My Star Trek 2 (2013) Artwork
- Thread starter Roald
- Start date
hmmm...
Seems me that Spock is not upset enough for having such a fresh wound. He really just seems somewhat annoyed. Also, am I to reach the conclusion that Khan, like, I dunno, bit his ear off?
Too much of this image makes me think it's just silly. And also needlessly gory. But my objections are more related to the silliness than the goriness.
--Alex
Seems me that Spock is not upset enough for having such a fresh wound. He really just seems somewhat annoyed. Also, am I to reach the conclusion that Khan, like, I dunno, bit his ear off?
Too much of this image makes me think it's just silly. And also needlessly gory. But my objections are more related to the silliness than the goriness.
--Alex
Khan wasn't the kind of crazy fucker who'd just bite your ear off. He's not Mike Tyson. Khan was an intelligent, cunning, charismatic superman. That's what made him dangerous, not a propensity to decapitate people.
Yeah, and The Joker was never a psychotic murderer, until Nolan had the guts to reinvent the character...
Here's an updated version, with green blood....
Much better and makes for a good poster to get people to watch this movie
Yeah, and The Joker was never a psychotic murderer, until Nolan had the guts to reinvent the character...
No, as for film, Tim Burton already did that. Jack Nicholson's version was pretty psychotic. And he's been portrayed in varied ways over the decades in the comics, from a psychopath with a sadistic sense of humour to sometimes just an eccentric prankster. Nolan's version was pretty true to the essence of the Joker.
Edit:
Well, at least you're not Photoshopping Gates McFadden's head onto a bikini-clad Nazi.
Last edited:
I think of Mike Tyson when I look at this, I know I'm not alone. not my style of Art, but well done
Joker has been a psychotic murderer for DECADES.
Yeah, and The Joker was never a psychotic murderer, until Nolan had the guts to reinvent the character...
The first image is just too ugly to be effective marketing. The amputated ear image doesn't effectively convey any sense of danger at all - simply revulsion.
It doesn't do a damned bit of good to call it "thinking outside the box" when you miss the entire point of what advertising imagery is used to communicate and to accomplish. It is not art intended to make any statement whatever other than "buy this."
It doesn't do a damned bit of good to call it "thinking outside the box" when you miss the entire point of what advertising imagery is used to communicate and to accomplish. It is not art intended to make any statement whatever other than "buy this."
yeah, uhm... the dark knight returns? the killing joke?Joker has been a psychotic murderer for DECADES.
Yeah, and The Joker was never a psychotic murderer, until Nolan had the guts to reinvent the character...
YARN
Fleet Captain
Please tell me this is some sort of elaborate troll...
Why.........??????????
Had I posted ST 12 porn or whatever, then I'd understand...... I really don't think this artwork (though a bit graphic) warrants a 'troll-alert'..........
In all fairness, people photoshop ST actresses heads on Nazi-uniforms in here, so is my artwork really *That* troll like...???
Last edited:
Here's a question: is the next movie gonna be about Khan? I haven't been following the news for that project. If it really is just a rehash of a story that's already been told (and told well at that) then I don't think I'm terribly interested.
Also, I don't think calling you out as a troll is fair, but I think your pictures here may not be in universally good taste. Big gaping open wounds has never really been the Star Trek aesthetic anyhow.
And as for the other dude with the Nazi imagery, he too got backlash so I hardly think that's a fair licence for you to cite as your "I'm being unfairly singled out for criticism" argument.
I suggest maybe dialing it back a bit. Instead of Spock with the torn off ear, why not just bruise him up and maybe a bloody nose or something along those lines. And again, Uhura doesn't seem to be in as much pain as the nature of those wounds would suggest. If, instead of deep gashes like that they were marks form having been whipped or something like that, then we might have something better: it'd be evocative without being repellent to your target demographic.
OTOH, your take on this actor as Khan isn't bad at all. And I think your bruised Kirk looks pretty believable.
Food for thought.
--Alex
Also, I don't think calling you out as a troll is fair, but I think your pictures here may not be in universally good taste. Big gaping open wounds has never really been the Star Trek aesthetic anyhow.
And as for the other dude with the Nazi imagery, he too got backlash so I hardly think that's a fair licence for you to cite as your "I'm being unfairly singled out for criticism" argument.
I suggest maybe dialing it back a bit. Instead of Spock with the torn off ear, why not just bruise him up and maybe a bloody nose or something along those lines. And again, Uhura doesn't seem to be in as much pain as the nature of those wounds would suggest. If, instead of deep gashes like that they were marks form having been whipped or something like that, then we might have something better: it'd be evocative without being repellent to your target demographic.
OTOH, your take on this actor as Khan isn't bad at all. And I think your bruised Kirk looks pretty believable.
Food for thought.
--Alex
More than anything, my question is: what's the point you're trying to convey with these images, besides gory mutilation for its own sake? Not that I have anything against gory mutilation, in the proper context, but how does any of it relate to Khan, specifically? I think of the promotional art for Dexter, with blood splashed everywhere while Dexter himself smiles charmingly, and it works because Dexter is charming, and a psychopathic serial killer 'with a heart of gold.' These images just say, to me, "Khan likes to mutilate people," but doesn't tell me anything else about the character or the context, and so they don't make me want to see the movie. Sometimes, one can be too minimalist - or looking in the wrong direction. A cadre of mutilated Starfleet officers, without any apparent reason for their mutilation (and especially without any accompanying emotional investment from them in the imagery, where they all appear to be blithely unaware of their predicament), accompanied only by the title "Khan" doesn't intrigue me, nor inform me, and ultimately that's what such imagery should do.
YARN
Fleet Captain
I didn't call him a troll.
There is a difference between being a troll and a "troll thread."
To call someone a troll is to make a claim about trait-like qualities of that person (e.g., "You ARE a troll"). To call someone a troll is almost universally pejorative.
To speculate that a thread (not the person) is a troll, is to speculate about the intention/function of a given message or set of messages. One can troll without being a troll. One can act like a jerk, on occasion, without being a jerk. Moreover, sometimes a "troll thread" or "post" can be whimsical or a ruse. It can be a joke - nothing mean spirited. Biting satire, for example, often takes people in which results in those who are duped effectively getting "trolled" (e.g., all those people who still get bent out of shape after reading Swift's a Modest Proposal).
So, everyone can chill out about me calling this guy a troll. I didn't. I simply submitted my sincere hope that this is a non-literal thread.
Wrong type of blood. Vulcans blood is green, not red. Never mind. I should had read the other post.
YARN
Fleet Captain
No worries. My word usage appears to be at variance with others here. In my word-world "an elaborate troll" is simply richly textured joke or prank.
Tribble Herder
Lieutenant Commander
What the frack has any of this got to with Khan? He's a ruthless dictator, not Hannibal Lector, fer chrissakes.
Similar threads
