frankly, a poster that doesn't at least ATTEMPT to reflect the band in even some remote fashion is not really a poster, it's art with a some type stuck on it to help sell it.
!!!!!!!! WORD !!!!!!!!!! exept i would not use the word "art"
yeah, the bands are too stupid to wipe their own asses unless somebody points it out. but that doesn't change anything. this is still a question about obligations and definitions. what's a gigposter supposed to do? promote the show and the band or be a vehicle for some artist to show off his own vision? both? how much both?
nah. i think i've taken enough of you guys' sausage for one lifetime (har har).
Damn you and your logic, Chantry. :) Now I have to like this thing.
"The Lebanon" was kind of a cool song.
So Art- in your opinion, does a gig poster have an obligation to try to represent the band whose show it's promoting? I think I already know what your answer will be, and I'm furiously working on my rebuttal.
after reading all of those (endless) threeads about "appropriatesness" of a poster design, well this is a case in point. if a poster needs to accurately reflect the image/theme/idea of a band to be a "good" poster, thewn this poster is genius.
yeah, this poster sucks balls (as perkins pointed out), but then, so did the band.
therefore: genius poster.
actually, whitey, i didn't do this. i just posted it. i pulled it off a wall in london in 1980. i thought it would be fun for everyone to see what england looked like back then. imagine it HUGE with a dayglo color in the background and posted in multiples like wallpaper. that's what everything in london looked like.