The Good, the Bad, and the Overused Cliche Title

Movie Poster Edition

Movie posters of late seem to follow a pretty predictable formula. There will either be a group shot of the main character(s), or whoever the producers would like us to think is the main cast, standing around and glaring at the camera. There's some variation to this, usually indicative of genre (grinning on a poster for a comedy flick, screaming terror for horror, etc) and some of the better-designed posters (ie, most by or imitating the style of Drew Struzan) get a more dynamic layout, usually managing to get across a good indication of the movie's tone even if they don't tell you too much about the plot or premise.
So, with absolutely no smooth segue at all, let's dive right in. If it really bugs you, just pretend it's some super-pretentious attempt at referencing film-technique and call it a jump-cut or something.

The Good: Daybreakers

This isn't the best poster I've ever seen, but it's certainly eye-catching, it gets the point across, and it's probably going to stand out when compared to the other, more photographic posters at the theater.
It keeps it simple and tells you what you need to know (vampires, presumably doing something that allows them to come out during the day) and gives a pretty good indication of what the tone's going to be like. This movie is going to be so violent and bloody, so terrifying, that very image on the promotional poster is going to leap off the paper and tear your throat out. It's not very pretty, but this is about bloodsucking monsters -- even if they're played by the most beautiful people Hollywood has to offer, they still eat people. Pretty probably isn't something that's going to be very indicative of the final movie in this case.

The Bad: Twilight

Okay, disclaimer time -- I have not seen this movie (or, in fact, any of the movies represented here), but I've done enough research to have a decent idea of the movie's premise and plot and so on. This movie HAS tried to take the more modern, prettified view of vampires, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's not very well-executed here. I have it from some reliable sources that Robert Pattinson can be pretty attractive to people of the appropriate gender and/or orientation, but here he just looks like he's ready to kill someone, or maybe like he really needs some fiber.
What I get from this is mostly dark broodiness and teenaged goths, with a side of over-applied body-oil or something. I've read enough to know that the vampires are supposed to be all shiny and stuff, but the effect really doesn't work well. Again, the darkness does seem to carry over somewhat into the actual movie, but everything I've heard indicates that the main focus of the story is a romance. I'm not getting that here, except maybe in a really twisted sense of the word; Rob looks kind of like he's about to break Kristen Stewart's arms. And if the main focus of the story is supposed to be the couple, do we really need all the supporting cast shown like this?

The Ugly: Alice In Wonderland

I know, the Mad Hatter is a fairly well-known character from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland, and that Johnny Depp is a very popular actor. But this can be seen as a case study in too much of a good thing. Or rather, a good thing done badly. There's showing off a weird character in an attempt to draw interest in a movie, and then there is terrifying small children on their way through the theater. The new Tim Burton movie doesn't sound like it's going to have children as its target audience, so maybe this is the studio's subtle way of flashing a warning to parents -- bring your kids into this movie, and they will be traumatized for months. But honestly, I'm just sitting here looking at it on a computer screen, and I'm getting a little scared. And not in that usual horror movie, ooh-what's-gonna-happen-next kind of way, but scared in the HP Lovecraft mind-rape-of-Cthulu-meets-Pennywise-the-Clown kind of way.

And I just wanted to give a special mention to this poster. It's not particularly bad or good, but THAT positioning of THAT particular title on a photo of the lead actor? It's like they actually WANT people to make dick jokes.









Disclaimer 2.0: All images displayed are the properties of their respective owners, ie, people who are not me. They are displayed here without permission but not for profit.

Logo Deathmatch 5 - Manufacturing: Bicycle Parts And Supplies

Or - Revenge Of The Overly Long Titles Part 2: Long Titles Strike Back

I want to start off by saying that this logo is, thankfully, outdated as of the writing of this blog. Whether it was a work-in-progress, the official mark of the company got changed, or someone just decided to upload a very bad recreation of Finish Line's logo to Brands Of The World, I don't know. All I know is, I'm glad that someone, somewhere along the proverbial foodchain, looked at the logo on the left and said "Oh HELL no."

Aside from the relatively bad craftsmanship displayed, I'm honestly not quite sure where to begin. The typography around the edge is pretty generic, but the text in the center -the actual company name- is in major competition with a less-than-spectacularly rendered flag. The flag, with all the little pockets of trapped white-space, is really the only thing generating any actual visual interest. And frankly, nothing here really says 'bicycle' to me. Auto mechanic, maybe. Car and general supplies, maybe. Racing company, perhaps. But not really bicycle, unless the generic and unmemorable ring in the background is meant to be a very out-of-shape bike wheel.

To be totally honest, the Ciari Parts logo doesn't say 'bicycle' to me, either, at least not immediately or obviously. The symbol does call to mind a wrench making a mechanical adjustment, but that could apply to any kind of mechanical supply. It does a good job of sending across its intended meaning in a way that's likely to be readable in all languages, the text is clear, and doesn't compete with the graphic, and it has a good hierarchy besides, drawing attention to the company name. It's compact, reproduces well at small sizes and without color. There are probably auto-supply and repair outlets that have similar symbols, but the C-wrench is still going to be memorable and recognizable. The trapped white-area creates interest without pinning the eye down, and it's easy to see this having many uses.

Logo Deathmatch 4 - Non-Profit Organizations: Health and Medical

Or - When Overlong Titles Attack, next on FOX.

Despite being the 'bad' selection for this particular post, this logo -technically speaking- does a lot right. It's contained, the typography is readable, the symbol, at least, is likely to reproduce decently at small size, it creates visual interest, and the color choice evokes trust and calm, both things that definitely fall into the 'good' category for a medical-assistance organization.

The downside, however, seems pretty major. Namely, representation and understandability. Take away the text, and I defy you to find someone who could tell you what this logo was for without just making a wild guess. I can sort of see a crouching person in the circle and three outer shapes, but with the little triangular symbol in the middle mostly destroys that image, aside from actively drawing your eye in, and away from the text. This would be more at-home in some futuristic first-person-shooter, probably on the side of some kind of container leaking a glowing, viscous liquid. Which could very easily be associated with shifts in health, but not in the way the AHAF would likely want.

Like the AHAF logo, the American Heart Association relies heavily on typography, and it has most of the same strengths that the prior logo does. The text is readable, and due to its size is likely to reproduce well at small sizes. The text and image are fairly well balanced, using white-space to draw and guide the eye without trapping it on one useless point. The color speaks -not of calm and trust- but at least of life, and vitality and passion. And frankly, if you're going to have an association with hearts, you probably don't want another color unless you're trying to be ironic, goth, or talking about gay rights. The torch isn't the most representative symbol in this case, but it can be read as carrying a light, or the cause, so it works. It's also going to be readable across most cultures and languages, and the simplicity is going to give it easily recall and make it easy to learn.

Logo Deathmatch 3 - Service: Utilities

I feel like I'm beating 'logos are a reflection of the company they represent' to death, but honestly, I keep finding logos that make me just sort of sit and stare, wondering why anyone would not only think that they would make a good first-impression on any customers, but would pay for the privilege of using them. The stellar example on the right, for one -- strung out and not well-contained, completely generic text, and a tacked-on symbol that both fights the company initials for dominance and has almost nothing to do with the services provided. I understand that RWE is actually based in Germany, so it's possible that in Europe, an intentionally-pixelated silhouette of a hand is somehow representative of gas and electricity, but I somehow doubt it. Maybe it's meant to represent the last outline of their customers after a natural-gas explosion caused by their services, it makes about as much sense as anything else I can come up with. Or it's implied that this will happen if you use a competitor's service; which might actually be kind of clever, but mostly as a late-night television parody. Either way, I find it highly unlikely.

This logo has its weaknesses; it's fairly long, and probably wouldn't reproduce well at a small size, but at least it seems to have some relation to the industry it's representing. Even if the flame-icon is a little over-obvious, it does its job, and the rectangular pattern it rests on suggests, at least to me, the colors at the heart of a candle-flame. Or the notches on a thermostat, and either way, it's a better indicator than the random hand on RWE's logo. The logo is balanced fairly well, the image and text flowing back and forth without competing, and the low, long shape gives it a sense of stability -- always a plus when talking about explosive gas. The loss of color would hurt a bit, but this logo would reproduce well in black and white, and could easily be placed on a letterhead, building sign, or other advertisement.

Logo Deathmatch 2 - Retail: Food

Ideally, a grocery store -or any kind of retail outlet- should be judged on the quality of its merchandise or produce, and the prices associated with the same. A lot of the time, store logos tend to be pretty generic, usually just the store name or initials laid out in some specific way, maybe a little symbol next to them. Some, however, feel the need to get a bit more graphical in their executions. This is sometimes done well, but it seems like more often, we get the kind of result seen in the logo for White's Fresh Foods.

It's fairly simple and reads easily, it's contained, and it represents its business fairly accurately, but the details drag it down. The illustration shown, to me, seems just a bit dated -- I remember seeing illustrations like this in advertisements for local grocery stores, but that was over ten years ago at this point. This isn't going to work terribly well in black-and-white, either, as the fruit depicted relies on its color to not totally dominate the image visually -- small areas of white-space are going to be a lot more distracting, and grayscale isn't likely to look very appealing here. The biggest problem I have with this logo, however, has got to be the color choice displayed. The blue in the text might not be so bad, on its own. Certainly not something I'd want to associate with a grocery store, most of the time, but not horrific. When I see fruit that at least nominally appears to be a bunch of oranges, I don't expect them to be colored an aqua-blue. That indicates either very poor refrigeration capabilities, or a lack of judgment on the part of whoever approved this.


Likewise, as White's Fresh Foods is not truly horrific, Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Market isn't really spectacular, but neither does it make me suspect that produce is allowed to sit out until its moldy. I personally might have chosen a brighter or richer green, but the tones chosen work well to at least give the idea of freshness -- and the clock-orange reinforces the idea of ease and speed without dominating the type.

It has the same advantages as White's (simple, contained, and fairly accurately representative) but lacks the datedness and poor color-choice that drags the former down. This logo also seems like it would shrink easily -though the subtitle might be a minor issue at small sizes- and it's likely to reproduce well in black and white. It would also seem at-home on letterhead, or a printed advertisement.