Everyone around here seems to hate these "floating head" covers. I can understand why. The original theater poster art is, in most cases, far more artistic.
The "noggin" covers are here to stay however. I can see their value while I am browsing the stacks of DVDs at BB or some other retailer. Seeing the actors "in character" helps to instantly bring the movie to mind, whereas an abstract image does not (I have to pause and think about it). When there are thousands of movies on the shelves, every second counts.
Movie posters are designed to be mysterious and abstract and are aimed at folks who haven't seen the movie yet. DVD covers are designed for folks who are assumed to have seen the movie (or at least to have heard enough about it through the media to destroy most of the mystery).
No doubt this is reflected in DVD sales and that is why the noggin covers aren't going to go away. Personally, I could care less, since I only see the spines in my DVD cabinet.
Someone here many years ago had a great idea that the studios are sure to ignore. The original artwork should be included as an insert on every film. This way Schlockbuster can have their Airplane '77 headshots all over the rental cover and purist can insert the original poster.
Reversable covers sound like a great compromise. My point was that Noggin covers make it easy (for J6P's like me) to quickly & easily parse the movies on the retailer's shelf (especially while the wife is waiting impatiently).
The ending invalidates whatever point the movie had. Ebert explains it pretty well here (spoilers). For a less thorough explanation, without spoilers, see his review and note that he gave it the incredibly rare zero-star rating.