An image is worth thousands of frames

One of the joys of Flickchart is seeing the array of movie posters for a film. Every film fan has a favorite movie poster. It may not be their favorite film, but it's an image that for them captures the essence of the film or perfectly summarizes their memory of experiencing that story.

So punk rock.

So punk rock.

Not so punk rock.

Not so punk rock.

When I worked at a video store in the late 80's, customers would frequently put in requests for the movie posters that accompanied the video release of a movie.

There was a heated competition amongst employees for the Sid and Nancy poster. The long list of girls that requested the The Lost Boys probably had more to do with Jason Patric and Kiefer Sutherland than the poster's artfulness.



Anyone that walked into a movie theater in the 80's can remember encountering the creations of Drew Struzan.

An undeniable master at capturing the soul of a film, Struzan has become recognized as the master movie poster artist.

While the passing of Don LaFontaine* in 2008 impacted the quality of movie trailers, Struzan is still with us, but unfortunately the quality of movie posters is on the decline.

With the loss of LaFontaine we lost the voice of the movies. But why are we losing the art of the movie poster? It has gotten to the point where fan-made posters, especially some of the minimalist approaches, are getting a lot of attention.

Why have movie posters gotten so bad, bland, and boring?

In the 90's LP collectors bemoaned the arrival of the CD due to its impact on the art of the album cover. This trend continued with DVD cover artwork, and now is continuing its spread to full size movie posters.

Other than Struzan's work, which movie posters do you think should be considered art worthy of preservation?

 

* If you're wondering who Don LaFontaine is, or you just really, really miss his voice: