The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
London 2012: Attack of the ‘80s
stilist
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
or, brand design gone weird.
In preparation for the 2012 Olympics, the event’s logo was recently unveiled, and a promotional video released.
Reaction to the branding has been... mixed. Around the Internet, there have been a lot of negative comments. Most involve either the appearance (described by some as ‘Lisa Simpson giving head’), or the cost: £400,000. It also seems that the BBC was allowing user submissions of alternatives (one of which, a goatse variant, was removed). There has been at least one positive comment about it, which seems to largely praise the campaign’s uniqueness.
In the spirit of our wonderful online democracy: what are your opinions? Is it over-priced? Is it unique, or ugly? Should they have maybe looked at alternatives?
For my part, I’ll agree that this is unique—at least for the Olympic environment. The graphic work seems garish, and the logo is just an abstract symbol with no worth (although it could be argued this is good, because the only possible value is the one assigned by the branding team). Still, the other aspects seem to focus largely on technology and youth, which are certainly commendable. I can’t say I’m fond of it, but I guess I’ve got five years to get used to it.
In preparation for the 2012 Olympics, the event’s logo was recently unveiled, and a promotional video released.
Reaction to the branding has been... mixed. Around the Internet, there have been a lot of negative comments. Most involve either the appearance (described by some as ‘Lisa Simpson giving head’), or the cost: £400,000. It also seems that the BBC was allowing user submissions of alternatives (one of which, a goatse variant, was removed). There has been at least one positive comment about it, which seems to largely praise the campaign’s uniqueness.
In the spirit of our wonderful online democracy: what are your opinions? Is it over-priced? Is it unique, or ugly? Should they have maybe looked at alternatives?
For my part, I’ll agree that this is unique—at least for the Olympic environment. The graphic work seems garish, and the logo is just an abstract symbol with no worth (although it could be argued this is good, because the only possible value is the one assigned by the branding team). Still, the other aspects seem to focus largely on technology and youth, which are certainly commendable. I can’t say I’m fond of it, but I guess I’ve got five years to get used to it.
stilist on
0
Posts
Now that I've seen it, I can't unsee it.
The "five rings" is her head. She's facing left, and the rhombus in the middle is her hand. The piece that says "London" is the torso at the top, and the part sticking out is the dude's arm, holding her head. Or else it could be a giant wang-a-lang.
I described all that from memory.
Goddammit
t Moniker: I’ll be honest, I hadn’t realised that’s what it was. Shame on me.
However, I think it was a bold and daring move. By all fashion sense right now, it's a pretty hip design. Will it be blasé by 2012 is the question. If it is, London will look ridiculous. However, I love the risk, because if it's still in style in five years (a good possibility) then the design and layout of the games will be spectacular, and London wlll look like the most fashionable and modern place on earth.
I also think that it does a good job portraying the time period of the games. I'm always reminded when I look through the games of the 20's and 30's how much their design captures their era.
The problem is that it looks like crap.
Lisa Simpson is a nice touch. It's now my favorite Olympics logo ever.
No, it isn't.
It looks blasé and horrible right now and London is getting ridiculed because of that.
Are you saying our time period is ugly, garish, and reminiscent of cartoon fellatio?
Awesome.
EDIT: Damn!
It looks kind of like an album cover or design from a photographer in SoHo's place that I just went to. It seems to me to be on the more cutting edge of fashion. I could direct you to Besty Johnsons's new line or some Screaming Mimi fashion sales, if you want.
And, sports and rock are coming closer and closer.
I dunno. I'd be careful with it.
It's pretty jagged.
The last of these claims is clearly wrong, as shown by these pages of logos designed by MOTPs at the BBC's website, those of which aren't jokes are almost all incredibly bad.
Anyway, I'm no particular fan of the logo (though I think it's beginning to grow on me) but I'm thoroughly sick of the whining about it.
Puzzle League: 073119-160185
It is a jagged, block letter writing of the year the olympics will be held. If a group had their band name or album title printed out to fill the whole damn cover I would hope it would be a better composition than that. It's not hip, it's not 'cutting edge' even though it's pointed, it's a sophomoric and glaringly obtuse way to just grab eyeballs with a loud shout rather than simple elegance and grace. London has enough history and symbolism tied to the city and the country that coming up with something non-hideous would not have been difficult. I don't know what I would have done, but that wouldn't have even entered my mind let alone survived any actual thought about using it.
de Kooning says hi.
Seriously, what the hell.
I think several of the logos in those galleries are leaps and bounds ahead of the official one, even if you limit it to just the serious ones.
This one is my favorite, though:
Which ones exactly? The one that has '2012' written as the first four letters of 'London' could me made passable with a bit of tweaking, the rest don't seem even remotely suitable to me.
Puzzle League: 073119-160185
Listen.
All I'm saying is that No-Wave was all the rage about a year ago, and it's still in - esp if you combine it with pre-Afrikaa Bambatu hip-hop.
Dust off that Color Me Badd record, ElJeffe, because I say in about 5 years you will be the envy of all the cool kids for that one.
It's pointless, garish, overdesigned, and pretentious; just like the Olympics themselves.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I don't think I still have my Color M... I mean, I would never have owned such a horrible album.
>.>
In my opinion, any of these four would be much better.
That's not to say they're great, just that the current one sucks really bad.
Well, if you want a bland logo, there's the one that was used for the campaign to win the games for London:
But I think I'm happier with this one.
Edit: as for the four in the post above mine, the top one might be alright if the L was fixed to match the rest of the letters, though I'm not sure what the IOC would have to say about them mangling the Olympic rings like that. The second one is cluttered and awful, the third as I've mentioned is pretty good really, the fourth makes little sense. The Olympics as a train station?
Puzzle League: 073119-160185
They're heinous.