THE AVENGERS: In Theatres May 4, 2012

[Kedd]

I was *just* thinking this about a week ago when Kedd did the Indy poll thread.

You look at posters like the one for Raiders and then look at the stuff we get now, you realize that massive advances in technology might not be a 100% good thing after all.

It's like CGI vs models/prosthetics/men in rubber suits. Yeah, a lot of great effects have been created with CGI, but I've yet to see anything look as good as say, The Thing or An American Werewolf In London.

Sometimes, low-tech is better.

Sometimes the stuff just starts looking too "plastic" for my tastes. I think this poster just suffers from trying to do everything in one shot so it all just looks like a collage in some kid's slam book or something.

[SteveFlack]

I was *just* thinking this about a week ago when Kedd did the Indy poll thread.

You look at posters like the one for Raiders and then look at the stuff we get now, you realize that massive advances in technology might not be a 100% good thing after all.

It's like CGI vs models/prosthetics/men in rubber suits. Yeah, a lot of great effects have been created with CGI, but I've yet to see anything look as good as say, The Thing or An American Werewolf In London.

Sometimes, low-tech is better.

It's the availability of Photoshop that's killing it. Actors (and their agents) are so particular about likeness, that having the ability to make sure their likeness is to their liking, that it's killing the creativity. Everybody talks about how Drew Struzan got so much work in the 80's. Why? Because his ability to do likenesses was amazing. Nowadays, Photoshop and better printing tools renders people like him unnecessary.

Luckily, the amazing screenprint work by people like Mondo and Gallery 1988, plus hundreds of unlicensed screenprinters are giving us better things to hang in our homes. Sadly, movie theaters aren't that lucky.

[Slewo.O]

I miss the days when we had movie posters done by real artists.

Seconded.

[SteveFlack]

Seconded.

http://www.mondoarchive.com/

[Pat Shatner]

It's getting renamed over here ( and just noticed from the posters it's coming out a week earlier )

Huh, didn't know that. Wonder why they chose to rename it?

[Patrick King]

Huh, didn't know that. Wonder why they chose to rename it?

Probably to prevent confusion with the British Avengers spy series.

[Prime]

Huh, didn't know that. Wonder why they chose to rename it?

The 60's Avengers TV show ( and crappy Sean Connery film) is still well known more well known over here.

Still you missed out the april 26th part!!!

[cPol]

Huh, didn't know that. Wonder why they chose to rename it?

Probably to avoid confusion:



EDIT: Interesting. 5 minute difference in the timestamp on the posts, and yet I couldn't see the other two. But anyway, what they^ said.

[HeroBoy]

Sometimes the stuff just starts looking too "plastic" for my tastes. I think this poster just suffers from trying to do everything in one shot so it all just looks like a collage in some kid's slam book or something.

Like, this has to have been researched though, right? Modern audiences must prefer shitty Photoshop over a Drew Strazen, right? I mean, otherwise why has the drawn poster stopped? Just cost?

[DaveCummings]

Like, this has to have been researched though, right? Modern audiences must prefer shitty Photoshop over a Drew Strazen, right? I mean, otherwise why has the drawn poster stopped? Just cost?

I know, it's sad to see them abandon beautifully illustrated posters. But Photoshop isn't the enemy of bad posters. Just people with shitty design sense. That perspective is all fucked up. Captain America and Hulk look like they've been doing shots of Pym Particles.