(click to enlarge)
After the tantalizing tease last week showing us a snapshot of the backwards-printed posters for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, we now have this more gorgeous twosome for viewing in huge resolution. The high key lighting and total lack of back-lit illumination reminds me of the stark full-frontal photos of Richard Avedon. (You’d damn well better bring your inner glamor when you sit for a bare-bulb Avedon interrogation portrait.) The posters thankfully forgo sepia for the more gilded glow of a burnished coin — the golden ageless image of bas-relief royal medallions. Another striking thing these faces have in common with an Avedon power portrait is the intensity of their arresting gazes. The camera captures an unblinking confrontational challenge, yet hint at the warm promise of frank engagement — tentative lips on the very verge of expressing what’s going on in the mind behind the eyes. The title written in reverse on Brad Pitt’s page now makes deeper conceptual sense when paired with its reflective mirror image on Cate Blanchetts half of the duo. The dyptich is combined in a more typical but no less effective fusion after the cut.
36 Responses for "Poster Pair: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
The 81st Best Picture!
AWFUL poster/s.
Ewww…
LOL, Ryan. You’re making the posters sound much better than they look.
I think they’re simply elegant. No doubt these are not the last posters we’ll see for CCoBB before Christmas. This year more than ever before, movies come with a whole sheaf of artwork.
These are great character banners and, for me, have the substantial weight of a first-class Interview magazine glamor shoot. If it’s not Avedon, it’s a remarkable evocation.
I don’t know about the real-life colors of Cate’s and Brad’s eyes, but love how the shade is so close in the third poster that they could almost be interchangeable.
(ha, Critix. That’s my conniving little job. I can also make a poster sound much worse than it is — if I’m not too excited about the movie.)
I like the one of Blanchett more, principally for spooky games the lighting plays with the cheekbones, but I still think they could have done something a bit more daring with the design.
And using the word “Life” is so banal — what film isn’t about “life” in some measure?
In the “pair” I saw which was actually a banner that looked like two movie posters together Christmas Day on Pitt’s half was backwards. Also it had the tag line(s) above Pitt it had “Life Can Only Be Understood Backward” and above Blanchett it had “It Must Be Lived Forward”
It seems to me he is looking directly into the camera, while she is looking slightly upward, which makes them definitely not “mirror images”.
I agree with GLodge, putting life behind the title is a bit tacky and makes the type seem too Hallmark greeting card for me. I like the images though.
Someone was playing with the contrast and saturation.
Anyway, composition-wise, the poster reminds me of VCB where Cruz, ScarJo, and Bardem’s faces were on the edge of frame and there’s a big nothing in the middle (their bodies, really). Here, it’s just black space. Not feeling it.
Never in my life did I expect to see a movie poster being analyzed in such a grand fashion…
all I have to say is, stay away from the photoshop!!
“stark full-frontal photos”
I won’t even mention my disappointment at what I thought those were! *giggle*
p.s. posters are UGLY.
In a world that thrives on hyperbolic statements, somehow Ryan always manages to take things even further.
This article epitomises verbosity at its finest…
“The posters thankfully forgo sepia for the more gilded glow of a burnished coin — the golden ageless image of bas-relief royal medallions”
“the title written in reverse on Brad Pitt’s page now makes deeper conceptual sense when paired with its reflective mirror image on Cate Blanchetts half of the duo.”
LMAO!!
Compositionwise, these are similar to the campaign for The Silence of the Lambs. One of his face, one of her face, one with them meeting in the center. The only thing missing is the moth.
http://www.impawards.com/1991/silence_of_the_lambs_ver3.html
You’re new around here, bt’60, so you don’t know that over-analyzing the living shit out of posters in heightened flamboyant terms is a tongue-in-cheek tradition we’ve had at AwardsDaily since this time last year.
It’s a way to avoid the tedium of obediently posting marketing material by subverting or acknowledging whatever the superficial intentions the graphic designers may have had, and by wryly reading as much overwrought embellishment into their creations as their own sense of importance seems to demand.
I know you prefer your analysis with emphasis on the anal, bt’60, but I’m not really writing with you as my target audience. You either get it, or you don’t. It’s meant to be arch, but whatever gets your ass laughed off, go for it.
Where do you go to school? Just curious.
@ Ryan Adams
LMAO!!! I sense some anger.
LMAO!!!
You’ll know I’m angry when your comments start vanishing.
Helluva nice catch, Ryan B.
Bravo.
@ ryan adams
I guess your “well-liked” friends and you are opposed to the idea of me having an OPINION about the article huh? LMAO. The article reads like the overworked writing of a verbose pseudo-intellectual and ironic enough, you kinda sound like one.
Now if you excuse me, I will “get my ass laughed off”….LMAO!!
fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! fight!
c’mon folks, it’s just a movie poster, no point getting all worked up…
there is a difference between having a respectable opinion without being offensive. These forums are a healthy and fun way to discuss an art form that we are all passionate about. Backto1960, respect the other posters and maybe you will have that in return.
oh. and i think the posters have an ethereal lovlieness to them.
So, a couple of three-syllable words apparently constitutes verbosity these days?
(Oh dear, should I use a less verbose verb than “constitutes”? “Approximates”? “Equals”? Still too long? Somebody help me, please.)
Loving your work, Ryan, in all its “pseudo-intellectual” glory. The web wants for eloquence these days.
(PS. Why is everything branded “pseudo-intellectual” now? What happened to good, old-fashioned, vanilla “intellectualism”? Does anyone acknowledge the difference anymore? Somebody get me my cane so I can wave it feebly in the air.)
I do not like this posters for CCoBB. It says nothing much about the movie. And the faces were shot like a regular magazine cover, except a lot less attractive than they normally are.
If they were relying on the face of Brad Pitt to sell the movie, couldn’t they pick a more attractive shot? At least one ab?
I’m not going to over-analyze these posters, but my gut reaction says, “meh.” Pitt’s looks like a drunk driving mug shot. And I fear people who are not that “into” movies–or this movie–or know the story of this movie– are going to think the posters are backwards by mistake and not on purpose.
Thanks Guy. I can only quote Poet Laureate, Sarah Palin:
Richard A, you scamp: “at least one ab?”
ahaha!
And I fear people who are not that “into” movies–or this movie–or know the story of this movie– are going to think the posters are backwards by mistake and not on purpose.
Pumpkin, luckily for those people, Four Christmases will be playing further down the multiplex corridor.
Brad Pitt’s abs are fine but poking fun at critics for licking Eastwood’s “ass” is intolerable….hypocrisy much?
RichardA must be a “well liked” friend.
Brad Pitt’s abs are more than fine, they’re foine.
If you think that’s comparable to licking Eastwood’s ass you’re disinvited from the orgy.
my god, bt’60. self-immolation much?
fione? LMAO!! do I sense some smack of attitude in our resident pseudo-intellectual Ryan Adams? do I sense some oh-no-you-didn’t personality?
This is the problem with verbosity, you miss out on the simpler aspects. I am not comparing Brad pitt’s abs to licking Eastwood’s ass. The comment about licking Eastwood’s ass wasn’t literal. It was in reference to a comment like kissing someone’s else or sucking up to someone. I was referring to critics who kiss Eastwood’s ass hence licking his ass. Thus, I find it hypocritical that I would be chastised for speaking figuratively yet it’s ok for you to rave about pitt’s abs. With all the constant elaborations, it’s starting to feel like I’m talking with an infant…who happens to use big words. I personally think Brad Pitt is overrated, acting and look-wise.
…I also noticed you edited your comment. From lunch puking to being disinvited from the orgy. I wonder why!
Back to 1960 you remind me of Mario Borroto. You aren’t, by chance, one in the same? Ryan is a particularly talented writer, one of the best I’ve ever read and we’re lucky to have him while we have him.
@ sasha stone
No, I am not Mario boroto and I also think Ryan Adams is a great and talented writer.
“Pumpkin, luckily for those people, Four Christmases will be playing further down the multiplex corridor.”
Very true, Ryan.
They’re duds. Nothing even remotely special about them, Pitt looks like he’s taking a mug shot, the use of “Life” in that cliche font is nauseating and, most importantly, it doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with what the movie is about. It doesn’t express one iota of anything about the film. It may as well be two paparazzi photos rejiggered on photoshop.
Leave a reply
All comments should respect the Awards Daily House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please let us know, quoting the comment in question.