New "Secret of NIMH" DVD box art

Check it out, they got a new box art for the re-release of the DVD,......and it's cheesy?! :? I don't know about you guys but I just can't stand box arts like this. I think the old one was better.

http://cgi.aol.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=617&item=4187300751&rd=1#ebayphotohosting

Hi,

I would'nt call it cheesy. I would say "over-glossed". You can see it in many VHS covers, basically the colour is brightened and the characters are overlly detailed.

Still I agree with you all the same. The old box desighn still stands in my mind.

A friend of mine alerted me to this change, which is why I went out and bought one of the 'original' versions with the normal art as soon as I could. for an excellent deal as well I might add $11.00 CAD.

I'd say the new art is right up there with the dust cover art for the 'Mrs Frisby and the Rats of NIMH' hardcover.

Xavier

I'm looking at the DVD case with the new box art now, and all I can say is.....Eeewwww!! What were they thinkin'! :? It looks as if the Brisby children have been to the beach recently, 'cause they're all looking a bit sunburned. And is that Mrs. Brisby in the picture, or some dude they decided to use as a stand-in? And lastly the crow....orrr should I say blob with a beak in the background. He's looking a litle blue, in more ways than one I might add. Perhaps because he knows this cover isn't gonna do much for selling the movie, and the true masterpeice therein. One last thing... Rex Reed seems a bit.... hungry in his review. Maybe they didn't give him enough popcorn during the movie.

There... I've written out the little commentary that is my inner dialogue when looking at the box art.... :roll:

--Tzolkin
ﺶﺞﻚﷲ

Was reading another topic in this forum and ran across a pic of the box art for TSON 2. Comparing the two DVD covers side by side, they look quite similar. Maybe the folks at MGM were trying to dumb down the image of the original movie so their sequel would sell better?

http://www.geocities.com/spiritmouse9/NIMHcoverArt.jpg[" alt=""/img] [img="]http://www.geocities.com/spiritmouse9/NIMH2coverArt.jpg[" alt=""/img]

--Tzolkin
[size=18]ﺶﺞﻚﷲ[/size]

Was reading another topic in this forum and ran across a pic of the box art for TSON 2. Comparing the two DVD covers side by side, they look quite similar. Maybe the folks at MGM were trying to dumb down the image of the original movie so their sequel would sell better?

http://www.geocities.com/spiritmouse9/NIMHcoverArt.jpg[" alt=""/img] [img="]http://www.geocities.com/spiritmouse9/NIMH2coverArt.jpg[" alt=""/img]

--Tzolkin
[size=18]ﺶﺞﻚﷲ[/size][/quote]

No, I'd say they're just trying to make it more 'kid appealing.' After all, in North America animation is still widly considered 'kid stuff' therefore if the box isn't colorful and bright with cuddly looking characters it wont attract as much attention from the ones who have the best change of encouraging a sale by the people who have the money. In short it seems to me they're playing up to the "Mommy/Daddy/Guardian I want this Movie!"

That's exactly what they where doing. Here in N.America animation has a different attitude then it does else where. I have an instructor at school that feels the same way. It's irritating.

Anyway, I don't believe SON was ever ment for the young. Disney wouldn't touch it with a 100' pole and had it been release today it would never have been rated G.

The SON dvd I have features this art and I was like what the . . . when I found it in the store. I like the old work better.

That's exactly what they where doing. Here in N.America animation has a different attitude then it does else where. I have an instructor at school that feels the same way. It's irritating.

Anyway, I don't believe SON was ever ment for the young. Disney wouldn't touch it with a 100' pole and had it been release today it would never have been rated G.

The SON dvd I have features this art and I was like what the . . . when I found it in the store. I like the old work better.

A friend of mine mentioned they had changed the box before I had bought the DVD myself, which is why I picked up a copy as soon as possible, and was able to get an original art version of it before they become unavailable and/or too hard to find.
I should post some pics of the Mrs Frisby and the Rats of NIMH hardcover I got. The did the same, put on this dust jacket that looked like a clown threw up all over it (IE: bright, and disgusting) but the actual hardcover has a nice foil embossed Mrs Frisby, along with all the original art inside, that in no way compares to the illustrations.

[sarcasm]I'm waiting now for the various firearm manufacturers to start packaging their firearms with bright, 'children enticing' packages.[/sarcasm]

I can't stand it when they redesign illustrations for something. I can't name one thing that they've done that to and made it better.

I can't stand it when they redesign illustrations for something. I can't name one thing that they've done that to and made it better.

In all honesty, its not you they're trying to get to buy the movie. Art that appeals to you, and art that appeals to a child are two VERY different things. As long as it can get a childs attention, and ultimately get parent/guardian to buy the DVD, thats all they care about. It's -all- about profit margin.

I realize that, but you are right. It's just annoying.

I realize that, but you are right. It's just annoying.

you can say that again ;)

I try not to think about that, but y'know, you're right. Those companies are out to make money no matter what, so it doesn't surprise me one bit that they would stoop so low as to use children as marketing tools. :x

--Tzolkin
ﺶﺞﻚﷲ

That is a shot in the foot. I can imagine a parent buying SoN for their kid, the parent didn't see SoN, because they feel it'll be a safe, kiddy movie. Then when they get home and pop the movie in.. :shock: Which then could lead the parents to get on MGM for having a low rating for SoN, which also lead into have ratings changed in other animated films MGM released.

That is a shot in the foot. I can imagine a parent buying SoN for their kid, the parent didn't see SoN, because they feel it'll be a safe, kiddy movie. Then when they get home and pop the movie in.. :shock: Which then could lead the parents to get on MGM for having a low rating for SoN, which also lead into have ratings changed in other animated films MGM released.

Well taking all into consideration, sure NIMH is 'dark' but its no more violent or what have you than one would easily find on news broadcasts, or even other Television shows. when it boils down to it, NIMH is MUCH more 'tame' in the sense of content that -really- gets parents upset in comparison that their child/ren have probably already seen on television. I doubt anything substantial will come of it.

i however dont mind the cover change so much secret of nimh one movie has not change however i would not mind them changing secret of nimh 2.

That is a shot in the foot. I can imagine a parent buying SoN for their kid, the parent didn't see SoN, because they feel it'll be a safe, kiddy movie. Then when they get home and pop the movie in.. :shock: Which then could lead the parents to get on MGM for having a low rating for SoN, which also lead into have ratings changed in other animated films MGM released.

If you think that's bad, just think about how the kid in that situation might feel. A bright, flashy movie cover catches their eye. They like the look of it, so they convince their parents to buy it. Parent puts it in, child watches and likes what they see even more than what was on the cover. The movie reaches one of its 'darker' parts and the parent overreacts and stops the movie leaving the poor child wondering just why in the (omitted word) mommy or daddy would do that, as it's no worse that what is on TV all the time anyway when parents are home. (agreeing with Xavier here) So kid confronts parent about it asking why and gets struck down by overprotective parent who may still be upset or angry....and the cycle continues.....

--Tzolkin
ﺶﺞﻚﷲ

What really gets me is that there was a new MGM logo on it as well:

http://spanishtoys.com/Arte/mgmkids65.gif[" alt=""/img]

Come on now, was this really necessary. Nimh 2 gets the original logo while the first darker movie gets this?

That just doesn't make any sense. What did they get the movies mixed up or something? I honestly can't even start to figure out just what they were thinking when they did -that-. :?

--Tzolkin
ﺶﺞﻚﷲ

Just one of those things that nag at your common sense. Or just a marketing oversight. They probably don't care about that kind of attention to detail. Though I do agree with you. It's just loopy.

There are parents out there that don't let their kids watch that kind of stuff.

but it all comes down to the old saying dont judge a book by its cover. i really dont care what is on the cover of a movie i will watch it if it is any good.

There are parents out there that don't let their kids watch that kind of stuff.

No kidding, this is what happened when a huge band of religious, over-protective parents came across Pokemon:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1099/pokemon.html

Man, just think of what might happen if they came across Secret of Nimh.

re maxx
but the funny thing is there is probably more violence at school than in the things the parents take away but yet thier kids are not home studied.

There are parents out there that don't let their kids watch that kind of stuff.

Ironically, in a lot of cases its those kids that have been sheltered to an extreme degree that either partake in violent acts, or end up killing themselves later in life when they get into the 'real world' and can't handle all the violence that is really out there.

Gotta love those vicious cycles.

There are parents out there that don't let their kids watch that kind of stuff.

No kidding, this is what happened when a huge band of religious, over-protective parents came across Pokemon:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1099/pokemon.html

Man, just think of what might happen if they came across Secret of Nimh.

It's people like that that turned me off of 'conventional' religions. Anyone that actually believes the garbage in that article should have their head examined. I like how they engineer the meaning of "Pokemon" to fit their story. It doesn't stand for "POKEt deMONs" rather "POKEt MONsters."

I swear... Some peoples children... :roll:

<sighs> Someone please call central services if whoever wrote that article has kids. I would think they'd want rescuing, especially if they were teenagers. There isn't much on this planet I despise more than blind obedience. :roll:

I too steer clear of 'conventional' religions, especially the so-called 'fundamentalist' sects. (no offense to anyone who is of one of those branches. If it works for you, then more power to you.) Kind of sad how some children's minds are destroyed more by their parents than by anything they'd see in a movie. :cry:

I'd recommend the book 'People of the Lie' by M. Scott Peck to anyone interested in the 'why' behind behavior like in that article.

Now back to NIMH..

Now these same parents could have a 'field day' with NIMH.. I can see it now, equating the genetic change with 'the mark of the devil' somehow, and twisting that beautiful scene when Mrs.Brisby is using the Stone to save her family to symbolize the beast rising from the pit or something like that. And boy, would they really preach about Nicodemus and his viewing machine. :roll:

--Tzolkin
ﺶﺞﻚﷲ

I fully agree Tzolkin. After all, kids generally get a basis for their beliefs/opinions from their parents.

For example, I have a friend who once spouted off at me regarding the "Hannibal Lecter" movies, namely "Hannibal". The only aspect he saw of it was the violence, which he got from his mom who is very "anti-violence". He seemed to miss the entire point, or design of the character. The character Hannibal Lecter isn't violent for the sake of being violent, but rather it's his somewhat twisted way of dealing with the rude people in his life. Which is part of the reason he took to Clarice Starling. She treated him with a bit of respect. Of course, Dr. Lecter would be an "extreme case" example of 'reasoned violence' heheh. Not to mention a completely fictional one.

Heh Kind of went off on a tangent there. But it does make a suitable example how a child's view of what they see in the world can be "clouded" by their parents opinions/beliefs, which tend to sometimes ignore all the other facts/aspects and seeing what they ‘want’ to see

One time when my grandma's friend came over one day with her grand kids, I think they were 5 years old, and I beleive me and my sister were about 10 back then. We asked them if they liked to watch digimon (we happened to have some tapes lying around) and they stared at us and said "Mama doesn't want us to watch that show. The digimon are all ugly, it's violent, and evil. If we ask why she'll give us a spanking". Me and my sis just stood silent for a while and decided to put the tapes away and not to arouse any question about television.(don't want to get in any family affairs)

Talk about some serious restrictions, it's just a cartoon, and already they're acting like it's going to be the end of the world if someone watches it. I only wonder what they're like now.

One time when my grandma's friend came over one day with her grand kids, I think they were 5 years old, and I beleive me and my sister were about 10 back then. We asked them if they liked to watch digimon (we happened to have some tapes lying around) and they stared at us and said "Mama doesn't want us to watch that show. The digimon are all ugly, it's violent, and evil. If we ask why she'll give us a spanking". Me and my sis just stood silent for a while and decided to put the tapes away and not to arouse any question about television.(don't want to get in any family affairs)

Talk about some serious restrictions, it's just a cartoon, and already they're acting like it's going to be the end of the world if someone watches it. I only wonder what they're like now.

hehe, yeah, they dont want them watching a show because its violent, but threaten them with violence and pain to keep them from wanting to watch it. Is it just me, or is there something wrong with this picture?

I maybe I should keep this tactic in mind when I have kids. For example:

"Don't play with knives, or I'll cut your fingers off" :roll:

One time when my grandma's friend came over one day with her grand kids, I think they were 5 years old, and I beleive me and my sister were about 10 back then. We asked them if they liked to watch digimon (we happened to have some tapes lying around) and they stared at us and said "Mama doesn't want us to watch that show. The digimon are all ugly, it's violent, and evil. If we ask why she'll give us a spanking". Me and my sis just stood silent for a while and decided to put the tapes away and not to arouse any question about television.(don't want to get in any family affairs)

Talk about some serious restrictions, it's just a cartoon, and already they're acting like it's going to be the end of the world if someone watches it. I only wonder what they're like now.

hehe, yeah, they dont want them watching a show because its violent, but threaten them with violence and pain to keep them from wanting to watch it. Is it just me, or is there something wrong with this picture?

I maybe I should keep this tactic in mind when I have kids. For example:

"Don't play with knives, or I'll cut your fingers off" :roll:

i dont know xavier it just might work hehehe.
but seriously i dont think violonce should be shown to little kids either if they are not mature enough to see it it should be the parents who watch the show before the kids so that when they watch it with them they can explain what not to do and why not to do it.

i dont know xavier it just might work hehehe.
but seriously i dont think violonce should be shown to little kids either if they are not mature enough to see it it should be the parents who watch the show before the kids so that when they watch it with them they can explain what not to do and why not to do it.

Well I was allowed to watch Robocop when i was what, 6 maybe? and it was easily one of the goriest, and violent movies of the time. Its not so much the content, its just a matter of explaining to a child what is "real" and what isn't, along with teaching them right from wrong.

If it were to be decided by some people, I should have gone on a violent rampage from all the violent content I have seen in my life, a lot of which was at a young age. However I'd never consider senslessly harming others because i was informed that the movies I was allowed to see were all "fake" and nobody really got hurt, and that what I saw on the news that was real wasnt "right" to do, and were done by "bad people."

If you shield children from all violence, by the time they get to see the real world as it is when they grow up, it'll likely do worse for them having been shielded from violence and suffering all their life, then suddenly be forced to deal with -real- violence and suffering that goes on around the world every day.

Well I was allowed to watch Robocop when i was what, 6 maybe? and it was easily one of the goriest, and violent movies of the time. Its not so much the content, its just a matter of explaining to a child what is "real" and what isn't, along with teaching them right from wrong.

that was excactly my point it should be the parents who teach the children whats real on tv. and whats fake. that children need to be educated about what thier watching when they are watching it. and the parents need to stop whining to the movie makers about violent movies. it is thier job after all to be the parents of thier children and thier job to teach them right from wrong not some movie directors. i mean the parents now a dAYs seem to want every one else to take the blame for there screwed up kid but when the finger is pointed back at them they complain about how others influence will prevent them from being good parents when in truth if they didnot want thier kids infuence by school movies or such why did they do nothing to prevent it. my little brother started hanging with the wrong crowd and gopt into trouble but when he did my mom imediatly pulled him into home study then forced him to do home work all day with no outside influnce this was nessacery for him others may not want to be that extreme but when your kid is having dificulties with others influence you must be there to straiting them out with a stern voice of reasoning and do everything in your power to make him ready to enter the world a well deciplined individual. welll i am rambling again so i will stopp for now tell me what you think of my opinions.

It seems parents these days don't want to be actively involved in their child's development, and screen what content they have access to. Why watch what a kid does online when you can buy some software [that the child will likely end up circumventing sooner than later] than actually paying a bit of attention to what ones child does themselves.

I once watched this 12 - 14 year old talk his mother into buying him a copy of "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" which includes senseless violence, and sex/prostitution, and that's just scratching the surface. One I explained what the games content was to the mother, she as much as told the kid there was no way on earth she was buying it for him. I also pointed out the ESRB rating on the front and back of the box. Parents really need to be more aware of what information the developers put out there, be it for games, or movies.

I really think at least in terms of games, a "guide to ESRB ratings" should be posted in stores that sell games that parents can't help but see. It seems most assume games are still as "clean" as they were 20 years ago, and don't realize there are games out there that are intended for "mature" players. Video Games aren't just played by kids anymore.

I really think at least in terms of games, a "guide to ESRB ratings" should be posted in stores that sell games that parents can't help but see. It seems most assume games are still as "clean" as they were 20 years ago, and don't realize there are games out there that are intended for "mature" players. Video Games aren't just played by kids anymore.

tell me about it i never even got to look at a teen game until i was 16-17 my parents would not hear of it until then and now the best games out thier are games like harvest moon, and zelda both of which are rated everyone. why do kids seem to go for violence it has no apeal to me. is it me or does it seem that all the games that sell best are the violent ones

tell me about it i never even got to look at a teen game until i was 16-17 my parents would not hear of it until then and now the best games out thier are games like harvest moon, and zelda both of which are rated everyone. why do kids seem to go for violence it has no apeal to me. is it me or does it seem that all the games that sell best are the violent ones

Well part of the beauty of Video games is it allows people to do things virtually that they can't do in real life. Which I think is a good outlet. I frequently enjoy violent video games, There's nothing wrong with them as long as a person views the content subjectively, and that it is a game. They're no different really than violent movies. However, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy non-violent type games. Part of the problem is sex and controversy sell, and some people play into that. Look at BMX XXX for example. That was its primary selling feature.

Well part of the beauty of Video games is it allows people to do things virtually that they can't do in real life. Which I think is a good outlet. I frequently enjoy violent video games, There's nothing wrong with them as long as a person views the content subjectively, and that it is a game. They're no different really than violent movies. However, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy non-violent type games. Part of the problem is sex and controversy sell, and some people play into that. Look at BMX XXX for example. That was its primary selling feature.

i think you misunderstood what i was trying to say. i did not mean that violent games were bad i in fact i too enjoy an acasion of shooting up badies i was simply trying to state that they seem to advertise nothing but the violence. look at resident evil it got month of advertising while harvest moon got none that i saw.

Perhaps I did slightly. In the end, its up to the developers to push a product. They push the games that they know/feel will be the bigger seller. Harvest Moon was a pretty "under the radar" game if I recall correctly. The software companies have to decide where to put their money. It usually goes toward the game that will bring in the biggest return. It all boils down to profit margin again.

Perhaps I did slightly. In the end, its up to the developers to push a product. They push the games that they know/feel will be the bigger seller. Harvest Moon was a pretty "under the radar" game if I recall correctly. The software companies have to decide where to put their money. It usually goes toward the game that will bring in the biggest return. It all boils down to profit margin again.

if harvest moon so under the radar why did it get best seller for the first 6 months it was out it is not as under the radar as you might think.

I'll have to disagree at least somewhat about the cover art. My original copy is the VHS, with the poster-style cover. I just got back from Kroger (a grocery store) where they were selling the DVD version for $5 as a special. I got one, of course. I'm slowly replacing my VHS with DVD, and you can't beat $5.

Anyway: The new cover art has got some problems, I can't deny. The pallette's over-bright, and poor Jeremy looks...weird. Compositionally it's very well-conceived, and has a sort of sweep that draws the eye along from Mrs. B's face, through the title, to Jeremy's face, to the amulet. I think that's why Jeremy ended up looking deformed, was to support that. What really floors me here is the figure of Mrs. Brisby, though. I've got the package propped up just staring at her. Part of the effect comes from her decidedly manic expression, and part of it is the pose and the way they've used perspective. The longer I look at it, the better I like it, even the bright colours. It just works for me. It has something of the circus poster about it, realistic enough to be believable, yet awkward enough to suggest that what it's depicting is something you've never seen the like of before.

I love the original poster art: the new art doesn't have the same mystical and dark feel to it. But, I know it could have been worse: a lot worse. :P

I have the new box art cover of the first one I got for Easter. :)