Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood | July 26 2019 | Digital Foot Technology | RIP Cinerama Dome

[CoolioD1]

2 minutes ago, Alli said:

the pictures released in Vanity Fair were exceptional. This poster is bad...intentionally bad

no

[Alli]

i must say the problem is especially brad's face and i noticed in the Vanity Fair pictures he's wearing sunglasses in all the pics.

 

getting old sucks when you're a sex symbol all your acting life

Edited March 18, 2019 by Alli

[PDC1987]

25 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

no other director would be getting this "it's supposed to suck" benefit of the doubt over a goddamn poster. even if it's supposed to be a pastiche it's a bad one! like it's just an inoffensive bland poster but you knuckleheads are driving me loopy with this shtick.

No, you're just missing the point and concept of it as spectacularly as possible.

[Jake Gittes]

Even if it were intentionally a bad poster, which it isn't, what's the fucking point? What's interesting about its badness? How does its badness reflect anything about e.g. the premise, setting, subject matter? It's not a parody or a copy of anything famously bad. It just looks like something you'd see on a direct-to-DVD movie in a supermarket bargain bin. "Oh but it's intentionally bad". And? Well congratulations it's a bad poster. What joy that brings us.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Jake Gittes

[CoolioD1]

19 minutes ago, PDC1987 said:

No, you're just missing the point and concept of it as spectacularly as possible.

you guys are definitely fucking with me.

[CoolioD1]

22 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

Even if it were intentionally a bad poster, which it isn't, what's the fucking point? What's interesting about its badness? How does its badness reflect anything about e.g. the premise, setting, subject matter? It's not a parody or a copy of anything famously bad. It just looks like something you'd see on a direct-to-DVD movie in a supermarket bargain bin. "Oh but it's intentionally bad". And? Well congratulations it's a bad poster. What joy that brings us.

it's supposed to be phony/bad jake it's a play on posters for classic films like Takers. learn film history dumbass

[DAR]

Like every film if the poster is bad, it’s a no go for me

[Goffe]

Guys... it’s a poster.

[CoolioD1]

Just now, Goffe said:

Guys... it’s a poster.

look the poster itself doesn't bother me i just wanna get into the mindset of the "it's bad on purpose" people.

[That One Girl]

 

clearly Tarantino was mirroring X-Men: First Class by ironically making a bad poster for a movie set in the 60s.

[The Futurist]

QT doesn't use photoshop, he only uses 1969 tech.

Digital Cameras ?

[tonytr87]

49 minutes ago, DAR said:

Like every film if the poster is bad, it’s a no go for me

Are you being facetious?

[Alli]

Maybe they're using the Aladdin strategy: start with some shitty promo and then the trailer blows everyone away...

[DAR]

11 minutes ago, tonytr87 said:

Are you being facetious?

👀

[DAR]

11 minutes ago, tonytr87 said:

Are you being facetious?

👀

[aabattery]

I respect the hustle of the clearly unqualified designer who no doubt got paid a fair chunk of change for this terrible poster.

 

Daylight robbery of the studio. Get that money.

[That One Girl]

Gotta appreciate their commitment to the bit of making these posters look as bad as possible

 

[CoolioD1]

ingenious poster. 

[Jake Gittes]

oh wow. a blonde girl.

[Brainbug]

I love these perfect posters. Theyre GREAT.

 

Also, Kill Bill 1 is the most rewatchable and entertaining movie from the whole of the 2000s.

 

One of these sentences is sarcasm the other is not.

 

 

Edited March 19, 2019 by Brainbug