Don't like it, far too plain, I prefer the artwork posters from movies like Live and Let Die, Diamonds Are Forever, etc. Nothing about the poster says Bond to me.
I totally agree. Bring back the art of the 60's and 70's posters.
Unfortunately, nobody really does illustrated poster art of that calibre anymore. The industry has moved on---and not to its benefit...
Amen to that brother B-)
I really miss the poster art of the earlier Bond films. CR had some good posters and I like the QOS posters so far, but they are not a patch on the earlier Bond artwork.
Don't like it, far too plain, I prefer the artwork posters from movies like Live and Let Die, Diamonds Are Forever, etc. Nothing about the poster says Bond to me.
I totally agree. Bring back the art of the 60's and 70's posters.
I remember these posters gracing my brother's bedroom walls...and although I can totally appreciate the art work, and design for that matter (very popular for those years) I have to say, surely, as the Bond franchise is now moving toward a much larger fan base ie. woman, then I can honestly say I would not have these posters on my wall.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a scantily clad woman... but I much prefer the focus on Bond..(and well, a bit biased maybe, but especially Craig ;%) and I love the QoS poster for it's minimal distraction and sleekness. The image of an impeccably suited gentleman, walking in the desert with that firearm, is totally kick a** B-)
I know I'm def in the minority here...as scantily clad woman are of course much more appealing, plus the pop art feel of the earlier film posters, but I think CR and this new QoS poster drags bond into the 00's (pun intended!) :007)
She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
Not alone, Lexi. I like the old Bond posters the way I like museum pieces, but I wouldn't expect the posters - or the films for that matter - to go back to old ways. Bond changes with the times, it's why the series has survived for as long as it has. Some fans prefer one era over another, not surprising at all what with the vast and at times rather drastic changes to the character/films.
But for recent changes (ie last 20 years), I think the series has been mostly living on gas since the mid-80s and Rog's step-down, there have been some relative high points but it hasn't "grown up" till the reboot/Craig's take on the character. It needed a more timely identity, maybe not desperately but hard to argue Wilson's pre-CR point about Bond going stale. While some view Dalton's and Brosnan's tenures as just what was needed, I think of them more as space-saving stepping stones to what we're currently getting - and I don't think that process of change is near done yet. If A. Broccoli had lived forever, we'd never get what we're getting now as I'm sure he'd never green-light such a "radical" change, which IMHO is simply going back to the beginnings of cinematic Bond and recreating Fleming's world/character for today's audiences with as little baggage as possible from DAF-DAD. The first run of Bond films did exactly the same thing, as even in '62 the world was far enough removed from Fleming's fictitious one to require such tampering. But like CR, they tampered well yet still managed to stay reasonably true to the books. Some fans seem to want the endless Bond snake eating its tail, and who knows maybe the next "update" includes more of the cinematic Bond. The new shift is welcome to this fan, hope they run it to the ground like good little EON producers. Rant off. ;%
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Personally, I think poster art was generally much better back in the day---museum pieces or not---and not just the Bonds. Look at stuff like the original 'Raiders' poster. Classy, and classic. The studios are afraid to have anything drawn anymore.
Still, I'm with Lexi: Bond on a stark landscape, clad in a suit with a suppressor-equipped machine gun...count me in :007)
I'd have liked to have seen an illustrated version...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
There's a screencap floating around of Craig with the sunglasses, prefer it to the photoshopped head, but it's still a cool poster IMO. Photo or drawn, both can be good or bad. CR had good posters, I like QOS's so far too. It's a Craig era thing I guess. {[]
Personally, I think poster art was generally much better back in the day---museum pieces or not---and not just the Bonds. Look at stuff like the original 'Raiders' poster. Classy, and classic. The studios are afraid to have anything drawn anymore.
Well I believe that a new Indiana Jones movie was out recently and there was certainly lots of artwork for that- and very nice it was too; you're quite right.
I don't think that being drawn is inherently better than a photo, though. Is the Goldfinger poster somehow less classic?
I think that the CR poster which had three Daniels all walking in a line was one of the most original and cool Bond posters we've had in many years. Photography's still an art form, after all
Not alone, Lexi. I like the old Bond posters the way I like museum pieces, but I wouldn't expect the posters - or the films for that matter - to go back to old ways. Bond changes with the times, it's why the series has survived for as long as it has. Some fans prefer one era over another, not surprising at all what with the vast and at times rather drastic changes to the character/films.
I can understand this. And I would never try to persuade otherwise. Everyone has their own very personal opinions on each Bond...and each Bond has given something to the franchise. I guess it what makes the films so popular, no one stays in it too long.
But for recent changes (ie last 20 years), I think the series has been mostly living on gas since the mid-80s and Rog's step-down, there have been some relative high points but it hasn't "grown up" till the reboot/Craig's take on the character. It needed a more timely identity, maybe not desperately but hard to argue Wilson's pre-CR point about Bond going stale. While some view Dalton's and Brosnan's tenures as just what was needed, I think of them more as space-saving stepping stones to what we're currently getting - and I don't think that process of change is near done yet.
Still, I'm with Lexi: Bond on a stark landscape, clad in a suit with a suppressor-equipped machine gun...count me in :007)
You know, I was going to try and find out the name of this, as to not totally embarrass myself ;% , so copped out with "firearm"
*Education time, Asp feel free to add here. The 'machine gun' is a Heckler and Koch UMP, most likely in the most common .45 caliber. It is a select fire weapon offering single shot semi-auto, 2 round burst, and fully automatic rates of fire. A collapsible stock makes transport simple, and the larger caliber makes it a superior take-down weapon to the more popular MP5.
While it looks cool as all get out, its not exactly a 'Bond' type of weapon. That being said, there is probably a good chance of seeing it during the initial chase scene of QoS, but that's probably it.
*Education time, Asp feel free to add here. The 'machine gun' is a Heckler and Koch UMP, most likely in the most common .45 caliber. It is a select fire weapon offering single shot semi-auto, 2 round burst, and fully automatic rates of fire. A collapsible stock makes transport simple, and the larger caliber makes it a superior take-down weapon to the more popular MP5.
While it looks cool as all get out, its not exactly a 'Bond' type of weapon. That being said, there is probably a good chance of seeing it during the initial chase scene of QoS, but that's probably it.
I was wondering when one of you gun boys was going to set me straight! Thanks for the lesson, although it's all double dutch to me
(I have dipped in and out of the "Bonds Pistol In QoS" thread, but I guess I haven't learnt enough yet hey :v )
...still, Bond weapon or not, it's still a very cool looking gun B-)
She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I don't think that being drawn is inherently better than a photo, though. Is the Goldfinger poster somehow less classic?
No, of course not. We were discussing the DAF poster as an example of the 'old style' illustrated collage-type poster. My observation was that illustrated posters are quite rare these days compared to then---not that illustrated is 'better'; just that we miss them.
I think that the CR poster which had three Daniels all walking in a line was one of the most original and cool Bond posters we've had in many years. Photography's still an art form, after all
Yes...but increasingly ubiquitous photo manipulation can sometimes cheapen that particular art form, and make it decidedly less memorable/distinctive, in my own opinion.
I've liked all the poster art that Eon have come up with during the Craig era---and indeed Bond's posters in general---but I miss the old days. In my basement are illustrated DN and TB posters...nothing quite that cool exists in the modern era, as far as I am concerned.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Maybe; I dunno- when you look at it objectively I'm not really sure what that medium has to say; especially about the new Bond films. Paintings are pretty romantic in feeling, which suits Indy and Star Wars etc. who still have the painted posters, but the stark modernity of the current Bond films suits a photographic approach, I think. I wouldn't use that style just for nostalgia's sake.
The Brosnans probably could have had painted ones, though. What was the last painted one? Daylights?
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Maybe; I dunno- when you look at it objectively I'm not really sure what that medium has to say; especially about the new Bond films. Paintings are pretty romantic in feeling, which suits Indy and Star Wars etc. who still have the painted posters, but the stark modernity of the current Bond films suits a photographic approach, I think. I wouldn't use that style just for nostalgia's sake.
The Brosnans probably could have had painted ones, though. What was the last painted one? Daylights?
Actually, I believe it was AVTAK---Bond and Stacey on the Golden Gate Bridge---but I could well be wrong. It seems to me that TLD was something of a hybrid: featuring a photographed Tim Dalton inside the gunbarrel, with a faceless babe in a white dress holding a gun (illustrated?) in the foreground. Not one of the better ones, IMO.
Certainly I wouldn't do an illustrated or painted one simply for nostalgia's sake. Rather, at this point it would be for variety's sake: something different, to which Eon are ostensibly aspiring, in a general sense. Certainly painted poster art can be romantic...but it can also be moody and noir---such as Blade Runner---and exciting/exotic, as with Apocalypse Now.
Objectively speaking, any medium has as much to say as any other, commensurate with how much skill and imagination the artist and PR team can muster. Given the counter-intuitive bent of the current Bond regime, I'd like them to continue to confound our expectations.
More than likely, though, you're right. They'll stick with 'photoshopped post-modern'...and probably make it work. As I said, I love what they've done so far...but I always hold out for an unexpectedly pleasant surprise
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
A friend of mine was given the poster by her local cinema, and it looks much nicer in the flesh. Unfortunately her mother wouldn't let me have it, because she "fancies Daniel Craig"
The Brosnans probably could have had painted ones, though. What was the last painted one? Daylights?
Actually, I believe it was AVTAK---Bond and Stacey on the Golden Gate Bridge---but I could well be wrong. It seems to me that TLD was something of a hybrid: featuring a photographed Tim Dalton inside the gunbarrel, with a faceless babe in a white dress holding a gun (illustrated?) in the foreground. Not one of the better ones, IMO.
The poster you are referring to, Loeff, was the US release poster. A painted poster was used for (I believe) the Australian release, and other markets which is probably the one emtiem is thinking of. The poster was a nice montage of TLD scenes in a gunbarrel format, with Timothy Dalton's image in the center. In all, a fine blend of design and illustration, in my opinion.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Don't think I ever saw that one; pity.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Below is a link to it. I have a framed print of it at home...in fact, I'm thinking of bringing it to office, but I have suspicion that it might prove to be a distraction.
Below is a link to it. I have a framed print of it at home...in fact, I'm thinking of bringing it to office, but I have suspicion that it might prove to be a distraction.
Wow! B-) Thanks, DH. That's exactly what I'm talking about.
Too bad we didn't get that one over here Looks like it was the end of an era... -{
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Below is a link to it. I have a framed print of it at home...in fact, I'm thinking of bringing it to office, but I have suspicion that it might prove to be a distraction.
Yes; that's the badger. It's very well done, but for me I think the simpler one that Loeffs mentioned earlier is probably the stronger image, to be honest. It says it's a Bond film, though (if in a slightly generic way), so I suppose you can't ask any more of it.
Certainly I wouldn't do an illustrated or painted one simply for nostalgia's sake. Rather, at this point it would be for variety's sake: something different, to which Eon are ostensibly aspiring, in a general sense. Certainly painted poster art can be romantic...but it can also be moody and noir---such as Blade Runner---and exciting/exotic, as with Apocalypse Now.
Fair points; those posters do have that- although noir is a bit of a retro step also: future noir, isn't it?
I'm not sure that being different is a strong enough reason on its own: it has to be right for what you're trying to say, not just different.
Objectively speaking, any medium has as much to say as any other, commensurate with how much skill and imagination the artist and PR team can muster.
I do really disagree with that, however: the medium is often a key part of the message: you choose the medium to help inform the audience of what you're saying as each medium comes with a visual language which the audience implictly understands. That's true of every form of communications; be that film, illustration, logo design etc. The medium is part of the message: you can't abritarily pick a medium because you fancy using it and then force that to fit the subject matter. It's a bit like me wanting to write the word 'Bond' but picking the letters 'y','l','u' and 'f' to write it with because I haven't used them in a while- it's really that important.
More than likely, though, you're right. They'll stick with 'photoshopped post-modern'...and probably make it work. As I said, I love what they've done so far...but I always hold out for an unexpectedly pleasant surprise
I think so- I think it works well when they go for it properly. I was a little disappointed in the main poster for CR because it seemed a bit of a compromise: it was mixing the style that we'd seen in the fantastically evocative and stylish teaser poster (the close-up of Craig at the gambling table- which I'm saw passed through photoshop at some stage but didn't seem any the worse for it to me) and seemed to be trying to mix that with a typical Bond poster with location, girl car etc.
When they stick to a strong idea; like the excellent teaser or the lovely pop-art-y three-Dans-walking billboard poster we were talking about it works and it works strong: I hope they don't feel the need to try and make it look like an old Bond poster because I think that just dilutes the message: in the same way I wish they hadn't put the DB5 in the film- make a clean break.
I'd have loved for the main poster to be more like one of those fantasic photos they took of Craig in the darkened casino for that photoshoot- brilliant stuff; looked like fashion photography. Now that would have been a striking poster.
...the medium is often a key part of the message: you choose the medium to help inform the audience of what you're saying as each medium comes with a visual language which the audience implictly understands. That's true of every form of communications; be that film, illustration, logo design etc. The medium is part of the message: you can't abritarily pick a medium because you fancy using it and then force that to fit the subject matter.
Conversely, you shouldn't photoshop yourself into a corner purely for the sake of striving to be 'modern,' which is in itself a means of 'forcing' something, in my opinion.
I won't accept that a painted QoS poster wouldn't work simply because of its medium, since I'm not convinced that anything Eon are saying in QoS would preclude such a thing outright. In fact, Forster has alluded to striving for a 'retro' style---i.e., hearkening back to the classic Bonds---in terms of production design and overall look. If there's anything at all to that, it would go to my point.
We're talking about dogfighting with a DC-3, after all; it's not exactly an F-22...
Yeah...we'll probably always disagree about this...
Now...a painted image of Craig at the card table, on the other hand...
:v
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Conversely, you shouldn't photoshop yourself into a corner purely for the sake of striving to be 'modern,' which is in itself a means of 'forcing' something, in my opinion.
I don't get your point- they've chosen the photographic method (and the CR teaser was much more hard photographic that most film posters out there) because it suits the film and it's currently a big part of the language for speaking to filmgoers. They're not 'photoshopping themselves into a corner' purely to appear 'modern'; they're actually doing it photographically because it's modern and it's applicable. You just seem to have put a negative spin on the grammar of what they've done without saying why it's bad! I could say that the fire service have painted themselves into a corner by using firefighting methods purely to appear 'heroic'- sounds like I think it's bad but I'm not saying why!
I won't accept that a painted QoS poster wouldn't work simply because of its medium, since I'm not convinced that anything Eon are saying in QoS would preclude such a thing outright. In fact, Forster has alluded to striving for a 'retro' style, in terms of production design and overall look. If there's anything at all to that, it would go to my point.
Fair point; but I'm not making QoS so I can't say what would or wouldn't work for it. I know CR well enough to say that I think they definitely made the right choice of medium, so I see no reason to doubt them now, and the films seem to be a continuous beast- plus they seem to be trying to echo CR with these posters... so I can't really call for a change of medium just because they haven't done it in a while.
Maybe they could; doesn't mean that they should, necessarily.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Nor that they shouldn't {[]
It seems a foregone conclusion; to Photoshop we go!
Maybe next time!
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
A large factor in the photoshop versus traditional medium is $$$. It takes much longer for an artist to craft something on canvas than it does photoshop. While there is still a design element in planning the final look of the graphic, it is much easier to manipulate the final image for color, composition, typography, etc. in the computer. Whereas, a traditional artist, if he's lucky, can make any last minute changes through painstaking cut and paste techniques, but it's still not simple. As long as the work can be done faster, and less riskier, on the computer (and thus less costly) photoshopped posters are here to stay.
I was glad to see Steven Spielberg make an exception for Indy IV...but I believe that's a case where nothing but Struzan's original touch would have sufficed.
A large factor in the photoshop versus traditional medium is $$$. It takes much longer for an artist to craft something on canvas than it does photoshop. While there is still a design element in planning the final look of the graphic, it is much easier to manipulate the final image for color, composition, typography, etc. in the computer. Whereas, a traditional artist, if he's lucky, can make any last minute changes through painstaking cut and paste techniques, but it's still not simple. As long as the work can be done faster, and less riskier, on the computer (and thus less costly) photoshopped posters are here to stay.
I'm not sure it's that simple: poster designers aren't going to kiss goodbye to money they could have earned if they'd painted the thing. I don't really know, but people do seem to think that there's no effort going into photoshop and photographic work, and that just ain't true. I know an illustrator who produces purely painted images, and he has to create them in a short space of time, just like photoshop artists. And both of them have to think of the concepts behind the images, which is a huge part of their success.
Mind you, you do get some photoshop disasters; like the Dark Knight character posters which abandon perspective altogther. But then the likenesses of Sean Connery weren't always perfect on the painted Bonds...
I was glad to see Steven Spielberg make an exception for Indy IV...but I believe that's a case where nothing but Struzan's original touch would have sufficed.
True, although there's some very obvious photoshopping in the Indy 4 teaser poster...
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
A large factor in the photoshop versus traditional medium is $$$. It takes much longer for an artist to craft something on canvas than it does photoshop. While there is still a design element in planning the final look of the graphic, it is much easier to manipulate the final image for color, composition, typography, etc. in the computer. Whereas, a traditional artist, if he's lucky, can make any last minute changes through painstaking cut and paste techniques, but it's still not simple. As long as the work can be done faster, and less riskier, on the computer (and thus less costly) photoshopped posters are here to stay.
All too true...which brings me full circle to my point about the bemoaning of so-called 'progress.' The history of civilization seems thus: expediency above all else. The surface of the earth is multi-layered with things used and then discarded...but it's not all for the better.
I was glad to see Steven Spielberg make an exception for Indy IV...but I believe that's a case where nothing but Struzan's original touch would have sufficed.
Spielberg is 'old school' all around...he's very probably the last major filmmaker who still insists on editing his films on a Movieola---1920s technology!---versus the digital editing suites which now crowd the Hollywood landscape. So in that sense, it's very apropos that he maintained fidelity in his poster art as well.
Em's points on consistency of execution, re: CR flowing into QoS are certainly valid ones...but if any film franchise is capable of the occasional resurrection of 'old school'*...surely it's Bond :007)
* And not because it's forced, or nostalgic...but because it works. The use of practical stunts, versus CGI, is another example...and it's another fight )
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Em's points on consistency of execution, re: CR flowing into QoS are certainly valid ones...but if any film franchise is capable of the occasional resurrection of 'old school'*...surely it's Bond :007)
* And not because it's forced, or nostalgic...but because it works.
If it works for them I'm sure they'd do it- they are a family business who have been doing just this one enterprise for 40 years- longer than Spielberg even! There have been massive international films very recently with painted poster campaigns, so everyone knows that they still function as posters, it's just that they've obviously chosen photographic as the preferred medium for their particular film. I've no reason to think that they're wrong about the photographic route working for them.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
If it works for them I'm sure they'd do it- they are a family business who have been doing just this one enterprise for 40 years- longer than Spielberg even!
Thanks; much appreciated! I've been struggling with the mathematics of that for months now
At any rate...I hope they give some consideration to alternatives in the future {[]
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
A large factor in the photoshop versus traditional medium is $$$. It takes much longer for an artist to craft something on canvas than it does photoshop. While there is still a design element in planning the final look of the graphic, it is much easier to manipulate the final image for color, composition, typography, etc. in the computer. Whereas, a traditional artist, if he's lucky, can make any last minute changes through painstaking cut and paste techniques, but it's still not simple. As long as the work can be done faster, and less riskier, on the computer (and thus less costly) photoshopped posters are here to stay.
I'm not sure it's that simple: poster designers aren't going to kiss goodbye to money they could have earned if they'd painted the thing. I don't really know, but people do seem to think that there's no effort going into photoshop and photographic work, and that just ain't true. I know an illustrator who produces purely painted images, and he has to create them in a short space of time, just like photoshop artists. And both of them have to think of the concepts behind the images, which is a huge part of their success.
Mind you, you do get some photoshop disasters; like the Dark Knight character posters which abandon perspective altogther. But then the likenesses of Sean Connery weren't always perfect on the painted Bonds...
In a sense, it is that simple. I do graphic design work for a living, creating both traditional and digital art for various clients. While the workload is the same in the concept stage, the execution and re-touching of the actual project execution are leagues apart in terms of the two mediums. Often times a traditional artist is selected for a project based on their unique style - but in the case where that element is not as important, clients will prefer a solution that promotes more flexibility and less billing hours.
Comments
That's not really a teaser poster, though.
Like this one?
http://www.bfi.org.uk/filmtvinfo/library/eventsexh/images/bond-goldfinger.jpg
Amen to that brother B-)
I really miss the poster art of the earlier Bond films. CR had some good posters and I like the QOS posters so far, but they are not a patch on the earlier Bond artwork.
I remember these posters gracing my brother's bedroom walls...and although I can totally appreciate the art work, and design for that matter (very popular for those years) I have to say, surely, as the Bond franchise is now moving toward a much larger fan base ie. woman, then I can honestly say I would not have these posters on my wall.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a scantily clad woman...
I know I'm def in the minority here...as scantily clad woman are of course much more appealing, plus the pop art feel of the earlier film posters, but I think CR and this new QoS poster drags bond into the 00's (pun intended!) :007)
But for recent changes (ie last 20 years), I think the series has been mostly living on gas since the mid-80s and Rog's step-down, there have been some relative high points but it hasn't "grown up" till the reboot/Craig's take on the character. It needed a more timely identity, maybe not desperately but hard to argue Wilson's pre-CR point about Bond going stale. While some view Dalton's and Brosnan's tenures as just what was needed, I think of them more as space-saving stepping stones to what we're currently getting - and I don't think that process of change is near done yet. If A. Broccoli had lived forever, we'd never get what we're getting now as I'm sure he'd never green-light such a "radical" change, which IMHO is simply going back to the beginnings of cinematic Bond and recreating Fleming's world/character for today's audiences with as little baggage as possible from DAF-DAD. The first run of Bond films did exactly the same thing, as even in '62 the world was far enough removed from Fleming's fictitious one to require such tampering. But like CR, they tampered well yet still managed to stay reasonably true to the books. Some fans seem to want the endless Bond snake eating its tail, and who knows maybe the next "update" includes more of the cinematic Bond. The new shift is welcome to this fan, hope they run it to the ground like good little EON producers.
Still, I'm with Lexi: Bond on a stark landscape, clad in a suit with a suppressor-equipped machine gun...count me in :007)
I'd have liked to have seen an illustrated version...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Well I believe that a new Indiana Jones movie was out recently
I don't think that being drawn is inherently better than a photo, though. Is the Goldfinger poster somehow less classic?
I think that the CR poster which had three Daniels all walking in a line was one of the most original and cool Bond posters we've had in many years. Photography's still an art form, after all
I can understand this. And I would never try to persuade otherwise. Everyone has their own very personal opinions on each Bond...and each Bond has given something to the franchise. I guess it what makes the films so popular, no one stays in it too long.
Totally agree with you on this.
Here's to that! -{
You know, I was going to try and find out the name of this, as to not totally embarrass myself ;% , so copped out with "firearm"
That would be interesting....but I guess we won't be.
I was wondering when one of you gun boys was going to set me straight!
(I have dipped in and out of the "Bonds Pistol In QoS" thread, but I guess I haven't learnt enough yet hey :v )
...still, Bond weapon or not, it's still a very cool looking gun B-)
No, of course not. We were discussing the DAF poster as an example of the 'old style' illustrated collage-type poster. My observation was that illustrated posters are quite rare these days compared to then---not that illustrated is 'better'; just that we miss them.
Yes...but increasingly ubiquitous photo manipulation can sometimes cheapen that particular art form,
I've liked all the poster art that Eon have come up with during the Craig era---and indeed Bond's posters in general---but I miss the old days. In my basement are illustrated DN and TB posters...nothing quite that cool exists in the modern era, as far as I am concerned.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The Brosnans probably could have had painted ones, though. What was the last painted one? Daylights?
Actually, I believe it was AVTAK---Bond and Stacey on the Golden Gate Bridge---but I could well be wrong. It seems to me that TLD was something of a hybrid: featuring a photographed Tim Dalton inside the gunbarrel, with a faceless babe in a white dress holding a gun (illustrated?) in the foreground. Not one of the better ones, IMO.
Certainly I wouldn't do an illustrated or painted one simply for nostalgia's sake. Rather, at this point it would be for variety's sake: something different, to which Eon are ostensibly aspiring, in a general sense. Certainly painted poster art can be romantic...but it can also be moody and noir---such as Blade Runner---and exciting/exotic, as with Apocalypse Now.
Objectively speaking, any medium has as much to say as any other, commensurate with how much skill and imagination the artist and PR team can muster. Given the counter-intuitive bent of the current Bond regime, I'd like them to continue to confound our expectations.
More than likely, though, you're right. They'll stick with 'photoshopped post-modern'...and probably make it work. As I said, I love what they've done so far...but I always hold out for an unexpectedly pleasant surprise
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Ah well, just won one on eBay
The poster you are referring to, Loeff, was the US release poster. A painted poster was used for (I believe) the Australian release, and other markets which is probably the one emtiem is thinking of. The poster was a nice montage of TLD scenes in a gunbarrel format, with Timothy Dalton's image in the center. In all, a fine blend of design and illustration, in my opinion.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
http://www.impawards.com/1987/living_daylights_ver3.html
Wow! B-) Thanks, DH. That's exactly what I'm talking about.
Too bad we didn't get that one over here
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Yes; that's the badger. It's very well done, but for me I think the simpler one that Loeffs mentioned earlier is probably the stronger image, to be honest. It says it's a Bond film, though (if in a slightly generic way), so I suppose you can't ask any more of it.
Fair points; those posters do have that- although noir is a bit of a retro step also: future noir, isn't it?
I'm not sure that being different is a strong enough reason on its own: it has to be right for what you're trying to say, not just different.
I do really disagree with that, however: the medium is often a key part of the message: you choose the medium to help inform the audience of what you're saying as each medium comes with a visual language which the audience implictly understands. That's true of every form of communications; be that film, illustration, logo design etc. The medium is part of the message: you can't abritarily pick a medium because you fancy using it and then force that to fit the subject matter. It's a bit like me wanting to write the word 'Bond' but picking the letters 'y','l','u' and 'f' to write it with because I haven't used them in a while- it's really that important.
I think so- I think it works well when they go for it properly. I was a little disappointed in the main poster for CR because it seemed a bit of a compromise: it was mixing the style that we'd seen in the fantastically evocative and stylish teaser poster (the close-up of Craig at the gambling table- which I'm saw passed through photoshop at some stage but didn't seem any the worse for it to me) and seemed to be trying to mix that with a typical Bond poster with location, girl car etc.
When they stick to a strong idea; like the excellent teaser or the lovely pop-art-y three-Dans-walking billboard poster we were talking about it works and it works strong: I hope they don't feel the need to try and make it look like an old Bond poster because I think that just dilutes the message: in the same way I wish they hadn't put the DB5 in the film- make a clean break.
I'd have loved for the main poster to be more like one of those fantasic photos they took of Craig in the darkened casino for that photoshoot- brilliant stuff; looked like fashion photography. Now that would have been a striking poster.
Conversely, you shouldn't photoshop yourself into a corner purely for the sake of striving to be 'modern,' which is in itself a means of 'forcing' something, in my opinion.
I won't accept that a painted QoS poster wouldn't work simply because of its medium, since I'm not convinced that anything Eon are saying in QoS would preclude such a thing outright. In fact, Forster has alluded to striving for a 'retro' style---i.e., hearkening back to the classic Bonds---in terms of production design and overall look. If there's anything at all to that, it would go to my point.
We're talking about dogfighting with a DC-3, after all; it's not exactly an F-22...
Yeah...we'll probably always disagree about this...
Now...a painted image of Craig at the card table, on the other hand...
:v
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I don't get your point- they've chosen the photographic method (and the CR teaser was much more hard photographic that most film posters out there) because it suits the film and it's currently a big part of the language for speaking to filmgoers. They're not 'photoshopping themselves into a corner' purely to appear 'modern'; they're actually doing it photographically because it's modern and it's applicable. You just seem to have put a negative spin on the grammar of what they've done without saying why it's bad! I could say that the fire service have painted themselves into a corner by using firefighting methods purely to appear 'heroic'- sounds like I think it's bad but I'm not saying why!
Fair point; but I'm not making QoS so I can't say what would or wouldn't work for it. I know CR well enough to say that I think they definitely made the right choice of medium, so I see no reason to doubt them now, and the films seem to be a continuous beast- plus they seem to be trying to echo CR with these posters... so I can't really call for a change of medium just because they haven't done it in a while.
Maybe they could; doesn't mean that they should, necessarily.
It seems a foregone conclusion; to Photoshop we go!
Maybe next time!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I was glad to see Steven Spielberg make an exception for Indy IV...but I believe that's a case where nothing but Struzan's original touch would have sufficed.
I'm not sure it's that simple: poster designers aren't going to kiss goodbye to money they could have earned if they'd painted the thing. I don't really know, but people do seem to think that there's no effort going into photoshop and photographic work, and that just ain't true. I know an illustrator who produces purely painted images, and he has to create them in a short space of time, just like photoshop artists. And both of them have to think of the concepts behind the images, which is a huge part of their success.
Mind you, you do get some photoshop disasters; like the Dark Knight character posters which abandon perspective altogther. But then the likenesses of Sean Connery weren't always perfect on the painted Bonds...
True, although there's some very obvious photoshopping in the Indy 4 teaser poster...
All too true...which brings me full circle to my point about the bemoaning of so-called 'progress.' The history of civilization seems thus: expediency above all else. The surface of the earth is multi-layered with things used and then discarded...but it's not all for the better.
Spielberg is 'old school' all around...he's very probably the last major filmmaker who still insists on editing his films on a Movieola---1920s technology!---versus the digital editing suites which now crowd the Hollywood landscape. So in that sense, it's very apropos that he maintained fidelity in his poster art as well.
Em's points on consistency of execution, re: CR flowing into QoS are certainly valid ones...but if any film franchise is capable of the occasional resurrection of 'old school'*...surely it's Bond :007)
* And not because it's forced, or nostalgic...but because it works. The use of practical stunts, versus CGI, is another example...and it's another fight
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
If it works for them I'm sure they'd do it- they are a family business who have been doing just this one enterprise for 40 years- longer than Spielberg even! There have been massive international films very recently with painted poster campaigns, so everyone knows that they still function as posters, it's just that they've obviously chosen photographic as the preferred medium for their particular film. I've no reason to think that they're wrong about the photographic route working for them.
Thanks; much appreciated! I've been struggling with the mathematics of that for months now
At any rate...I hope they give some consideration to alternatives in the future {[]
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
In a sense, it is that simple. I do graphic design work for a living, creating both traditional and digital art for various clients. While the workload is the same in the concept stage, the execution and re-touching of the actual project execution are leagues apart in terms of the two mediums. Often times a traditional artist is selected for a project based on their unique style - but in the case where that element is not as important, clients will prefer a solution that promotes more flexibility and less billing hours.