Posts Tagged ‘Internet’

Starring The Mousy Girl as The Killer

May 17, 2012

I found some pictures on the Internet of Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs and the resemblance was uncanny. Well, that got me thinking. What about? You ask. Actors and their roles, specifically what if a certain actor who is known for playing a certain kind of role, plays against type. Such as:

Bette Davis as a Boozy Single Mom
Yes, it is true. She played a single mom in Frank Capra’s final film Pocketful of Miracles (1961), which is a remake of an earlier film of his Lady for a Day (1933). The film deals with Apple Annie who sells apples on Broadway and has a daughter who is studying in Spain. One day she learns that her daughter, who has no idea that her mom sells apples for a living, is coming to visit with her fiance, who is the son of a Spanish count. So, she enlists her best customer, gangster Dave the Dude to help her convince her daughter and her daughter’s fiance that she is a part of New York society. As interesting as this film sounds, there was trouble on the set from day one (a good deal of it came from Davis) and when the film premiered the reviews were tepid at best. So, Capra never directed another film after Miracles.

Pat Boone as a Cold Hearted Husband
Yes, Mr. Sweaky Clean can go beyond sweaky cleanness. In the film The Yellow Canary, (1963) he played a famous singer by the name of Andy Paxton. On the surface, he has the life many could dream of, he has a successful career as singer, a beautiful wife, played by Barbara Eden and a baby boy. Well, when the lights go down Paxton is very self-centered and his wife is fed up with Mr. I’m-So-Great-And-You’re-Not. Yet, just as she is about to leave him, their baby is kidnapped. Does this cause a turnaround in Paxton? No, he refuses help from the police and even agrees to pay $200,000 as a ransom for his son. Yet, once Paxton arrives at the location to make the payment, the kidnapper is no where to be found. Hmmm, the plot thickens.

Meg Ryan as a Tough as Nails Army Helicopter Pilot
Yep, America’s Sweetheart (how in the world did she get that title), can play tough. In  Courage Under Fire (1996), Ryan plays Army Captain Karen Walden, a rescue helicopter pilot who is up for the Metal of Honor. Reports say that just before she died, she rescued a downed helicopter crew and fought off the Iraqis after her helicopter crashed. Well, as the investigation into Captain Walden’s actions goes on, conflicting reports come out and lead investigator Lt. Colonel Serling, played by Denzel Washington, begins to wonder if she deserves such an honor. Does she or doesn’t she get it? Watch the movie to find out.

Arnold Schwarzenegger as a Kindergarten Teacher
How many movies have Schwarzenegger playing a tough cop? Lots of them! How many of them have have Schwarzenegger playing a tough cop who has to go undercover as (insert dramatic pause here) A KINDERGARTEN TEACHER! Only one and it is called Kindergarten Cop (1990). In order to catch a drug dealer, Schwarzenegger has to find the dealer’s ex-wife, who is hiding out in Oregon as a teacher. So, if he wants to find her and ultimately get the drug dealer, he has to pose as a kindergarten teacher. Does he find the ex-wife, nab the bad guy and save the day? If you really want to know, put the film in your Netflix queue and all will be revealed.

Yes, it can be interesting to see actors playing against type. Yet, when you think of it, there should be no “type”.  After all, it is called acting for a reason.

Sources:
http://www.movieweb.com/news/first-look-at-ashton-kutcher-as-steve-jobs-in-jobs

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055312/

http://www.amazon.com/Pocketful-Miracles-Glenn-Ford/dp/B00005LOLA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336876323&sr=8-1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057700/

http://www.allmovie.com/movie/the-yellow-canary-v117884

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115956/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099938/

What Movie Do You Want To See?

April 12, 2012

Again, the Internet has lead to the creation of a blog entry and two articles are to blame. One article from the April 7 issue of CNet deals with a new app from FlickChart that offers movie recommendations based on the kind of movies you prefer. Another article from Roger Ebert’s blog deals with a best film list from a British film magazine Sight & Sound. What sets this best film list apart from other best film lists are two things:

  1. Assorted film critics, directors, producers, film festival organizers, etc., are polled for their top ten all time best films and this is distilled into a best film list.
  2. This list comes out once every ten years.

Well, as you can guess, these two articles got me thinking. Not so much about how art films and award winners seem to dominate these lists, rather it is how these lists are just reflections of the bias of those who put such lists together.  Those in the film industry would pick films they are familiar with. The app from FlickChart picks films based on one you already like. So, that leads to best of lists that contain films ranging from Shoot the Piano Player to Carrie.

Of course, bias in and of itself isn’t so bad. If you didn’t have things that you liked and return to time and time again (i.e. foods or activities) and vice versa, you wouldn’t have any order in your life. Still, it is important to note that these lists are not to be taken as fact. Yes, lists like Sight & Sound  and the one you make on FlickChart can help you make movie viewing choices, but they are not the be all or end all of best of lists. They are just a bunch of films that a group of people think are worth ranking.

So, don’t be surprised if art films and award winning films end up on best of lists. Critics, film festival organizers and other in the field have a bias and yes, a certain degree of film snobbery, for films in that genre.  After all you wouldn’t expect that Carrie or Porky’s would be on such a list. That’s why there’s your personal Netflix queue or FlickChart for when you are in the mood for such films. Your own best of list is reflective of your own bias.  Therefore, if watching a film like Porky’s helps you to forget your troubles, so be it.  The best “Best of” list is the one you personally make.

Sources:
http://howto.cnet.com/8301-11310_39-57410710-285/get-better-movie-recommendations/

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2012/04/post_5.html

 

Now I’ve Seen Everything (Up To This Point)

February 23, 2012

As always, the Internet has proved to be a great source for my blog. So, will I write about an upcoming auction of a Little Caesar movie poster that will take place in Texas during the month of March, 2012? (There are only two posters from this film known to exist and this is one of them.)

No.

Will I write about an auction that took place on February 9-11, 2012 that included The Amazing Spider-Man No. 1 comic book from 1963. The comic book was rated as an 8.5 (10 is the considered best) and sold for $23,400.00

No.

So, what will I write about? Hair, namely celebrity hair. Believe it or not, I learned that that Paul Frasier Collectibles in England is selling strands of hair from celebrities such as Katherine Hepburn, Elizabeth Taylor, Marilyn Monroe, even Justin Bieber, just to name a few. Most of the strands sell for £49.95 ($78.69 USD), yet one strand sells for £149.95  ($236.24 USD) and a collection of hair, not just a few strands, sells for £35,000 ($55,142.51 USD).

Wow, some people will buy anything and more power to Paul Fraser for making a profit out of the hair. The thing is, what is someone going to do with a strand of hair? Clone the celebrity once it is possible to create a human being hair or tissue samples? Put it in a display case to astound friends and confuse enemies? I can see the point of buying a piece of clothing or jewelry that a celebrity owned, even a movie prop. They are things that are either pleasing to the eye or artfully rendered and, in the case of clothes and jewelry, they can be worn. You can’t wear a strand of hair.

Also, what about the case of celebrities that didn’t have children and any parents and siblings have since died. How can it be proven that the hair is really theirs? Do you call up relatives and a say “Excuse me, we have a strand of hair that may be from your cousin, Marilyn Monroe. Can you please give us a DNA sample, so that we can prove that the hair is really hers?” Personally, if there was a famous person in my family and his or her hair were to be auctioned off, I would charge for having to give a DNA sample. How much would I charge? Whatever the going price for the hair is, that is how much my DNA is worth.

I must say that having a strand of hair from a celebrity, especially a dead one, is creepy. No matter how tastefully the hair is displayed, it still came from a human being. It’s like displaying a skull or a jar with an eyeball floating in formaldehyde. As wonderful as the human body is, and it is, the body looks better and is less creepy when the parts aren’t disassembled and scattered hither and thither.

Then there’s the question of how the hair was acquired in the first place? In the case of Justin Bieber, it was acquired when he cut it on The Ellen Show. How did people get a hold of the hair of Elizabeth Taylor or Marilyn Monroe? Did a maid save some strands after Taylor or Monroe washed their hair? Did a beautician put a collection in a jar after a cut and styling session? Elvis’ barber did something like that and his collection of The King’s hair sold at auction for $33,657 in April 2003.

I guess this is just a case of there are people in the world with more dollars than sense. Yes, a person is entitled to spend his or her money as he or she sees fit and if that person wants a strand of Elizabeth Taylor, and can afford it, then fine, spend your money on Liz’s hair.  Yet, all the money in the world doesn’t take away the creep factor.

Sources:
http://www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/News/MEMORABILIA/‘Little-Caesar’-movie-poster-–-‘holy-grail’-of-gangster-films-–-auctions-in-Texas/9781.page?catid=78

http://www.morphyauctions.com/auctions/article?id=195

http://morphyauctions.auctionflex.com/showlot.ap?co=31120&weid=21297&weiid=7787056&archive=n&keyword=Spider&lso=lotnumasc&pagenum=1&lang=En

http://store.paulfrasercollectibles.com/famous-hair-s/1830.htm

http://finance.yahoo.com/currency-converter

MastroNet Inc., Americana Premier Catalog Auction, Lots 1-670. #583 “Enormous Quantiy of Hair From the Head of the “King” – Elvis – Saved by His Personal Barber”, pages 206-207. April 23, 2003.

http://www.kovels.com/201008258031/News-News-News/elvis-presley-hair-a-bargain.html

 

 

The More Things Change…

January 19, 2012

The more blog ideas I get.  Two items on the Internet inspired this entry.  They are:

The Historical Fact
On December 28, 1895, the first commercially screened movie was shown in the Grand Café in Paris. The film, called Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory, is 46 seconds long and shows people leaving the Lumiere factory in Lyon, France. The film was screened by Auguste and Louis Lumiere (their father owned the factory) and people actually paid to see this, along with other short films, created by the Lumiere brothers.

The Recent Development
The December 27, 2011 entry of Entertainment Weekly’s Popwatch blog was a part lament/part rant about the demise of the video rental store. What lead to this article was that the author wanted to rent Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion and she couldn’t find it anywhere. So, she was stuck with downloading it from iTunes. (The horror!)

My Two Cents
Regarding the first movie shown to a paying audience, everything has a beginning and movies are no exception. Yes, the act of going to see a motion picture began in a humble Parisian cafe. I saw the film (Thank you, You Tube) and while it doesn’t compare Hollywood’s current output, it is worth a lot as a historical document. Imagine being a patron of the Grand Café. A poster advertising a new attraction piques your interest. You go in, pay admission and see something you have never seen before, namely, moving images on a wall. We in the early 21st century take it for granted that there are motion pictures. In late 19th century Paris, motion pictures, even if all they do is show people leaving factory, were an amazing new sight to behold. Attached is the film, let me know what you think of it.

Now for the endings part of this blog entry. Thanks to Netflix, DVD vending machines and the Internet, the end of the video rental store is coming.  Yes, for whatever reason there will be some holdouts that survive because they serve a niche in their community. Still, trend is to get videos from a source other than a bricks and mortar store. On the one hand that is good, because the choice is in consumer’s hands and in the case of Netflix and the Internet, they have more items than can ever be found in a bricks and mortar store.

On the other hand, searching for something on the Internet or just viewing the selections from a DVD vending machine, seems so sterile. I can remember going to a Tower Records & Video (RIP) near my house to rent a movie and not having any idea what to rent until I actually found something after browsing the aisles for at least 15 minutes. While that happens with the Internet, there’s no sense of adventure when what you want is right at your fingertips. As for vending machines, they are limited to 20 to 40 titles of the most recent releases or straight to video duds. While it is great to rent the latest Harry Potter film from one of these machines, noticing that Piranha 3DD is listed below right below it doesn’t enhance the experience—at least it doesn’t for me.

Still, who would have thought in 1895 that there would be computer-animated films, films made with motion capture technology and even just films made in color and having spoken dialogue and other sounds. In addition, who would have thought in 1995 that video stores would be replaced by Netflix, vending machines and the Internet. Of course, time marches on and things evolve and change. So, who knows what entertainment or other wonders that tech heads will dream up and create. Whatever comes next, it is good to have a sense of appreciation for what is and a sense of wonder for is to come. Believe it or not, there was a time when even cable television didn’t exist. Now there are over a hundred channels available to those who subscribe to service and people actually complain about “…nothing good being on TV.”

Sources:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/the-birthday-of-the-movies.html

http://www.earlycinema.com/pioneers/lumiere_bio.html

http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/12/27/contrarian-corner-ive-had-it-with-video-stores/

The Studios Need to Hire These Artists

November 17, 2011

As I have mentioned many times in this blog, the Internet is my primary source for information for this blog. This week’s entry is no different. Not too long ago I found two items about custom made movie posters that I want to share with you.

Mondo Tees
The folks out of Austin, Texas have done it again. To commemorate the release of the Jurassic Park trilogy on Blu-Ray, Mondo had artist JC Richards create a movie poster that surpasses the original. (The original movie poster is on the left, Richards’ creation is on the right.)

In fact, the image on the right should have been used for movie posters when the Jurassic Park films were released. The image with the dinosaurs in the forest gives you an idea what the film is about, but leaves enough mystery so that you’ll want to see the film to learn more. Also, it is just a beautiful image that honors dinosaurs as the majestic creatures that they were. After all, dinosaurs as a species were around for 180 million years. Humans, as in homo sapiens, have been around for only 200,000 years.

The Royale
As great as Mondo is, it isn’t the only place that is creating custom made movie posters. An arthouse movie theater in Mesa, Arizona, called The Royale, features custom made movie posters for special screenings at the theater. For the theater’s showing of Scott Pilgram vs. The World, artist Randy J. Gregory created a movie poster that was inspired by old school video games. (See below).



Keeping with the old school video game theme, artist Daniel M. Davis created this poster for the theater’s screening of the documentary King of Kong. (See below)


The Bloggers Opinion
Now these movie posters featured are both excellent works of art and amazing movie posters. They promote the film and are pleasing to the eye. These artist should be working for the studios. They know how to create movie posters that both engages the viewer and piques the viewer’s curiosity so that he or she is interested in going to see the film. So many current movie posters are committee designed Photoshopped monstrosities that they are examples of how not to make a movie posters.  Therefore, powers that be in Hollywood, how about having fewer starving artists in the world and hiring Messrs. Richards, Gregory and Davis?

Sources:
http://www.universetoday.com/38125/how-long-have-humans-been-on-earth/

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0878252.html

http://www.fusedfilm.com/2011/10/check-out-mondos-newest-jurassic-park-poster/#int38

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/jackalope/2011/10/the_royale_offers_custom_movie.php

http://theroyaleaz.com/

Kimosabe, Uncle Walt Says Stop

August 25, 2011

I found a news item about Disney Studios stopping production of the latest Lone Ranger movie. The reason for halting production was the budget. Producer Jerry Bruckheimer was able to reduce the budget from $250 to $232 million, but Disney wanted the budget down to $200 million. There was also the theory that since Cowboys and Aliens did poorly at the box office, Disney was going to put the Lone Ranger on the shelf for now. The film was in pre-production, meaning that while no film was shot, money had been spent on the project and Johnny Depp, who was to play Tonto, will be paid the full amount that was listed in his contract. No word on Armie Hammer’s salary (he was to play the Lone Ranger) or what Director Gore Verbinski thinks about all of this.

What do I think of all of this? Woo-hoo! There is some intelligent life in Hollywood. How many Lone Ranger radio shows, movies, shorts, television shows and cartoons were made? Is it really necessary to make yet another one? Enough has been done with the story, so I don’t think even actors like Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp can really add anything new to it.

This trend of remakes, reboots and redos has gotten very, very old, very, very fast. The Lone Ranger belongs to another time when, simplistic stories of the “Old West” were the norm. That’s not to say that a film based on the “Old West” can’t be made. Just be original about it. If you are thinking that I wanted Cowboys and Aliens to do better at the box office, you are right. After all, what was to stop aliens from visiting Earth in the 1800’s? So, it is not so far fetched that the cowboys would come in contact with them.

I end this not by pleading with the Hollywood powers that be to be more original. Instead, I ask the moviegoing public not to be so quick to see a remake, reboot or redo movie. Seek out something original for a change. As for all the Lone Ranger fans out there, if you folks are so hungry for some “Hi-ho, Silver!” stuff, then put some Lone Ranger films in your Netflix queue or go to your local library and borrow a few Lone Ranger DVD’s. You’ll be able to enjoy those films with the original actors and there won’t be another remake, reboot or redo movie cluttering the film landscape.

Source:
http://www.movieweb.com/news/lone-ranger-halts-production

Haven’t I Seen You Before?

June 30, 2011

Would you believe that there will be yet another Three Musketeers film? It’s true. This version stars Orlando Bloom and Milla Jovovich and was directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. The movie is scheduled for release on October 11, 2011. An image of the movie poster is floating around cyberspace and chatter on it is mixed. There are comments from those who like it, saying that it recalls a time when movie posters were drawn. Comments from those who don’t like it range from “Blah” and “Lame” to “Too busy for this poster. My eyes are all over the place!!!” As for me, I like the compositional style, I just don’t like the look of those in the poster. They have a going through the motions/ “I’m just here for the check” look. Below is the poster.

Moving right along, a recent story in the Times of India was about two movie posters. In particular, how a Bollywood movie poster for Murder 2 was very similar to Lars won Trier’s Antichrist. Both posters featured arms entangled in twisted branches and if there weren’t an Internet either no one would call attention to it or the attention would come much later. Anyway, below are the two posters in question.

What’s going on here? Has Hollywood’s current recycling kick spread to posters? Actually no. The reuse/repurposing of compositional and artistic styles has been going on since before the Renaissance. Both Michelangelo and Leonardo DaVinci influenced Raphael. Henri Matisse and pre-Roman Iberian sculpture influenced Picasso. A can of soup influenced Andy Warhol. I would go on but you get the idea.

So, it’s not a case of movie posters artists getting lazy, they are taking part of a long tradition of artists seeing something that they like and incorporating it. What separates art from a mere copy  is when the artist uses a technique in such a way that it becomes a part of his or her signature style. Of course, with the above-mentioned Three Musketeers poster, sometimes taking elements from the past doesn’t always work. That’s why talent is so important. No matter what the tools he or she uses, whether photography, computer generated images or acrylic paint, the true talent of an artist shines through. Think of the movie posters for Back to the Future and Mystic River (seen below and created by Drew Struzen and Bill Gold, respectively). One is drawn and one is photographed, yet they are great posters because two excellent artists created them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Therefore, if the artist is good—a movie poster is a thing of beauty. If the artist is bad, the movie poster is lambasted throughout the Internet.

Keep this in mind the next time you look at a vaguely familiar movie poster.

Sources:
http://www.flix66.com/2011/06/09/logan-lerman-and-orlando-bloom-look-awful-in-new-poster-for-the-three-musketeers/

http://www.movieweb.com/news/the-three-musketeers-poster

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-09/news-interviews/29637659_1_poster-mohit-suri-trier

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/R/raphael.html

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/P/picasso.html

http://www.drewstruzan.com/illustrated/portfolio/?fa=medium&gid=686&mp&gallerystart=1&pagestart=1&type=mp&gs=1

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/secrets-hollywood-s-greatest-movie-188670

Movie Poster Exhibits

May 19, 2011

I read of two exhibits of movie posters that I want to share with you.

One exhibit called, Foyer Entertainment: Movie Lobby Cards from the 1930s-1960s at the Main Branch of the Free Library of Philadelphia and it features lobby cards, which are 11 x14 size movie posters that were place in theatre foyers and inside the theater itself. These lobby cards were in use until the mid 1980’s. What ended their use was a combination of the demise of second run movie theaters and theater owners preference for one sheet movie posters. The exhibit runs until June 17.

Another exhibit called, Remember When: Marvels and Memories from the Collection of Dr. James Clark, at the Tyler Museum of Art in Tyler, Texas, is an exhibition of over 300 artifacts, mostly movie posters and other memorabilia of Tyler area plastic surgeon Dr. James Clark. Dr. Clark got his start in collecting when he was in high school. He had a job in a local movie theater and one of his duties was to remove posters when a film’s run had ended. Of course, the rest is history. This exhibit runs until August 14.

Here are two exhibits featuring movie posters, running independently of each other and as you can guess, I’m pleased to learn of these exhibits. After all, I’m not the only one who thinks movie posters are works of art. Just Google movie posters and you’ll find loads of websites and blogs (other than mine) that showcase movie posters.

The good thing about these exhibits is that they are displaying movie posters in the real world. While you can learn about them on the Internet (which is what I do), if you want to see these exhibits, you have to go to an actual place to see these movie posters (which is what I hope to do for the exhibit in Philadelphia). Yes, it is fun to see all sorts of movie posters from the classics to fan-created masterpieces on the Internet, still seeing a movie poster in person is what really gets the gray matter going. You’re seeing the actual movie poster, not a 150 x 200 pixel representation. You get a chance to see the details that a computer screen can’t provide.

So, if you live near the places where these exhibits are taking place, get out and see these movie posters for yourself. If you don’t live near the museums that have these exhibits, get out any way. As great as the Internet is, it doesn’t beat getting out of the house and experiencing life in the real world.

Sources:
http://libwww.library.phila.gov/blog/index.cfm?srch=3&postid=1225

http://www.dallasartnews.com/2011/05/thrills-chills-and-movie-stills-at-the-tyler-museum-of-art/

There’s an App for That?

January 27, 2011

How do I come up with subjects for my blog entries? Well, I could say that I scour the Internet all hours of the day and night looking for just the right subjects, but that would be a lie. I actually use Google Alerts and everyday I get links from all over the web about movie posters. From these links, I find subjects to write about. (Don’t look at me at that, some bloggers, like me, have a life outside of the Internet.)

Anyway, I found some information about an iPhone ™ App that allows a person to make any photo into a movie poster. Do wonders never cease? Turn your Facebook profile photo into a horror or blockbuster type of movie posters for your iPod™, iPhone™ or iPad™—all for the low price of $0.99. (ha-ha) Seriously now, this is just another electronic time waster, made by some geek who is most likely still waiting for Tomb Raider 3 to be greenlighted.

Yet, as fun as it might seem to take a photo and turn it into a movie poster, I say:

1.)   It doesn’t compare to the real thing.

2.)   Personal pictures should be left alone to tell their own story.

In addition to being advertising vehicles and reminders of movies that we enjoyed, movie posters tap into our memories, fantasies as well as hopes and dreams. Personal pictures are part of the story of our lives. A picture of a baby covered with strands of spaghetti is funny and charming in and of itself. Take that picture and turn it into a movie poster with the title of “The Spaghetti Strikes Back” it crosses into the corny territory.

Movie posters and personal pictures have their place as separate entities. They work best when the they aren’t combined.

Source:
http://apps.su/program/25879/invasion-of-the-b-movie-posters.html

Death of the Movie Poster?

January 20, 2011

God bless the Internet. It makes research for many things, so much easier. Particularly this week’s entry, since I found a few posts dealing with the art of movie posters. One post on SeattlePi.com wrote about how Mondo, a small company out of Austin, Texas that started as a sideline to the Alamo Drafthouse, makes high quality limited edition movie posters. The writer goes on to say that Mondo’s artists make better movie posters than the movie studios do. (You can find examples of the latest item for sale here: http://blog.mondotees.com/.) Another item, this time on the Thristy for Milk blog mentioned that recent movie posters are just photoshopped creations that are made by committee and don’t compare to movie posters of the past.

Yes, many current movie posters are just photoshopped creations and many fan created items are works of art, still before the wholesale basing of today’s movie posters continues any further know that:

1.)   While movie posters prior to the 1970’s were drawn, the art department had to bend to what the studio heads wanted.  After all, the studio heads were the ones who signed their checks and if the people in the art department wanted a job, they had to do what their bosses wanted.

2.)   Works of art like the “Mona Lisa” and the Sistine Chapel were commissioned. That means artists of the likes of Michelangelo, Da Vinci had to swallow their pride and do what the patron wanted. Granted, Michelangelo clashed with Pope Julius II during the years he worked on the chapel and Da Vinci was such a perfectionist that he took the Mona Lisa with him to France, so he could continue working on it, when he was appointed as “the first painter, engineer and architect” for King Francis I. Up until the late 1700’s, most artists, if they wanted to eat, attached themselves to the nobility and they did what they were told.

3.)   Don’t knock all “modern” movie posters.  Modern photographic and design tools are just that—tools. It takes imagination and a keen eye to use those tools to create a movie poster that is worthy to be called a work of art.  Don’t believe me. Just look at the posters for the final Matrix movie, Black Swan, A. I., American Beauty—just to name a few and you’ll see what I mean. (It also helps when the studio heads don’t overdo the suggestions.)

So, reports of the artistic movie poster being dead are greatly exaggerated.

Sources:
http://www.seattlepi.com/movies/433305_film43568774.html

http://thirstyformilk.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-state-of-movie-posters/

http://www.timelineindex.com/content/view/1324

http://www.oil-paintings-reproductions.com/Articles/Leonardo-da-Vinci.html