Muppets Most Wanted Poster (UK and Ireland)

[galagr]

Anyone like the old one? Welp, too bad, because now we get this beauty:

GG, guys, gg. No, I'm sure no one will noticed that you replaced that COMPLETELY EPIC BACKGROUND THAT MADE THE POSTER LOOK 5 TIMES BETTER WITH JUST BLANK WHITE AND MORE OVERUSED STOCK PHOTOS.

 

[JonnyBMuppetMan]

Yeesh, practically everything's out of whack now. The lighting, proportions of the characters, even flaws I could overlook in the previous iteration (sorta small Fozzie) are now completely glorified here.

I get that Disney wants to establish a bit of unity in their advertising, and not every single Muppet poster has to be art, but I still cannot comprehend WHY they would feel the need to go back and "fix" what wasn't broken to begin with; downgrading what was a cool, epic poster, into a bland, incompetently Photoshopped jumble inferior to even the U.S. poster.

 

[Reevz1977]

Ooh yeah, now that's really, REALLY awful!! Congratulations Disney!

 

[jvcarroll]

Ooh yeah, now that's really, REALLY awful!! Congratulations Disney!

I just don't get it. They have better photos to choose from and they can certainly take wonderful poser shots without having to pay "the actors" a dime.

 

[Drtooth]

I'd honestly be more annoyed if this was something merchandised that I'd have to pay for. Movie posters are barely a second thought anymore, and even the good ones look completely identical. You'd at least thing there's something to make these appealing enough to sell, but it's the last thing they think about when it comes to movie marketing. More time, money, and effort seems to go to more visual and interactive promotions like websites and movie trailers. And I wouldn't doubt it's because we find out about the movie 3 months before it's even finalized now.

Still... what's the problem with shooting more posers? I know stock pictures are all the rage with everyone (keep seeing the same Nick TMNT stock artwork on every TMNT merchandise), but maybe another round of poser photos to go on next time?

 

[Twisted Tails]

Anyone like the old one? Welp, too bad, because now we get this beauty:

GG, guys, gg. No, I'm sure no one will noticed that you replaced that COMPLETELY EPIC BACKGROUND THAT MADE THE POSTER LOOK 5 TIMES BETTER WITH JUST BLANK WHITE AND MORE OVERUSED STOCK PHOTOS.

NO! Nonononono! This is not right! This IS GARBAGE! Completely worng and I liked the one with the black and white background.

Thanks a lot Disney! Hmph! This is what I got from your publicity.

Have I seen changed movie posters from movie posters? DUHHHHH! Here is the bad part and it is: OVERSTOCKED PHOTOS! GAHHHHHH!

You can tell from my tone that I am one tough MC member at comments and don't say that I am bad at commenting about Muppet issues.

 

[Drtooth]

It looks no worse (heck, better) than the crappy Pokemon-esque The Muppets poster which was a copy of an equally misguided Toy Story 3 poster (which frankly resembled their merchandising push). It's a shame the ruined a pretty good poster with that generic blank background (which is all the rage with kid's movies... ALL of them, so Disney's not the only ones) to shove the stars in.

Still, the term "Muppets" and "Stock photos" go painfully hand in hand, and have since the late 90's. I'll give Disney credit for creating some new posers instead of shoving the tiny eyed, flathead Kermit no one liked all over everything. But they still use stock photos in certain merchandise. If Disney wants some brand unity thing with a Gonzo poser that looks like the less expressive, more simplistic nosed puppet, why do I still see the cover of Muppets Take Manhattan every so often?

 

[Bridget]

Was I wrong in the fact of expecting more? You know how you can imagine what something is going to look like before it does? This is EXACTLY how I imagined it would be if they decided to be lazy with it. Sooooo many more photos to choose form. I appreciate the effort- but, this is close to rubbish. The only possible thing I like about it is Piggy's hand-on-hip pose. But even so, they all look like paper cut outs to me.

 

[galagr]

I wasn't truly dissapointed in this poster until I realized that the Muppet Mindsets' banner looks better than this. And it was made by a fan. Not a multi-billion dollar company like Disney, no, a fan:

 

[Drtooth]

Making something an issue of if fans can do better is always a non-starter. It's always correct, but there's a lot of levels of insane dedication fans will go to that just can't be match by barely enthusiastic marketing departments. And any non-employee or not famous fan involvement is considered "unsolicited material." You can thank the untalented disturbingly obsessive fanboys for that much. Like the hundreds of poorly written Tiny Toons revival scripts all about Fifi out there.

It's very obvious that it's a shame that there are T-shirt contests with artwork higher quality than these posters that don't even get to become a shirt. And all that other "the fans can do better" stuff out there. It's a real shame they didn't hire bigger fans in the company to make these posters, but it's also pretty obvious that they wanted these done on a budget. And most of that budget went to more viral advertising. What I'd rather stack these up to than fan-made material is SW's involved photoshoots for the DVD release of current Sesame episodes. They bargained to get a new photo of Kermit on a DVD cover. That's a lot more dedication right there. Especially considering the DVD's are essentially just episode compilations slapped together.

But then again, the one situation where this poster comes off looking better? Check out the merchandise we got from 2002-2005. Newer Piggy heads super imposed on old photos, clumsy additions of supposed fan favorite characters on already crowded stock photos from the 70's (their hearts were in the right place, anyway)... these posters are high art compared to that crap.