|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. It's in reverse. 
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:51 |
|
|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. It's a metaphor of the clashing direction between where the fans wanted Star Trek to go and where Abrams took the series. You're seeing a ship being raped which is why it's uncomfortable to tell what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. The Mass Effect field has to be projected in front of the ship too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:It's in reverse. Bullshit. Everyone knows the crew of the Starship Enterprise boldly go forward because they can't find reverse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. The wrap drive doesn't move the ship, it moves the Universe past the ship, in reverse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. Not that it matters for what is primarily an attractive visual presentation, but an object passing you traveling faster-than-light will actually (given certain assumptions about the possibility of such objects existing) create a blurred version of the object appearing to retreat once it has gone by. See the illustration below of a tachyon passing an observer, where the dim sphere is the FTL object and the blue and red shapes are distortions of the sphere appearing to retreat in opposite directions. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
I can't be alone in seeing a Face/off Nicolas Cage here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
beanieson posted:nope, it's definitely this: I really like this poster because it is a simple and eye-catching design that is very aesthetically pleasing. However, now all I see is a tall dude drinking out of a can with a long straw. Thanks guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:I really like this poster because it is a simple and eye-catching design that is very aesthetically pleasing. However, now all I see is a tall dude drinking out of a can with a long straw. Thanks guys. I dislike it because I don't think it's any of those things. Except the tall dude, that I see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:I dislike it because I don't think it's any of those things. Except the tall dude, that I see. Yeah, that's a really poor poster and it's worse now that Crackbone made me notice the ship appears to be flying backwards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Not that it matters for what is primarily an attractive visual presentation, but an object passing you traveling faster-than-light will actually (given certain assumptions about the possibility of such objects existing) create a blurred version of the object appearing to retreat once it has gone by. See the illustration below of a tachyon passing an observer, where the dim sphere is the FTL object and the blue and red shapes are distortions of the sphere appearing to retreat in opposite directions. Since when have Star Trek and Science ever really hung out together? Sure they pretend to be friends but Star Trek is a real dick when the chips are down.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:I really like this poster because it is a simple and eye-catching design that is very aesthetically pleasing. However, now all I see is a tall dude drinking out of a can with a long straw. Thanks guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. It's almost like it is a poster advertising a movie that is more about style over substance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
davidspackage posted:I can't be alone in seeing a Face/off Nicolas Cage here. I saw Nic Cage in that picture too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 23:56
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:Since when have Star Trek and Science ever really hung out together? Sure they pretend to be friends but Star Trek is a real dick when the chips are down. I didn't mean to suggest that any relationship between actual physics and that poster (which I think is very dynamic and attractive) is anything but coincidental.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:The effect is all wrong though, as the motion lines on the poster make it look like the ship is flying backwards, away from the viewer. They're not motion lines, man. It's the tunnel effect created when they're in
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
Hewlett posted:If you blur your eyes a bit, it looks like a ground-level view of a guy holding a large drink can with a long straw he's drinking out of.  Holy gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 04:51
|
|
|
I am completely unable to see that poster as it was originally intended after reading that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
French character posters for Spring Breakers are out. Since they're basically shots of girls in bikinis, I'm going to assume they're  and will be linking them.Selena Gomez http://i.imgur.com/QcntCwR.jpg Vanessa Hudgens http://i.imgur.com/vY8NSUv.jpg Ashley Benson http://i.imgur.com/MVNCAIT.jpg Rachel Korine http://i.imgur.com/bsk1Goy.jpg James Franco's one probably isn't NWS though.  Also, more from Olympus Has Fallen   
edogawa rando fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Feb 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
"Our nation will rise"? Hollywood sure is trying to get some mileage out of an uninspiring verb. Those Spring Breakers posters are horribly generic and I think three of the girls have the same overly-smoothed cleavage. Here is the much better Spring Breakers poster 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:Also, more from Olympus Has Fallen Something about these posters screams "television". I think it's the font choices and the way the title is rendered.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 07:55
|
|
|
foodfight posted:Ryan Gosling plays the male equivalent of the manic pixie dream girl and it is loving terrifying. I'm ok with this but I want to specifically hear tliils explanation so I can be certain I'm enjoying the movie correctly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 10:16
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Something about these posters screams "television". I think it's the font choices and the way the title is rendered. It's very 24
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 10:43
|
|
|
That's not James Franco
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 10:44
|
|
|
sassassin posted:That's not James Franco Yes it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 13:11
|
|
|
Ceci n'est pas une Franco.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 13:14
|
|
|
"Our nation will rise" should be the tagline for Spring Breakers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 13:29
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:Since when have Star Trek and Science ever really hung out together? Sure they pretend to be friends but Star Trek is a real dick when the chips are down. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
This was a bad time to re-paint the comm room on the Voyager.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 14:59
|
|
|
Stallone, I am disappoint. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:Stallone, I am disappoint. Looks like the German/Euro poster for Bullet To The Head, judging from the credits. But, god, that's a lot of veins.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
Stallone looks like if he brushed up against a wet bramble he'd explosively de-pressurise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
 What? You want a poster of the kid putting both parents in a headlock, but you only have a picture of her with her hands on her hips? Sure, we can do that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
That's a mouthful of a tagline.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
Are those supposed to be her parents? They look the same age.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
aga. posted:Are those supposed to be her parents? They look the same age. You weren't the only one thinking that, turns out she's 27 this year, playing a 16 year old. To be fair, her parents in the film were born in 59 and 68, so they're just airbrushed to hell and back looking like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Hahahahahaha Awesome. vvvvvv just finished that yesterday. kiimo fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:51 |
|
|
It's funny because your avatar is the first thing that poster made me think of: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:17
|
|
