TRON Blu ray box art (The Original Classic?)

[phasersonthrill]

I have become used the studios often substituting the original movie poster art with something less desirable, but in my opinion this takes the cake.

And the subtitle, were they that afraid that people would confuse it with the new movie?

 

[wannab]

I have become used the studios often substituting the original movie poster art with something less desirable, but in my opinion this takes the cake.

And the subtitle, were they that afraid that people would confuse it with the new movie?

That's exactly why. I can't tell you how many people (mostly younger people) I've asked hadn't even heard of the original.


Doug

 

[GotWookiee]

Damn, that sucks. The original poster is iconic. Hell, it's even the basis for the final scene of Tron: Legacy!

Who is that on the cover? It looks like Ram, but Tron or Flynn.

 

[niennumb1]

Sounds like so far it's only scheduled to be in the mega pack edition reported by comingsoon.net:

Click here for story and cover / packaging art

 

[EvilRocketeer]

i love disney dvd packs....seriously, they were like one of the first companies to give you a blu-ray dvd, regular dvd, and a digital copy.....i think it started with "UP"

 

[DaddyfromNaboo]

Uh, that´s fan made, right? Right?! RIGHT?!

I hated the SW prequel poster "art", as well as I hated the first trailer cut by that "intern" :rolleyes

 

[defstartrooper]

Does seem crazy to not use the original artwork which was good and replace it with something completely bland and lazy.

 

[Jeyl]

Gah. That artwork is terrible. Nevermind the fact that it looks like it was from a publicity shoot rather than from the actual film since they blacked out the person's face. Here's what it looked like originally.

Why couldn't they have just used this? With some very slight adjustments, this would make for a pretty catchy cover.

Or how about the original Tron DVD cover?

Or how about the Criterion Collection style 2-Disc cover artwork? *MY FAVORITE*

See? That's an awesome looking cover. I would buy a larger poster rendition of that.

Speaking of, how about just the original poster artwork?

 

[EvilRocketeer]

^that is a beautiful poster....i always loved it

 

[dualedge]

Yeah, it does kinda suck that they aren't using the iconic poster design (it's one of my all-time favorites too - I've got an original folded one-sheet copy of it autographed by Bruce Boxleitner from when he came to DragonCon a couple of years ago) but ultimately, I'm more concerned with the movie's quality, y'know?

I like for BluRays and DVDs to have the nicer artwork but the amount of time I spend looking at the covers is pretty inconsequential so I can't say I care that much. Take, oh, I dunno, Star Wars for instance and how it's got a great cover on the DVD case but then it's got that blasted SE version inside it. So, as long as they haven't screwed up the movie, they can replace Bruce Boxleitner's Tron character with a photo of Tron-Guy as far as I'm concerned. :lol

 

[Jeyl]

I like for BluRays and DVDs to have the nicer artwork but the amount of time I spend looking at the covers is pretty inconsequential so I can't say I care that much.

Hey, the amount of time people look at the artwork is about as equal to the amount of time they'll watch a movie. I would even say that the artwork for the films is looked at more often than the films themselves.

I treat posters/cover art as an art form in on itself. Even though it's supposed to reflect the film, posters can really energize someone when look at it. Unfortunately today, a LOT of poster artwork has been doing the bare minimum of trying to convey what the movie is about. Take Star Trek (2009) for example.

See? It's just some guy's head looking down on us. Does that really showcase any of what Star Trek is like? Here's one of my favorite Star Trek posters.

I LOVE this poster for Star Trek VI. It's got space, planets, the Enterprise at warp and a Klingon looking up. I would want to see this movie more than the one that only showcases Mr. Bada** face.

 

[JD]

Hey, the amount of time people look at the artwork is about as equal to the amount of time they'll watch a movie. I would even say that the artwork for the films is looked at more often than the films themselves.

I treat posters/cover art as an art form in on itself. Even though it's supposed to reflect the film, posters can really energize someone when look at it. Unfortunately today, a LOT of poster artwork has been doing the bare minimum of trying to convey what the movie is about. Take Star Trek (2009) for example.

See? It's just some guy's head looking down on us. Does that really showcase any of what Star Trek is like? Here's one of my favorite Star Trek posters.


I LOVE this poster for Star Trek VI. It's got space, planets, the Enterprise at warp and a Klingon looking up. I would want to see this movie more than the one that only showcases Mr. Bada** face.

I kinda like the JJ Trek cover... it's simple, and... well, it does convey what it's about: James Kirk. The movie is pretty much all-Kirk, the other side (Spock) represents the other side of the story: Spock.

Whereas, the Undiscovered County cover - while it's a movie I remember little about - didn't have the Enterprise warping over a planetoid that looked like a Klingon.

 

[d_osborn]

i'm guessing they didn't go with the original TRON poster design for the BR because it was lifted as a poster for LEGACY. maybe the disney ad dudes thought it would be confusing?

no clue... but the BR cover design is awful!

 

[jdhogtexas]

I agree the art of movie posters has really gone down hill. I bet if studios asked people hear we could come up with somthing epic that they never would have come up with.

 

[tk5378]

That's about as bad as the BR Last of the Mohicans cover art...what, were they trying to avoid paying Daniel Day Lewis royalties by airbrushing his face? It looks like a weird "Planet of the Apes" re-make starring Dr Zeus or something!

 

[dualedge]

Hey, the amount of time people look at the artwork is about as equal to the amount of time they'll watch a movie. I would even say that the artwork for the films is looked at more often than the films themselves.

I treat posters/cover art as an art form in on itself. Even though it's supposed to reflect the film, posters can really energize someone when look at it. Unfortunately today, a LOT of poster artwork has been doing the bare minimum of trying to convey what the movie is about. Take Star Trek (2009) for example.

See? It's just some guy's head looking down on us. Does that really showcase any of what Star Trek is like? Here's one of my favorite Star Trek posters.

I LOVE this poster for Star Trek VI. It's got space, planets, the Enterprise at warp and a Klingon looking up. I would want to see this movie more than the one that only showcases Mr. Bada** face.

I'm not sure I disagree with you but it seems you're correlating movie POSTERS with DVD covers. I don't do that myself but that's cool if you feel that way about it.

Being an artist and designer by trade, I LOVE movie posters and agree with you on the often lacking posters that we see these days. It's also why I BUY the POSTERS and spend time looking at THOSE.

DVD cases are more like books that hold the movie when I'm not watching it. I stick it on a shelf and see the title on the spine. I pull it out, grab the disc and watch the movie. If I want to appreciate the art I just go stand in front of the theatrical one-sheet hanging on the wall. The amount of time I look at the DVD cover could be counted in seconds whereas the amount of time I see the posters could be counted probably in days, months or maybe years depending on if you count peripheral vision. I've got a Rocketeer pre-release teaser one-sheet and a Batman Beyond one-sheet hanging on my wall a couple of feet away after all.

None of that is to say I don't care about BluRay and DVD packaging... it's nice if they use good artwork but I can't say that I've ever once pulled out a DVD just to stare appreciatively at it's cover art, y'know? If I care that much about it, I'll hop on ebay and buy a one-sheet if it's not crazy expensive and will eventually hang it on the wall either at work or at home.

But when it comes to buying movies, to me, the quality of the movie is what I'm looking for, not the quality of the artwork. I've got that side of my fandom well covered by having the theatrical poster which is always going to put any DVD case to shame.

Just my 2 cents

 

[dualedge]

i'm guessing they didn't go with the original TRON poster design for the BR because it was lifted as a poster for LEGACY. maybe the disney ad dudes thought it would be confusing?

no clue... but the BR cover design is awful!

Speaking of theatrical one-sheets... that one is next on my want-list :angel

 

[OldKen]

I hate how much they are down playing the original.

In a lot of ways it was a better movie than Legacy. It broke more ground than Legacy. The characters were solid. And it was it's own original design. (something that is not possible in todays hollywood)

They should retouch, clean up and brighten some of the lights and colors. But I would say this will be no different than the HDnet version.

I know a lot of people complain about the original, but I will always love it.

 

[Hedjii72]

Does anyone know if it will include all the bonus features from the 2 disc DVD? I'm thinking of selling mine, but only if the Blu Ray has everything it had on it.

 

[Jeyl]

I'm not sure I disagree with you but it seems you're correlating movie POSTERS with DVD covers. I don't do that myself but that's cool if you feel that way about it.

Of course I put them in the same category. They both have a job to do and they sometimes require talent in order to come up with something that grabs your attention. Sometimes on rare occasions the result will be better than the original poster artwork.

Original DVD (Poster Artwork)

Criterion DVD