Jacob
New Member
Posts: 148 
|
Post by Jacob on May 14, 2009 21:04:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on May 14, 2009 22:42:23 GMT -5
The comments on that site.... SIGH. This is never going to end apparently.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on May 15, 2009 12:17:36 GMT -5
Unfortunately, the criticism will always be.....around. ;(
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on May 16, 2009 22:26:35 GMT -5
Well it is stupid package. Why couldn't they have Lester's Superman II or even Donner's Superman II instead?  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul (ral) on May 17, 2009 10:49:42 GMT -5
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on May 17, 2009 15:33:15 GMT -5
 Image has the wrong film emphasised. Give it time and you'll all end up agreeing with me... |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on May 17, 2009 15:47:06 GMT -5
Don't know why but I kinda ike it. ;D Love that they used the new S logo.
I'd like to see a bigger picture in order to appreciate it better, though. But really, both films should have been equally emphasized on that cover.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on May 17, 2009 15:52:57 GMT -5
What a clash. ;D
I wonder in retrospect, how many hate the big Superman box set since the packaging is largely SR-inspired.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2009 19:08:33 GMT -5
WHAAAAAAA???
Surprise of the century!
|
|
|
|
Post by adam15 on May 18, 2009 19:12:52 GMT -5
I think it's fair to say that STM should be emphasised on the cover. SR is just so.... I dunno. Even if you cats like it you gotta admit it's second to STM!
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul (ral) on May 21, 2009 19:43:01 GMT -5
That's just a temp cover play.com are using - not actual artwork
|
|
