Forum:Any unpopular opinions about the logo community?
From the Audiovisual Identity Database, the motion graphics museum
Reply or edit
Report post
|
I'll start first.
- Insult terms are incredibly annoying.
- Sony Pictures Television is Sony's best television logo if you ignore the plastering.
- The Paramount logo with the 1976 fanfare should've been used more. I rarely hear it in the movies of its time.
- People who use the term "logo kids" are more immature than the logo kids they accuse themselves.
- Warner Bros. has been updating itself too often.
Any others you guys have?
|
Reply or edit
Report post
|
- Logos from major film, television, gaming, etc. studios (including semi-major), while good in their own right, get too much attention. Other countries and independent studios exist and have plenty of logos that are about as effective and charming as theirs.
- I'm not scared of any logo nowadays. Not even a jumpscare is enough to dissuade me from watching it more.
- Recent logos with a seemingly simplified approach can have its own charm due to their colorful animation, unique style, or cute jingle.
- Logos with a vintage theming are underrated, and so are old Slavic film logos.
- Sometimes, having amazing CGI and putting it to use on a logo where the screen flies around various locations can make it feel generic (that is where certain Chinese film logos and the newr Walt Disney Pictures logo lose their "WOW!" factor).
- Remember those old home entertainment logos from Greece, Argentina, UK, etc. that frequently uses analog computer effects for its animation and plays either instrumental synth or popular music as its soundtrack? Considering their time period, they are pretty decent and get too much ridicule for looking cheap and simple. Well obviously, not all of them as their low budget can really show.
- For some reason, I feel like the more recent logo finds of this decade are not getting enough recognition in the newer logo lists. People still consider the most infamous scary and cheesy logos in mind, and as well rank them highly as one of the scariest, even though the logo community has discovered more that can top their quality.
As for individual logos, beginning with what I think are overrated:
- The newer Walt Disney Pictures and Warner Bros. Pictures logos are inferior to their predecessors. Great animation, but they are mostly following and expanding the same concept that was done greatly beforehand.
- The 2021 MGM logo (though I still like it and glad with the reception it has been getting).
Now for the rest:
- The Zombastic Productions logo is more funny than scary.
- The 1994 TV Cidade ident gets too much hate, not to mention, what if that isn't the regular ident?
- The 1976 KWSU logo is actually pretty good. It's a fascinating and unique, complex take on the Scanimation technology at the time.
- The Oz Film Company logo is, although I used to be scared of it a decade about, might have the most tragic reputation and the one, in terms of that, that aged the poorest. I think it was meant to be a sight of beauty and a unique experimental dynamic between Princess Ozma and the audience. But as time went by, the expression and silent nature lost its resonance, especially among the logo community.
I am intrigued by the premise of this thread, and also have more unpopular opinions to express, so I'll return for more.
|
Reply or edit
Report post
|
I think the Toppic Video logo (y'know, the screaming one) is more funny than scary to me.
|
Reply or edit
Report post
|
That Westcountry had a good ident.
|
Reply or edit
Report post
|
I'm not particularly in the loop with what is and isn't popular within the logo community right now. I've never been crazy involved in the social aspects of the scene, and I still wouldn't consider myself active in those respects.
I will say that I think the logo community at-large is much more interested in seeing the newest logo reveals from all the major studios and production firms, instead of cherishing older logos. I'm not making this point as a slight towards the massive archive engines that are channels like Broken Saw, but a lot of interesting finds kind of get themselves buried under the eighteenth capture of a specific logo combination from some TV show no one will remember 3 years from now. I'm not saying that archiving these things are not important, I'm simply trying to say that there are plenty of interesting things to find that aren't brand new.
Another "unpopular" opinion (I guess) is that AVID as a database skews towards more modern production labels and companies. I think this is relatively par for the course, since it is much easier to find modern logos (they're just about everywhere) as opposed to older fare, but it definitely seems like the further you go back, the patchier AVID's coverage gets.
|
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
