Is there anything worse than a movie cover for a book?
I care more about the material quality of the cover than whatever's printed on it
>>24818307I do agree that it's bad...but timcham is soo cute
>>24818307Vidya cover
>>24818307I don’t really mind as long as I can get it used for a decent price. That being said I do tend to buy original printings/designs. There’s an undeniable, mostly irrational, fear of being seen as an NPC for reading a movie cover as if you wanted to read to the book only because you saw the movie. I say mostly irrational because just like reading anything to impress anyone in public it’s a bit of a self-centered view to think that anyone actually cares enough about you to look at what you’re reading or that theyre discerning enough to care if you’re a pseud. Pure vanity really. But again, i do try to avoid them when I can for this reason so I won’t speak as if I’m above such thinking completely.
>>24818307you're saying you'd rather have some 100year old doodle instead of this majestic poster
>>24818307Yes.
>>24819064Those are some clogged ass pores on his forehead. Yuckies.
>>24818307a lot of its because bookish types see their corner of media as exclusive and not for the common folk so they get offended when their little corner of the arts becomes a public commodity. pottery. not defending slop consumers but it is what it is.
>>24819115You should look so good after all those years in prison
>>24819489I do look much better after my prison stint, thank you. Unlike monty python here I didn’t eat any dude ass in prison.
>>24819064Where's Caveisel?
When instead of a sticker they print the words 'now a major motion picture' in a big circle smack in the middle of of a otherwise acceptable cover.
