I always thought I was the only one who felt this way, but then I saw a thread on IMDb about it, ensuring that at least a small selection of anally retentive geeks feels the same way. I wonder how MiceChat feels about this.
So I recently got my hands on the Hunchback of Notre Dame DVD, a film which I've always felt is one of the best and most underrated ever. That quality was certainly reflected in this, the original movie poster...
...a gorgeous, atmospheric, well-designed piece that captures the feel of the movie perfectly. It's so nice you'd want to frame it and look at it every once in a while.
Unfortunately, the DVD looks like this:
A schmaltzy, crowded, mediocre drawing of a scene that never occurred with more shiny Photoshop airbrushing than six years of Vogue put together. And while the movie is one of Disney's darkest and deepest, the cover art invokes the sort of cartoon that teachers toddlers to count.
The same thing happens with every release; gorgeous movie posters, awful DVD art.
Why must they do this? I understand that they want parents to pick these up and think, "oh, this will be lovely for little Layla," or, "this looks long and loud, maybe if I pop this into the DVD tonight and crank up the volume Harold and I will finally get a little time to ourselves," but do they have to dumb their own masterpieces down like this? And doesn't it alienate that older demographic that watches animated films for their own enjoyment; the sort of crowd you see at every Pixar release? What do you think?