Movie covers....GRRRRR!

[Lady of Winterfell]

I hardly ever read those little blurbs, or pick up a book because of them. I usually just skip over them, because they really don't tell you anything. They can always find somebody to give it a good blurb, even if the book is terrible.

 

[Pyan]

Slightly off-topic, but at least they've stopped the selective reviews - you're not allowed to use a bit of a review and ignore the overall tenor these days...

As in:

Guys and Dolls. Piccadilly Theatre, 2005

Extract: "Hilarious"

Full version (Independent on Sunday): "Frank Loesser's great musical from 1950 is hilarious... Grandage's production often falls somewhat flat".

Excellent! Theatres forced to withdraw misleading reviews - News, Theatre & Dance - The Independent

 

[K. Riehl]

I agree with most of the posters here but I can recall some very good movie tie in covers that were/are better than the original cover.

Irving Block and Allen Adler wrote a story that was made into, "The Forbidden Planet"
The original book was nondescript and disappeared once Adler was Blacklisted due to the Red Scare. The Stuart novelization which appeared after the movie and had the classic Robby the Robot cover.

Farewell to the Master by Harry Bates was made into the Day the Earth Stood Still. The rare paperback takes the picture from the lobby card below.

When Worlds Collide has a fairly bland cover. The Movie tie-in version has stills from the movie and is much more collectible, and cooler.

Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell has a classic Hannes Bok cover, but the second edition movie cover is pretty good too.

So, IMO there are some movie covers that are at least as good as the originals.

 

[K. Riehl]

The Movie tie-in versions of "The Thing

 

[sffhound]

Wow, LOVE the covers!

 

[tangaloomababe]

I are most wholeheartedly with everyone and hate book covers that are changed to reflect a movie, particuarly if the book title has been changed when addapted into a movie.

 

[MJBIZ1]

Personally I just like to see the original artwork on the books. See what the author had in mind rather than some big movie company's idea.

Yep I agree. Much rather see a representation of what the author intended!

 

[MontyCircus]

I don't need Will Smith on the cover of I, Robot.

hehe, I recently picked up the Foundation Trilogy on Amazon, and I was planning to pick up I, Robot too. But there was just no way I was going with the Will Smith cover. I HATED that movie. When the end credits rolled I was disgusted with myself that I had actually watched it to the end.

But that's the only cover they had (or the only one in stock, I forget exactly). Anyway, I ended up not getting it.

If the movie based on the book was good, then I woudn't mind a movie cover.

 

[dask]

As a book collector I can't stand movie covers. Avoid them whenever possible. As noted above book covers from 50s and 60s are great. If studios would make movie posters as good as some book covers and then use them for books that wouldn't be so bad. Case in point: the poster for The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Fastastic! Book cover very dull. If they would have used the movie poster for book cover like they did for the record cover that would have made one cool paperback!

 

[K. Riehl]

I have seen a couple of earlier posts which talk about the original cover as something the author wanted/controlled/intended. It is very rare that the author has any say at all in the cover art. I have talked to several authors who alternatively love or hate the given books cover. I imagine it is the same with the movie covers as well. Although it must be an ego stroke to have someone like Will Smith playing one of your characters

 

[icowdave]

I don't like the movie covers for 2 reasons:

1. The movie never lives up to the book. So many cuts and changes get made to squeeze hundreds of pages down to 2 hours and the movie cover represents the movie more than it does the book.

2. Movie covers are part of the massive movie tie-in juggernaut along with shot glasses, action figures, plush toys, stupid board games, calendars, bobbleheads and freakin' Happy Meals! I don't want to be part of the deluge of junk.

I just try to ignore it. In the end though, if it means more people will pick up the books that's got to be good for the authors, the industry and ultimately for fans. If they sell millions more copies of LOTR because Orlando Bloom is on the cover the publishers ought to have more money to spend on new authors and books that I might read.

I'm trying to be half full here.

 

[McMurphy]

"I Don't Understand. Is he going to fight electic sheep with a sword?"

Know what I really hate? I hate when a novel is made into a movie and the cover of the book is now either the star of the movie or something movie related. I even hate when it states "now a major motion picture" or "soon to be a major motion picture". I don't need Will Smith on the cover of I, Robot.

I know it is a minor detail but I will go out of my way to avoid getting that cover. I will actually pay a little more for the same book depending on the cover. I love those old vintage covers from the 50's or 60's and the old Edgar Rice Burroughs covers.

Sorry, just venting a little.

To make matters worse, the reprints sometimes have a series of photos stuck in the middle book that interrupt one's reading and directly counter the text.

Then again, the film adaptions do sometimes remind me of works that I have neglected to read and do return the price of the paperback to a more economic fare.