I saw the artwork for Kill Bill 2 and I thought it sucks.

The same thing for Master & Commander.



Why couldn't they use the movie poster artwork where she is wearing a wedding dress and holding the sword?


Do you prefer if the dvd cover artworks matched the theatrical poster artwork?

Do you prefer if the dvd cover artworks matched the theatrical poster artwork?

Yes, because its different.

Never really thought about it. Don't have too many complaints about the cover art, they all look pretty good to me.

It doesn't matter... there are some bad theaterical posters out there and there are some bad DVD covers out there.

Well, if the poster was better than big mugs of the actors, then yes.

All DVD'S should have the original poster art as the covers!

a big YES! to original artwork

Since i've been a collector of VHS for a long time, I do miss seeing the original artwork. Mgm is bad at this. They almost always change things and they end up looking ugly.

Big to anchor bay & blue underground for either not changing the artwork or including it as a bonus insert.

Doesn't kill me, but I'd prefer the original poster art.

Depends upon if I like the original poster or not

original artwork is usually always better...so yes, I'd prefer that. but since all I really see are the spines 99% of the time, I really dont care.

I prefer the original movie poster artwork, even if it is worse than a redesign for DVD.

I don't really care one way or the other, as long as it looks good. There's a lot of crappy original art out there.

Master & Commander standard edition didn't have great art but the special edition was terrific.

Yep, pretty much it. But since I don't go to the theaters anymore, I wouldn't know what the official poster art looked like to begin with.

Makes sense to me ....

I like good cover art. If the poster sucks, then I dont want that. If the poster was good, than I want that.

nope don't care about the cover art, it could say blockbuster for all I care

For nostalgic reasons, I prefer the orignal poster art (especially 80's movies).

i definatly prefer the original poster art

whichever looks better. in the case of Lost in Translation, I would've been happier the scarlet johansson/tokyo movie poster as the cover of the DVD

I have to say, the cover art for the Matrix Revolutions DVD sucked. I would have rather they picked one of the four pictures or made four different covers and you pick which one you like best. Either way it doesn't matter much, the movie wasn't very good.

I agree, most of the time the original poster are better then some of these crappy DVD covers.

I'd prefer the original. If they want something new, then I'd want the original as an insert.

I prefer the orginal poster art. But in some cases it doesnt work 'as is' so a little modification of it is fine.

Just Say No to Floating Head Syndrome.

The worst offender with this is Disney animation. They have some beautiful poster art, yet most of their DVD covers are terrible.

Another batch that comes to mind is MGM's James Bond discs. There was some really cool artwork on their posters. Why didn't they use them instead of a cheap cut-and-paste job?