Captain Beard Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 So... were photographs of Harrison Ford unavailable to the artist responsible for the label art? I mean, that picture looks more like Sam Waterston with a 5 o'clock shadow than Harrison Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaGtGruff Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 So... were photographs of Harrison Ford unavailable to the artist responsible for the label art? I mean, that picture looks more like Sam Waterston with a 5 o'clock shadow than Harrison Ford. That's funny, I always thought it looked great! In fact, I was rewatching Raiders a few weeks ago, and one thing I noticed about the artwork on the DVDs for the first three movies was how *different* Harrison Ford seemed to look in each of the pictures. I mean, his face on the DVD cover for "Raiders" did almost look like someone else. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rik Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Probably wasnt him at all in some pics.Movie box art pics and other media photos have always been air brushed back in the 80's, and today, photo shopped or whatever they use.Actors have told that the pics of them was their face but not their body and vice versa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rom Hunter Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 (edited) So... were photographs of Harrison Ford unavailable to the artist responsible for the label art?No. A slightly more rugged look, that's all. Excellent artwork. Edited June 18, 2008 by Rom Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krytol Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 (edited) Slightly off-topic. I always thought he didn't look quite right in this Blade Runner art: Edited June 18, 2008 by Krytol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rom Hunter Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Hence: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J. Franzman Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 (edited) Hence: Where did that Blade Runner image come from? I have the poster of the previous one (original theatrical one-sheet art sans text). Edited June 19, 2008 by A.J. Franzman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Wolfe Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 I'm fairly certain the reason for the obvious non-likeness is that at the time, actors could choose not to give consent for their likeness to be used, or voice for that matter on cd-rom games. I think though as the video game business grew, the entertainment lawyers started changing contracts around so that marketing, advertising and franchising included video games and are part of the contract if you sign on to do a movie, so these days you don't have the same issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Beard Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 So... were photographs of Harrison Ford unavailable to the artist responsible for the label art? A slightly more rugged look, that's all. Excellent artwork. Well honk my hooter! Not too shabby at that when seen side by side as you presented them. I guess in my head, Harrison Ford looks like... well... a much older Harrison Ford. Then again, what did you expect from an observation that was prefaced with a disclaimer about its stupidity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buyatari Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) Hence: Where did that Blade Runner image come from? I have the poster of the previous one (original theatrical one-sheet art sans text). Check this one out. Blade Runner Medium: Acrylic paints & colored pencils on gessoed board Size: 30x40 inches Year 2003 I began working on this piece of art way back in 1982 when I was commissioned by the Studio to explore concepts for the poster. I did one color comprehensive originally and from that made a few alterations as requested by the Studio. In the end, they did not use my design so I never painted the finished illustration. In 2001, when Ridley Scott was thinking of releasing a new director's version of the film, I was asked if my original sketch from '82 could be used on the cover. It turned out that this was Ridley's favorite artwork for his film. I went through the usual artist angst, rather than use a comprehensive for the cover, better to use finished art and if I'm going to paint the finish should it be the 20-year-old design or should it be updated. I decided on the latter. The DVD was produced at long last and this is now the cover (2007). Signed and dated bottom right corner "drew 2003" $125,000.00 If you ar interested in buying it you can find it here http://www.drewstruzan.com/illustrated/por...t=1&type=mp Edited December 10, 2008 by Buyatari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bohoki Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 ahh so replicants wear too much eye makeup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osbo Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) Nevermind... I ain't got 125K... Edited December 10, 2008 by Osbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buyatari Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Nevermind... I ain't got 125K... Come on! Pfft... Can you think of something better to spend 125k on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.