MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Logo A Go Go


Be Sociable, Share!

14 Responses to “Logo A Go Go”

  1. prideray says:

    That looks like something a child could have done with a Dymo labelmaker! (Or a grown-up with a nice job.)

  2. jeffmcm says:

    The Paramount Classics gates were, appropriately, classy. This is lame. Shouldn’t ‘Vantage’ actually be used like it means something, like a view from the top of their peak?

  3. Fox Searchlight looks to be the only dependent without an “indie-ish” logo. Focus has that minimal blue and yellow thing, WIP has the simple black and red logo, sony classics is the epitomy of minimal, vantage has this. Meanwhile Searchlight looks like a full blow studio unto itself.

  4. wholovesya says:

    So 1994. Their first “bad” move.

  5. Jeremy Smith says:

    Well, it was apparently between this and goatse. I’m not sure they chose wisely.

  6. palmtree says:

    I’m not a graphic designer, but I think some color would have made this way better. The lettering is pretty grungy but then the light source and black background feel very sterile. Just contradicts itself visually.

  7. jeffmcm says:

    What’s ‘goatse’?

  8. Sharpel007 says:

    Being a design student, i would guess there going more for indie film can label, but to me great simplicity is the WI logo, not simple but cool is the Focus intro, which seems like something the Eames would design

  9. prideray says:

    You do not wish to know about goatse and you do not wish to google it. You have been warned!

  10. wolfgang says:

    Jeff, you can go to and look up goatse. That’s the safest way, if you are that curious.

  11. jeffmcm says:

    I did google it before and got the gist. I’m lazy, but the internet was made for lazy people.

  12. Josh Massey says:

    At least it wasn’t “tubgirl.”

  13. ployp says:

    Ok, got what goatse and tubgirl means. Who makes these things??

  14. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Thing is, I get what they’re going for and if it were a smaller indie group it would be actually quite great, but Paramount Vantage should be a bit more upscale than this. This would be a decent design for groups like Strand or Magnolia or whatever, but Paramount Vantage, no.
    Only advantage is that they can use this logo on their posters, easily.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon