It's not uncommon to see people comment on how lazy modern posters look on this sub. Whenever new art is shown for a movie, everyone jumps to attack it, and in most cases, rightly so. Without fail, someone will bring up the point that posters don't sell movies, trailers do, which seems fair. But, is it true?
I find I look at the picture on the Amazon app before reading the blurb below. Which is good news for poster artists. The bad news, is a lot of the more iconic, painted posters from the 80s and 70s are not easy to make out at that size and distance from the couch to the t.v. So, bigger and brighter titles, less details, and fewer people seems to be the way to go. The upside to this is, I noticed floating heads and the tired, blue and orange color scheme stand out less among the thumbnails. Maybe, this will lead to some interesting innovation and the use of more minimalist posters. Poster art done well is incredible, and am a huge fan of the Alternative Poster Movement, but are detailed, intricate posters becoming less common for a reason? On the other hand, are “art posters” really making a comeback? It seems like a good way to create buzz early, look at Mother!.
That's as far as I've thought through this based on my observations, what do you guys think? Are posters changing because of streaming services? Are they better or worse, or does it even matter that much?
Submitted September 17, 2017 at 04:55PM by MajorZippoOmaha http://ift.tt/2h9XnxW
No comments:
Post a Comment