PDL DVD cover

snaporaz · April 03, 2003, 08:42:47 PM

why, exactly, should the dvd cover be different from the movie poster?

Markyboy · April 03, 2003, 09:54:17 PM

Quote from: snaporazwhy, exactly, should the dvd cover be different from the movie poster?

Ideas change between now and the time the theatrical posters were designed. Maybe it was influenced by box-office performance, maybe not, but accept this as PTA's pick for final cut. I don't understand the backlash, we accept every single frame of the movie as being part of his cinematic creation whether it is perfect to us or not. Well this is just one more frame. An important one, but it will help to reach a bigger audience from the video store. Maybe resulting in more $$ for PT's future creations. The DVD menus are sounding tops.

Stick your theatrical poster up on your wall, and have something new and different in your collection.

Ghostboy · April 03, 2003, 10:23:53 PM

True dat. I think it's kinda swell, myself. And in response to what ebeaman said, PTA is indeed human, and that's what makes his movies so damn good.

sphinx · April 03, 2003, 10:51:57 PM

thread summary by sphinx

majority 'wraa i fucking hate the cover what the fuck sandler's head motherfuckers'

mariotti 'it's really not all that bad, chaps'

majority 'oh i guess so but i still hate the motherfucking cover why couldn't they fucking blake it or something fuck'

bonanzataz · April 03, 2003, 10:53:48 PM

xixax 'GOATSE!!!'

RegularKarate · April 03, 2003, 11:01:50 PM

I think the cover is great and everyone that's throwing a tantrum about it is being a little bitch.

The more I look at this cover, the more I think it totally fits... it's just so akward and amazing, it fully captures the mood of the film and the character. And the white background is the only reason, the picture looks good.

I like the movie poster fine, but it shouldn't be the DVD cover. I knew it wouldn't be the DVD cover and would have been disapointed if it was.

Blake art inside for sure, that's the way it's supposed to be.

The walking hand in hand shot would make a nice back cover, but not proper for the front.

phil marlowe · April 04, 2003, 08:55:52 AM

the movieposter is really one of the most brilliant posters i have ever seen. and sure, the cover is great.

tpfkabi · April 04, 2003, 10:56:23 AM

the walking hand in hand or the poster image would send the wrong message..........that says normal formulaic romantic comedy through and through..........i like the cover, but i think my suggestion with the harmonium is the best

moonshiner · April 04, 2003, 10:59:13 AM

except for the fact that it accentuates *adam sandler's role in the film i fucking love the cover, Paul Thomas Anderson (won't refer to him as PTA) wanted the DVD set to be a little bit odd, correllating well with the type of movie it is....front cover is odd, bland, shows the point of the picture, the oddity in the character of the film, the back is beautiful deep reds, a symbol of the beauty that lies in the end of the film.

*i love older sandler movies, always did, but it seemed like he brushed off the credit he was getting for doing such a great job in this movie...seemed much more interested in getting back to one of "his" projects with all his buddies, so be it, but i don't get the impression that he cares about being taken seriously as an actor...i guess that's wherein the loveable nature of sandler lies, his aloof anti-celebrity attitude....now i'm confusing myself

EL__SCORCHO · April 04, 2003, 09:25:24 PM

I don't like the cover, it's very lame and boring. The white background really sucks.

I thought the studio would want to get some people to rent the movie (since not many saw it theaters). I don't think this cover helps. It's a big turn off.

Jon · April 05, 2003, 01:31:04 AM

Quote from: bigideas..........i like the cover, but i think my suggestion with the harmonium is the best

I don't.

I have the cover as my background, I love it.

And you don't care.

bonanzataz · April 05, 2003, 01:32:12 AM

who cares about the cover. at least i'm getting the fucking movie.

Jon · April 05, 2003, 01:39:32 AM

Quote from: bonanzatazwho cares about the cover. at least i'm getting the fucking movie.

Mmhmmm.

cine · April 05, 2003, 01:52:23 AM

I dunno about you guys, but I think if PTA read some of this shit he'd probably either laugh his ass off or cringe at how negative some of you are being. Bottom line: If you like the movie, you should like the cover. If you don't like the cover then think of why he might've chosen that one over all the other ones. Maybe you'll gain a newfound respect for it, who knows. PTA does what he does for his own artistic reasons. Bashing his cover is like bashing his overall vision of the picture. Period.

Derek · April 05, 2003, 09:13:07 AM

Quote from: RegularKarate
The more I look at this cover, the more I think it totally fits... it's just so akward and amazing, it fully captures the mood of the film and the character. And the white background is the only reason, the picture looks good.

I like the movie poster fine, but it shouldn't be the DVD cover. I knew it wouldn't be the DVD cover and would have been disapointed if it was.

Blake art inside for sure, that's the way it's supposed to be.

The walking hand in hand shot would make a nice back cover, but not proper for the front.

what he said.