Public Voice Network
- Multicolored logos? 77
- Light in the Box Coupons
- Vid of the Day 1096110961
- Shit QBNers Say 125125
- TYPO San Francisco 55
- Suggest a good movie... 936936
- Logo from Locked PDF? 33
- blog 5557955579
- American Musical Supply C… 11
- Pic of the Day 5937359373
- FMT 020312 4646
- intern -> job 2121
- Your Last Concert 375375
- the gif animation thread 1132211322
- Steve Jobs FBI file 66
- Shit QBNers think 6969
- What are you listening to… 41734173
- Park Slope 22
- The Elder Scrolls V: Skyr… 7676
- ♥ Things girls like ♥ 9696
- AE shadows won't work 99
- Politics 1759717597
- Chick of the Day 1431414314
- Skateboarding. 598598
rebranding Playboy 5656 Responses
Last post: 1 year, 10 months ago | Thread started: Mar 22, 10, 6:50 a.m.
- BaskerviIle
A great theoretical project. The thinking, the positioning, the design are all great.
This guy deserves to go places, best work I've seen in a whilehttp://blog.iso50.com/2009/11/24…
- Mar 22, 10, 6:50 a.m. – Permalink
- BaskerviIle
read the whole blog post
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 7:17 a.m. – Permalink
- ItalianStallion
Fail imo...
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 7:25 a.m. – Permalink
- Iggyboo
That's not his best work. That looks like a skunk the point of the brand is that playboy is connected to what men like the feminine side or aka bunnies. And bunnies ears being split is a sexual reference to something else being split. And bunnies are far more feminine than a fox, men would simply look at it and go is this for the women? Its clear that its more masculine with what looks like an olive stick in his mouth. I like his posters far more.
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 7:28 a.m. – Permalink
- Khurram
Eugh, he was getting AWAY from the overtly sexual connotations.
Read the blog MORANS:
"I imagined a Playboy comprised solely of articles, devoid of nudity (or images of any kind) — something that people would have no choice but to read. In the same way it was regarded as progressive and irreverent in the past, so too could it be now, with an effective and drastic restructuring. Strangely enough, the boundaries Playboy pushed back in the 60’s have now come to be relatively standard operating procedure for men’s magazines. A drastic change, such as eliminating nude spreads altogether, would be one of the ways Playboy could once again be on the forefront exciting editorial content."
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 7:43 a.m. – Permalink
- Khurram
Also, my problem with the "bunny" is that it denotes the sort of feminine qualities that men were into in teh 50s/60s - i.e. fat bitches.
"Bunnies" are fatties, aka, rubenesque, aka voluptious, aka curvy, aka pear-shaped, aka fatties.
All the "playmates" in the pictures of the women in that era dressed as "bunnies" are fatties. That's why none of the modern playmates dress as "bunnies" cos they look like fatties, aka bridget jones.
The fox is much more representative of the slender modern female sexual form propagated in our culture.
Add some DD titties on there and you're good to go!
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 7:50 a.m. – Permalink
- BaskerviIle
What I liked about it was, that he set his brief to move the magazine forward, to make it more like Monocle or something. I think it does that pretty well
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 8:23 a.m. – Permalink
- Douglas
Funny that you'd tame the magazine and push it into an already dying format. Why not hop on the bandwagon and redesign it digital? There is a pretty large amount of thought that needs to go into why Playboy is dead, and I don't think turning it into a glossy version of Monocle or Fantastic Man is the right decision. I don't mind the idea of losing the iconic bunny because of all the association it carries. Even if the content changes, no on would be caught dead reading it in public, or on a morning commute, etc. Might as well change the name of it as well.
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 8:32 a.m. – Permalink
- Iggyboo
I change my opinion about everything..... Holy shit, I got this all wrong this is a student assignment done by Alex Cornell not ISO. For student work it's pretty damn good. Well done, marketing wise brand wise it's a bit off but for taking a total risk and going ahead and attempting it I congratulate you. You got like 140 comments on that iso50 site talking about this... Clearly you created a buzz. GJ alex's work for the full project can be seen more accurately at: http://www.alexcornell.com/#1967…
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 8:34 a.m. – Permalink
- harlequino
I'm picking up this whole "orifice" vibe with the negative space in the tail.
sort of like...
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 8:34 a.m. – Permalink
- Khurram
another beef with the bunny, as well as the fact that it promotes fatties.
it's a bit misogynstic/paedophillic portrayal of women - not that that magazine latently isn't, which it is.
But fucking bunnies. That's for little girlies "awww, bunny wabbit!" naiive, simple, BIG EYES, like Betty Boop or Marilyn Monroe, all like "don't ask me! I'm just a little girl!" fuckin paedos.
A "fox" is much more representative of a mature female form - wiley and independent, yet still youthful enough to be worth fucking and impreganting with my cock.
Like for the male archetype it would be A BULL.
This is a symbolic discourse on the redesign, in terms of symbolism.
Add some DD titties on there and you're good to go!
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 8:43 a.m. – Permalink
- CygnusZero4
This makes about as much sense as redesigning McD's golden arches. Some things just should not be fucked with, ever.
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 8:45 a.m. – Permalink
- flashbender
I miss having that much free time
- Dog-earMar 22, 10, 9:19 a.m. – Permalink
