Pajiba had a post the other day about movie posters being different in other countries. I find it interesting to see the subtle (and maybe not so subtle) differences that can be made, and whether it actually does mean anything at all or if it’s just several companies interpreting a brief. But I have noticed my own movie poster difference in the last few days, and it’s been bugging me to death. Mostly because the change is unnecessary, but also because it is butchering the language.
Exhibit A:
The poster for Horrible Bosses you get if you Google ‘Horrible Bosses Poster’. I can only assume this is the US version, or main version. It’s fine, it fits with the other posters for the film. Can’t see why it’d need to be altered.
Exhibit B:
Sorry for the quality, it was taken hastily as I waited for the tube this morning, and I haven’t been able to find a version online. So, why the change? And why did anyone think it was necessary to write ‘sex-crazed nympho’? Is writing nympho not enough? Does it not imply sex-crazed already; isn’t that kind of the definition? If someone felt a change was needed could they not have changed the sex-crazed bit and added something else that wasn’t redundant?
I really do not get this. Maneater is hardly a weird word. We’ve come across it here. Nelly Furtado assaulted us with a song about one for months. We wouldn’t look at the original and go ‘I’m not sure what they’re trying to get across here.’
And now I’ve spent far too much time considering it, (and promoting a film I have no real interest in seeing) and I’ll get no answers.
