4 ms·

Yea so the Lebowski one was the only one I really agree with, and even that's is a stretch. We have to believe that the title is actually mistepresenting the ge

by Gunax 5y ago

Yea so the Lebowski one was the only one I really agree with, and even that's is a stretch. We have to believe that the title is actually mistepresenting the genre... Maybe but it's still liated as a comedy. The other 2 examples did not make any sense to me at all. I guess to summarise what I mean: of course people want to make good covers. It seems these accusations depend on us really assuming a very nefarious intent. It just feels like any art couod be clickbait by that. Eg. If they used an image if a bowling ball, I could say 'Well, this movie isnt about bowling!'

fabbari 5y ago
The main point of the article in not about making good covers. It's about using covers that match - sometimes marginally - your interest even if it's not a main part of the movie, misrepresenting the content of the movie to make you click on it. Clickbait. The Lebowski example was just that: he likes action and Netflix presents to him the "action" thumb for the movie - even if the movie is not exactly John Wick.