|
 Click for large.
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2007 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
Skatman posted:There must be a way to make this into a desktop wallpaper I can wallpaper it for you if you'd like. Widescreen or standard?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2007 01:07
|
|
|
Regular aspect ratio: http://rapidshare.com/files/26900011/swhwallpaper_reg.jpg.html Widescreen aspect ratio: http://rapidshare.com/files/26900194/swhwallpaper_wide.jpg.html You'll have to jump through the rapidshare hoops, but the files are too large for waffleimages and I don't know what else to do with them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2007 01:27
|
|
|
 Click for big.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2007 04:14
|
|
|
 Click for big.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2007 05:40
|
|
|
blairerickson posted:If you think about how American Beauty would sell itself as a "Grindhouse" flick, it would focus on the peeping tom neighbor, the teen sex, the adulterous wife, the repressed gay dad, the kid selling weed, the dad trying to screw the teen cheerleader, and of course the violent ending. Grindhouse films were made and promoted long after the sexploitation sixties, and they encompass a much wider spectrum than the OP's starting image. I see absolutely nothing wrong with the American Beauty poster and wouldn't change a thing. My favorite submissions of the entire thread were the ones which did not simply attempt to parrot existing "Reefer Madness" posters. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I just wanted Yossarko to know his original work was very good in my eyes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2007 00:38
|
|
|
blairerickson posted:Love this one. That's really not true, it's just an extremely narrow interpretation which focuses almost entirely on the 1960s and early 1970s. Grindhouse cinema was alive and well long after posters like the ones you're talking about went out of style. There's nothing at all wrong with your preference of style, but why try and discourage people who express the genre differently?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2007 00:57
|
|
|
Jikes posted:Obligatory "I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm genuinely interested disclaimer": They are trashy whatever-sploitation by definition, that doesn't mean that all Grindhouse posters must strictly follow the same archetype. My gripe, if you can even call it that, is with the belief that every exploitation film ever made had a poster littered with tabloid headlines in the feast of flesh font. The OP's original submission fit that classic exploitation image, his (or her) following works, such as the Kung-Fu Double Bill and The Sixth Sense, displayed two distinctly different but equally effective grindhouse posters. The Sixth Sense poster in particular would have been ruined by splashing "He sees DEAD people!!!!" across the large black void, though it would certainly make it fit the mold of the original post. Exploitation content can be expressed through lots and lots of text, or through effective use of imagery. I prefer the latter, some people prefer the former. Both camps should be allowed to submit without being scolded for their personal preference, as it brings some variety to this fantastic thread. The actual movie "Grindhouse" had several posters promoting the film as well as the two component parts, employing a variety of styles. Here's the one I enjoyed the most, and it represents my point: Planet Terror Alternatively, take a look at some of the posters for Andy Warhol's sexploitation movies. Chelsea Girls is a good NSFW example. Andy Sidaris movie posters also embody a unique exploitation look.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2007 02:31
|
|
I thought that grindhouse films were trashy whatever-sploitation by definition? But then again, I don't know much about film history. What are some flicks that you'd class as grindhouse but not exploitation? I want to search for more poster images to see if it gives me any fresh ideas, because I've really been enjoying this thread.
|
 Click for big.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2007 08:52
|
|
|
 Click for big.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2007 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
Chocolate Mouse posted:I kind of ran out of ideas on this one. I think I got stuck with it looking too much like a contemporary poster and not really what I had in mind. The lower part looks off balance and I guess the dirt is too much on the top. I tried going with the traditional captions, but they didn't really seem to fit. The yellow crap all over it is distracting when you get to the upper region of the picture, probably just because of the particular color and the way it interacts with the layer beneath it. Other than that, I think it's quite complete.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2007 21:24
|
|
