-
Website
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/ -
Original page
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/new-transporter-3-poster-looks-oddly-familiar.php -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
have him upside down, atleast once in a poster!!!!!!!!
super tight. The 2nd movie in the series was way better (especially since they took out the
crappy music from the first one and put in a stylish orchestral score). I just hope that they
do the same with the new one. In elke geval (that's Dutch for anyway), bring it on! I'm in
line.
Except you know..the first one was actually a decent action flick.
I'm willing to bet they copy and pasted parts of the the script from the first film.
http://www.krinein.com/img_oc/2726.jpg
Jiff
www.FireMe.To/udi
The three posters are all different. They all follow the same theme but, they are NOT exactly the same. They are not even mostly the same.
Finally, I find it rather predictable that the third film in a sequel series would use themed promotional material. If the films follow a theme, why wouldn't the posters?
You want to talk crappy marketing decisions? I'll give you one: the fact that US movie studios continue to try and double dip on Blu-Ray releases even though the discs cost like, 3 or 4 times as much as a DVD. So I can buy the super cool unrated edition of a movie (like say, The Transporter) on DVD for $5-$10 but the Blu-Ray one is the edited cut only minus the extras and it's $40? You would think the way to market the new format as superior would be to show that it has everything the old format did and then some for roughly the same price.
Also, that girl from the second Transporter 2 movie was the Eurotrashiest ever, which was the entire point. The director of the first two movies once said that the big secret of The Transporter is that he's actually gay, but I don't think I can hold the fact that Frank Martin was grossed when the empress of eyeshadow licked his face as proof of such a claim.
then again ... its just me ... :P
It's not an "obvious cut and past job" It's three different posters. The difference is all in the gun poses. If this was the 80s, it would be three chuck Norris movies with Chuck doing three different types of kicks, with only the number in the title changing.
Are we really gonna nitpick about a poster? Posters are mostly digitally chopped and enhanced BS anyway, right?
Maybe you should look up 'hyperbole' in that very same dictionary. Let me know what it says.
I think the movie will be fun to watch!
they look SO similar that you'd think they were part of a series or something. i can't believe hollywood thinks they can just pull stunts like this. it makes me so angry.
my only criticism of this article is that perhaps on the transporter 3 cover he is actually jump kicking to the left and firing his weapon, as opposed to falling to the right? oh but my goodness... we must speak in theater terms, so he is actually felling stage left, or jump kicking seagal style stage right... help me Neil, which is it!?
I'm also not a photoshop expert, but Statham's leg seems to be doing some pretty un-leg-like stuff in that shot.
And yes, we are going to nitpick a poster.
The poster is just following the other 2 movies. It's the third in a series, why shouldn't it look similar?
I just hope it's better than the second one.
the same movie series, why would you criticize them for using similar posters? i
would understand if the poster was similar to another movie franchise but this is
just ridiculous.