my reflective summative statement

My Reflection regarding the Evolution of my film poster design:
While reflecting on the development of my ideas for the comedy film poster, I read this funny, but thought provoking comment from the internet, regarding Eddie Murphy’s appearance and the recurring, similar, red font typeface in film posters featuring this actor in popular mainstream comedies. The resulting film posters have a striking similarity:

“The guy loves doing wacky shit in funny costumes above or below huge red font, thats the only explanation I can think of. I mean, one or two covers is one thing, but really? Every damn cover from the last 15 years needs to look the same? And while the art on the cover isn’t all identical, at least not like those first examples, every one of those looks the same. It’s always either a giant mug of Eddie Murphy, usually dressed up in cooky shit, or its him interacting with other ZAAANY characters in a family friendly way. And, I would like to point out, other than Bowfinger, every one of these is after his “good” period. It’s very obvious that Eddie Murphy’s decline in humor matched his DVD and VHS cover’s rise in the use of red font. 48 Hours? Nope, no red block letters. Coming to America? Nope. How about Beverly Hills Cop? Really? Thats not the same generic family-friendly font either? Wow.” (Anonymous blog)

The comments are thought provoking; in the way that the reader is encouraged to realize that the designers were deliberately trying to maintain the hype surrounding Eddie Murphy’s history of successful comedy, through repeating the upbeat image of Eddie Murphy’s portrait or mid-shot, and those of his funny supporting cast against blank backgrounds. The easily recognizable font and typescript – bright red, with or without the white outline or shadows (possibly Helvetica or Comic sans) can be seen in a similar context to the distinctive ‘M’ of McDonald’s which had proven popularity and success with the public. (See earlier blog on evolution of 2 typefaces) It is obviously important to the movie producers that their movie product is anticipated by the public as’ just as funny’, or, ‘more of the same.’

While I planned my final comedy film poster to be structured in much the same way as the Dr Dolittle posters above, so the movie going public would easily identify the comedy genre, the evolution of my movie posters has not been as straightforward or as repetitive as the Eddie Murphy, film poster history; I was interested in the aesthetic elements, such as the placement of a credible and easily identifiable New York street background- note the gradual change in street views during my poster evolution; I am very happy with the final background solution as it creates a deep sense of space, the view behind the characters is increasingly cinematic. To my mind, this is a great improvement on the simply constructed Eddie Murphy Doctor Dolittle posters.

All initial images for my poster seem to have been conceived with such a strong idea of the back story in mind, that I chose portraits of people with thoughtful, preoccupied, non-funny/non - happy faces. My first poster draft contained a figure with an interesting silhouette, because I wanted to define his stethoscope and doctor’s coat in a subtle way. Unfortunately, subtlety is not a characteristic of mainstream family humour, so I was disappointed with the outcome.

Although the draft for the second poster was directly related to the obvious characteristics of the Eddie Murphy posters, with the image of the happy bald ‘Dr’ (Dr Phil) laughing crazily, my poster appeared like a duplicate of these, with no hint of a unique back story. The final poster solution is more satisfactory in terms of the interconnectedness of the characters; although my profile portrait is serious, the faces of the woman and the man to the right and left, are smiling – implying that they don’t take my character seriously; the back story is hinted at, enticing potential audiences.

I am also satisfied with the final font choice and typeface; it is huge, bold and echoes the name of Doctor Dohuge, while still keeping the similar red tones of Eddie Murphy posters. I think the addition of the tag line ‘Size Matters’ in white, adds another comic dimension to the poster back story, and the white lettering for the actors’ names visually links the  tag line.

Unfortunately to conclude my reflection, I realise that I still need to pace myself with my working approach to design. It is adrenalin that drives me, to create, often at the last minute; I have not previously documented the evolution of the wallet, minute manila folder and prescription- style ticket which I created as part of the design brief, to celebrate the Doctor Dohuge theme. Although I am satisfied with the process of creating the template for the tiny manila folder, and the realistic prescription, with the hand written typeface, which I deliberately wrote in typical illegible, Doctor’s writing, I aim to improve my time management next year.

 .

Logo evolution

Evolution of two well-known logos/ logotypes; a discussion regarding the success or lack of success of each logo:

·         McDonalds

·         Ford

Mc Donald’s – A successful evolution

Initially, in 1948, the logo of Mc Donald’s was not immediately distinctive; composed of three different letter types – Mc Donald’s in an italic script,( with serif) above the word FAMOUS, in upper case, bold letters, (News Gothic). Underneath, the word BARBECUE (perhaps a Walbaum type). The double line between Mc Donald’s and BARBECUE, on either side of FAMOUS, served as an unsuccessful attempt to unite the three different fonts, which appear too ‘busy’ to the viewer’s eye and consequently, easy to forget.

The 1953 Mc Donald’s logo, is perhaps more successful in terms of its greater unification; lettering and image are united inside the circular frame. The cute cartoon figure relates to the delivery of the product, by use of speech bubble” I am Speedie”. Also, the different fonts are now limited to 2, which makes the overall effect less ‘busy’ to the viewer’s eye. Mc Donald’s is presented in mostly lower case, almost a childlike type of lettering in bright red, which links it to the red diagonal band with white outlined upper case font, stating the words: FROM COAST TO COAST. Unfortunately, this logo does not appear memorable either, as overall, it is still too busy and complex, the little cartoon may be cute, but he is bland and not unique as a personality.

The 1960 Mc Donald’s logo presented the beginning of the evolution of the more distinctive ‘M’ logo type that 21^st Century customers successfully associate with Mc Donald’s; The’ M’ is seen with a diagonal line through it, all in gold, outlined in red, and the red word Mc Donald’s is underneath, linked with the red outlined ‘M’ above. The letter spacing of the word   ‘Mc Donald’s’ is more tightly spaced here, this was a hallmark of commercial graphics in the 1960s and 70s. (The ‘Mc Donald’s’ name is more generously tracked in the later 1992 logo) It is also noted here that the ‘M’ does not yet have the simple all – in –one format that it has today – it is formed by 2 interconnecting upside down ‘u’ shapes. This format seems rather complex and is not as easily identifiable as the later ’M’ shape.

The 1968 Mc Donald’s ‘M’ is the same form that it is today, however the company still saw the need to include the Mc Donald’s wording with the ‘M’. Here the Mc Donald’s name horizontally crosses the Letter ‘M’.

Colour changes are apparent from the orange ‘M’ of 1968 to the distinctive yellow Mc Donald’s ‘M’ of 1975 and 1992 where the Mc Donald’s lettering changes from the black print of 1968 to white in 1978 and 1992. The change to white creates a higher contrast.

It is noted that the designers experimented with the use of the rectangular box format in 1975, 1992 and 2000, perhaps in an attempt to unify the logo within a frame, or by using the sense of strong red negative space contrasting against the letters.

It was not until 2006 that the ‘M’ was considered a substantial brand in itself – instantly associated with Mc Donald’s and successful in its simplicity.

I see the successful evolution of the Mc Donald’s logo as corresponding to the shift from complexity to simplicity in advertising, which has occurred over the past fifty years. One explanation for this is that due to the complexity of modern lifestyles and the visual overload of typefaces, which the average person encounters daily in an urban world, the simpler the logo the easier it is to recognise and remember.

The evolution of the Ford Logo – not so successful

The evolution of the Ford logo also documents the movement towards increasing simplicity, yet I feel these changes ultimately do not reflect the individuality or uniqueness of the Ford vehicle. The 1903 logo appeared as an art nouveau - influenced, genuine article that captured the artistic awareness of the period and emphasized the quality of the car.

Perhaps the logo changes in 1909 and 1912 help express the speed of the car as the linked hand written fonts flow fluidly, however the decision to include the lettering inside the compressed oval shape seems to ‘ground’ the car. Rather than associating the Ford brand with quality or speed, this logo brings to mind mass production; the quick easy stamping of a car meant for the general market.

My preference would be to keep the original logo, as it has an antique, old family, pioneering feel to it, rather like an old belt buckle or a fine old whiskey. Perhaps the artist can put forward a case to keep some designs the same as the original which customers associate with uniqueness, and something special.

Analysis and Comparison of design styles, visual codes (semiotics) and references to be found in my artwork (poster for a family comedy)

I am also providing a contextual analysis, stating whether it is successful in its implementation and delivery.

As much of my poster is still in the conceptual stages, I will be presenting this blog in a back – to - front format, discussing the poster’s context first: For my contextual analysis, I am referring to the genre of Family Comedy made popular by such actors as Adam Sandler, Rob Schneider, Owen Wilson, Ben Stiller, Will Ferrell, Steve Carrel, Vince Vaughn…who have been referred to as ‘The Frat Pack’. Some of their movies are produced by Adam Sandler’s ‘Happy Productions’.

Movies such as ‘Fifty First Dates’, ‘The Animal’, ‘Hot Chick’, ‘Step Brothers’,’ Meet the Fockers’ and ‘Zoolander’, fit the genre of Family Comedy because their main emphasis is on humour which is often  produced by exaggerating characteristics of real life; Adam Sandler is hilarious in ‘Hot Chick’ where he appears in a supporting role as a stoned character elaborating on the way he can store marijuana in a little container…he is so funny because he keeps obsessing over something which normally a person would only mention once ;Rob Schneider in ‘The Animal’ is often funny because he can look so vulnerable in weird situations, for example, when he is ‘taken over’ by a goat on heat, to the music of Marvin Gay, ‘let’s Get it On’; Schneider is also hilarious in the gender – swapping role in ‘Hot Chick’.

I have attempted to reference the genre of simple family humour with my movie poster design, showing a mid-shot / heads and shoulders photo, of my main characters’; Doctor DoHuge, who is a reversal of the character Doctor Doolittle, and one of his ‘patients’ who are centrally placed in the frame.  Here, I have been influenced by many of the movie posters which concentrate on personality close-ups of the well-known actors in the comedies. Doctor Do Huge, is actually a homeless man who takes on the persona of a Doctor because he        thinks that doctors are popular with women. I will probably frame the midshot above and below, with the typeface for the title of the movie and the actor’s names. At the moment, I am still debating whether to place the bolder font for the title, either diagonally or horizontally. I have noted that the smaller fonts giving lesser names and credits are sometimes created in narrower typeface so they can be fitted in the poster’s frame; I would like to avoid this as it is best to have the typefaces unified.

I will choose a brightly lit background – either plain white, or a warm colour such as yellow or red, to indicate the happy/ comedy genre. I am endeavouring to make the typeface consistent – either all black or just one colour, so it will be easy to read and will contrast well with the background. The images will not be complicated with symbols although the character of Doctor Do Huge may have a white coat and stethoscope, to indicate his Doctor status, and he may be swinging this stethoscope so that it tangles around his patient. To reinforce that it is a family comedy, both figures are laughing happily.

 +