Design Work: LEO BONUS ROUND!

Design Work: LEO

For mindblue's Learning Experience Organizers. Reminds me of 1960's MGM.

The concept in question:

The influence?

Logo Variants: An Odd Interest

It was the only thing I liked about last year's "Sherlock Holmes."

You go in to a movie, sit down, and know that the studio logos have to come before the movie. Representation and such, studios have to let you know that the following item is their product. And you know these icons and their tunes — Columbia Lady, WB Shield, Disney Castle — so much that they really do start to signify what kind of film you're getting into. Like remember seeing all the "Indiana Jones" film for the first time, and noticing the clever transitions from Paramount's mountain to something in the film? Sweet, wasn't it?

There are small, weird cults upon legions of logo loons on YouTube with playlists and mashups dedicated to their favorite mastheads. Branding is a thing. You wear your polo player below that collar, and Warner wants you to know what they own. Hold on, my point's coming.

But, don't you just love it when a studio alters their logo to better fit the mood of a movie? Seriously!

In the last fifteen years, since the re-advent of titles and special graphic design, thanks to guys like Kyle Cooper, filmmakers aren't afraid to try something a little special to set the mood for their films. So, these films go a little bit further, and alter logos. And, it's like the studio is actually supportive of the film, and they want to help maintain the illusion by adding to the film's vibes. They want to help set the mood, and be a part.

And that to me, is just so cool. Silly, hyper-specific, nerdy and weird. But cool.

So with that, allow me to show you some cool logo variations. Some of my favorites, if you'll allow it. And I hope you can share some after this. Now I'm gonna stick with Warner Bros. logos, because:

1. They were a bit easier to find...

2. It helps to have a common thread for comparison and understanding differentiation.

3. I prolly like their shield the best (Michigan colors, Looney Tunes mileage maybe).

So, to start, here's the standard fare. From "Gremlins":

Warner used that logo and theme music for years. A shield, with slight changes to fit the times. Nice enough. It's bold and makes you think of their legacy. But...

Let's get stylish with "Watchmen." Granted, I kinda hate the movie. But the logos — stark, simple high contrast designs — allude to the pulpy material that would follow:

Kinda nice. It's frank and cuts to the chase. Appropriate, given that it's a five hour film (in some cases). But it's as simple as color changes, that help set a tone.

Then, of course, there's the gifted styles of Steven Soderbergh. Sure, the guy has oodles of cultural competency in his aesthetics, but note the differences between each WB logo for all three of his "Ocean's" films. It's like they grow significantly more obnoxious, just like each respective film:

All great, but total signifiers for each film. First one's cool and assure. Second's one's showy. Third one's a bit ridiculous.

Now, this one, "Speed Racer" is interesting. By its self, the logo's actually quite gorgeous. A clean, carousel of color for a kaleidoscopic car movie. Kinda wondrous and child-like. Totally fits the look of the film. Too bad the film itself was unrelentingly garish and corny. "Speed Racer" the movie sucked. Not the logo though:

I mean, imagine if "Willy Wonka" had something like that?

Also, check out the change in tone, and WB's total willingness to dirty up their logo for the "Harry Potter" franchise:

And if I can have my favorite — and I do — it's the second film's WB logo. Like a fully realized, living breathing mock-up of the normal logo. Totally epic and purdy.

Again, I know it's just logos, but come on. Who hasn't thought: "Hey! That's pretty neat-o!" Alright, we don't say say "neat-o," but you get my point. Branding can be clever and creative. Not just there, obligated to nothing but the brand.

With that, I say two things:

1. Got any cool logo variants you can think of or find? It's ok, you're safe from Ogre screaming "NERDS!" here. Put everything in the comments please.

2. Here's what I was talking about!:

-B

Post Stuff: My Sister's 'Save The Dates'

Lis, just say the word and I'll take these down.

I made these for my sister, who finally after 43 years of waiting, has agreed to a betrothing, to Prince Droopy. Again, tell what to take down Lis.

Art friends, critique if you like. Lis, don't read the comments, unless you comment first and then like, never look again.

Critique Me: Mindblue Logo Revamp

A job/favor/awesome for my brother. Click, of course, for larger stuff.

Mindblue.com is the brain child of Ryan Goble, and is in dire need of a web overhaul. This is what we're working on, and this is the flag we're gonna be flying.

Great Design: "Caddyshack" Teaser Poster

After yesterday's events, and my pouring my heart out over film femininity, I feel the need to get back to some cool, but crass visuals. This week's installment of Great Design, brings us the advance sheet for "Caddyshack," which, if I saw in early 1980, I'd probably think porno... huh huh. I have a penchant for tacky, euphemistic and sexual design in the vein of the Quickie Burger sign in Ann Arbor or Playboy cartoons pre-1985.

Seriously, this thing looks like it should be advertising a movie called "Sex Goofballs!" amirite?

Why its got balls:

1. Well, that can be taken literally. So, its got all kinds of giggly double entendre.

2. The poster is simple, clever, and just showy enough, like the Rolling Stone mouth, or the recent posters for "True Blood" and "Jennifer's Body." A mouth, with heavy lipstick, can be kinda, sorta, possibly, dare I say ... hot? Enticing? Intriguing? All good for advertising purposes.

3. It's part of that wonderfully straight-forward sex-comedy era (despite the fact that "Caddyshack" has matured beyond "Porky's" golf status), and it used rough suggestion and fantasization. I'd say this is much harder than the now ironic gradient posters brought on by Steve Carrell's viriginity.

So, in conclusion, I ask you: when's this movie coming out?

Er, any ideas, comments, complaints on this thing? Put it in the comments. And wash your balls before entering.

Great Design: "The Toxic Avenger" Poster

Theatrical Movie Poster from the 1984 Troma Production "The Toxic Avenger," directed by Lloyd Kaufman.

Click for Larger Image.

Reasons this poster is a good example of design:

1. It draws you in immediately, with intriguing content, and a promising premise.

- Kinky, clear cut villains with guns, and red/black gang color.

- We're confused, but interested in what may be the malformed hero.

- Obviously the women is a good actress. Look at the eyes, the sub nudity, and the ability to be another woman in peril.

2. There's a BRILLIANT tagline. It's a total hook.

- "He's the SUPER-VIOLENT super-hero!"

3. The warning? Total titillation for a moviegoer! It's bad for you! Well, I wanna know why.

4. No frills here. Just a well shot, clean cut, clearly stated image, met with clean and easy text.

5. It's "The Toxic Avenger." 'Nuff said.

Great Poster? Or Greatest Poster?

Courtesy of IMPAWARDS.com

Director provocateur Lars Von Trier is one of the finest directors of of the last 25 years, courtesy of his lit-fuse films, and the discussions they create. "Medea," "The Idiots," "Breaking the Waves" and "Dancer in the Dark" are among his arguable classics — love 'em or hate 'em, they make get you started. With his latest, "Antichrist," Von Trier is pushing, hard. Willem Defoe and Charlotte Gainsbourgh (now a Cannes winner courtesy of this film), are a couple who lost a child, and that's putting it vaguely. There's more, but I feel inclined to say little. It's not out yet. But, I'm super stoked to see it, and I'd love to have seen it at the CFF, but tickets, well, you know. It's always price or selling out. Both on "Antichrist." 

Among my reasons for excitement, is this stark, simple and stunning poster. It doesn't try too hard, without being incredibly thoughtful. High praise, in white text, with red titles, and simple cross-shape as the layout. It's perfect. No floating heads or ambiguous/flashy imagery. Just the facts (opinions...) ma'am. Plus, the large British 18 with "strong real sex" and "self-mutilation" only interests more. What's it about? I'm not sure, and I don't care. It's titillating, not because you want to enjoy "Antichrist," but you just need to see it.  

It opens here, in the U.S., limited, on October 23rd. Here's to hoping it doesn't arrive mutilated on the Avid.

Click on the image below, for the nice, clean, Apple trailer:

That's damned good advertising.