Sony's repackaged Muppet DVDs

[Mo Frackle]

While I'll agree that it's too bad to be good, it's also to good to be bad. In other words, it's too good to be bootleg. If it were bootleg, the photoshop job would probably look terrible, along the lines of slapping a photo on another photo. Or worse, stretching out a photo on google images so that it fits the size of a DVD package.

The goal of front covers is to draw the audience's interest. Show them something weird, like Kermit and the gang running from government agents, the Muppets wrecking New York, anything that won't make the average buyer go, 'meh'.

 

[Pinkflower7783]

These aren't gonna look pretty on shelves.

 

[jvcarroll]

The large portraits and over-saturation are designed to "pop" on store shelves more so than the original cover art. I understand why they did it. It just doesn't have to look so crude.

 

[CaseytheMuppet]

I get what your saying. If you were to look at a huge wall of various movies, The bright saturation Kermit blinding ouchie cover is going to get more attention than other movies.

 

[panmanthe2nd]

These are really, really bad. The Gonzo one isn't as bad as the other ones, but the Kermit one....you gotta be kidding me.
PanMan: Where did you find this? It's way too bad to be true.

Plus CaseytheMuppet raised a good point in a post above: It's not Kermit as a kid. Isn't that what the movie's about?

I found the covers on amazon.co.uk and since then I've seen them in lots of shops, so it is real.

I've been thinking the same thing about the Kermit cover.

 

[Sgt Floyd]

The large portraits and over-saturation are designed to "pop" on store shelves more so than the original cover art. I understand why they did it. It just doesn't have to look so crude.

When I said they would attract attention in more ways than one, this is what I was hinting at. But because they look so amaturish, they'll get attention, then probably laughed at and thrown back on the shelf. They will draw attentin because they are colorful, but also draw atention to how bad they really are.

Although, the MTM one is probably the best looking one...which isn't saying much.

I would say MFS if it wasn't for the terrible photoshop job on Gonzo.

 

[Muppetboy09]

"We now present to you, Kermit's Swamp Years! This time. Starring Radioactive Kermit!!!"

 

[Mister Muppet]

wow these are shocking coversI recently went to a shop with my mates and they had these on the shelves and when my mates saw them they thought they were bootlegs because of the awfull covers

 

[Drtooth]

When I said they would attract attention in more ways than one, this is what I was hinting at. But because they look so amaturish, they'll get attention, then probably laughed at and thrown back on the shelf. They will draw attentin because they are colorful, but also draw atention to how bad they really are.

But the problem is, these are marketed directly to little kids (something I hate in the Muppets, but works fine with Elmo), and they want a simple, non-cluttered, colorful cereal box look so they can pop out from the other overly colorful, cereal box looking DVD's....

where in-lies the FLAW. They make DVD's to stand out from the others that look exactly the same. I wouldn't see any Drew wuzzizface looking artwork (not that any of these films actually got them) for anything except an adult collector's edition... but we just can't have nice things.

I honestly don't see why the original covers aren't good enough, but I guess the whole point is to trick people into thinking these are new releases when they clearly aren't.

 

[panmanthe2nd]

I'd be interested to know if the 'Muppets From Space' is a signal sided disc, or double sided like all the previous UK editions.

I'm guessing it's a signal sided disc, because on the back of the cover it only talks about it being in widescreen.