#1
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:02pm
As seen on posts on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child has changed its Marquee and Playbill. Any ideas why this is?
Cursed Child Logo Change
#2
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:12pm
I don’t know all the legal jargon, but basically Warner Bros is unifying all the HP ip together, so the official logo is being used.
The good is this most likely means the Lyric will get access to the official Wizarding World theme park butterbeer!
The bad is the new playbill sucks.
The good is this most likely means the Lyric will get access to the official Wizarding World theme park butterbeer!
The bad is the new playbill sucks.
#3
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:12pm
I can’t link because I’m on my phone but damn, that is an ugly Playbill.
#4
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:15pm
I don't like the new marque, the front is fine, but they didn't even try to center the "and the".
https://www.instagram.com/p/B1_5wv1gk0Z/
The new playbill is also baffling as the old design could have still worked, like why change it beyond the new font?
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2ApBzDHDZ4/
Updated On: 9/4/19 at 09:15 PM
#5
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:16pm
For those curious, they have reverted to the "classic" HARRY POTTER logo. An insta pic of the new playbill.
They likely did it to have brand consistency across the films, books, official merch, and the stage production. There was probably a focus group in which the "classic" HP logo resonated more strongly with respondents.
#6
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:20pm
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "They likely did it to have brand consistency across the films, books, official merch, and the stage production. There was probably a focus group in which the "classic" HP logo resonated more strongly with respondents."
My question is why now? This would seem like a choice for when the show moved to Broadway or opened elsewhere. I guess for the new mobile game? Is that even still new?
#7
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:21pm
VotePeron said: "I don’t know all the legal jargon, but basically Warner Bros is unifying all the HP ip together, so the official logo is being used.
The good is this most likely means the Lyric will get access to the official Wizarding World theme park butterbeer!
The bad is the new playbill sucks."
Is there any article explaining the legal stuff? Really interested in why.
#8
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:29pm
I don’t know specifics, but for example, Warner Bros forced the Lyric to stop selling their off-brand version of Butterbeer over the summer because it wasn’t the official one, but they also refused to allow them to sell the butterbeer from Universal.
It looks like Warner Bros is just now getting around to re-examining how they view Cursed Child within their brand as San Francisco and Germany get ready to open.
I can’t find any articles, but much like Disney, these corporations at the end of the day are still...corporations. So, often legal bs takes time and goes round and round.
Really hoping they fix the Playbill, which I’m sure they will.
It looks like Warner Bros is just now getting around to re-examining how they view Cursed Child within their brand as San Francisco and Germany get ready to open.
I can’t find any articles, but much like Disney, these corporations at the end of the day are still...corporations. So, often legal bs takes time and goes round and round.
Really hoping they fix the Playbill, which I’m sure they will.
#9
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:31pm
I thought Warner Bros didn’t have any stake in Harry Potter
My father (AIDS)
My sister (AIDS)
My uncle and my cousin and her best friend (AIDS, AIDS, AIDS)
The gays and the straights
And the white and the spades
#10
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:39pm
VotePeron said: "I don’t know specifics, but for example, Warner Bros forced the Lyric to stop selling their off-brand version of Butterbeer over the summer because it wasn’t the official one, but they also refused to allow them to sell the butterbeer from Universal."
Wow, did they really? WB make so much already off this brand, them going after the Lyric for this, and towns, baseball teams, etc for hosting Harry Potter events (Read about that last year) I feel is a bit much. I get its show business, but I doubt it hurts the money WB makes. Just my 2 cents... Sorry didn't mean to go off tangent on your point haha.
Side note, if tying it all together now means they can sell the butterbeer at the theatre, get me my broom as I fly there immediately, that s**ts so good haha!! That's the one thing I always wished they had there, not to discount the froze by any means.
#11
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:41pm
DoTheDood said: "I don't like the new marque, the front is fine, but they didn't even try to center the "and the".
https://www.instagram.com/p/B1_5wv1gk0Z/
Actually, going by how the titles are mocked up in the movies, the "AND THE" is in the right place, and "CURSED CHILD" should be directly underneath it.
#12
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:46pm
Call_me_jorge said: "I thought Warner Bros didn’t have any stake in Harry Potter"
From the website: "HARRY POTTER CHARACTERS, NAMES AND RELATED INDICIA ARE TRADEMARKS OF AND © WARNER BROS. ENT. ALL"
From an article about Warner's involvement with Cursed Child:
"As crowds pack into the Lyric Theater in New York City to ogle at a grown-up Harry Potter travel through time in the Broadway play Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, there are several backstage characters who presumably wish that they, too, could go back into the past and rewrite history.
Those would be executives at Warner Bros. and its parent company TimeWarner. For while the studio owns most of the entertainment rights to Harry Potter and its spin-off series Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them–including films, live-action television, video games, theme park attractions–J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter’s creator, controls everything else. That includes the stage rights to her works, which means that, although Warner Bros. is a partner on Cursed Child, which is currently the hottest play on Broadway, the studio is not a lead producer or the primary stakeholder. In other words, Cursed Child is a Rowling production (along with producers Colin Callender and Sonia Freeman)."
TLDR, WB gets money from it but not as much as they'd like. Reading between the lines, it seems that they're trying to have as much brand unity as possible in the post-AT&T merger.
#13
Posted: 9/4/19 at 9:48pm
CT2NYC said: "Actually, going by how the titles are mocked up in the movies, the "AND THE" is in the right place, and "CURSED CHILD" should be directly underneath it."
True, like the logo on the playbill looks great, why could they have not done it like that or keep it more like the original marquee with both "AND THE" and "CURSED CHILD" centered? They probably did not want to change the "CURSED CHILD", but then I don't think it then looks as good.
#14
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:07pm
The new marquee in London looks really good
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2AapyQHoGn/?igshid=1vqzwa1g0rxtx
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2AapyQHoGn/?igshid=1vqzwa1g0rxtx
#15
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:15pm
DoTheDood said: "CT2NYC said: "Actually, going by how the titles are mocked up in the movies, the "AND THE" is in the right place, and "CURSED CHILD" should be directly underneath it."
True, like the logo on the playbill looks great, why could they have not done it like that or keep it more like the original marquee with both "AND THE" and"CURSED CHILD" centered? They probably did not want to change the"CURSED CHILD", but then I don't think it then looks as good."
It doesn't look right. They should have just put the "AND THE" under "Harry," and raised "CURSED CHILD" a bit. It would have been a good compromise.
Updated On: 9/4/19 at 10:15 PM
#16
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:19pm
VotePeron said: "The new marquee in London looks really good
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2AapyQHoGn/?igshid=1vqzwa1g0rxtx"
It looks good, but "CURSED CHILD" should be moved a little to the right, and "AND THE" should be raised a bit, tucked in next to the bottom of the "H."
#17
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:27pm
Is the child in the “nest” gone on the theatre front? I’m not into HP, have never read the books, seen the films or seen the show, but I thought that was effing cool!
#18
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:47pm
Looks like the nest flew up atop the building to the right. I do like the unification with the logo revamp, but I also liked the elegance of the old logo because it made it feel less like a method to try to milk even more money out of the series
#19
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:49pm
Miles2Go2 said: "Is the child in the “nest” gone on the theatre front? I’m not into HP, have never read the books, seen the films or seen the show, but I thought that was effing cool!"
In the West End production, it is in-front (as you can see in VotePeron's marquee post), while the nest for the Broadway production is on the next building over. Both still have them, just the Broadway one is not as obvious if you are on the marquee side of the street.
#20
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:50pm
BroadwayNoob said: "Looks like the nest flew up atop the building to the right. I do like the unification with the logo revamp, but I also liked the elegance of the old logo because it made it feel less like a method to try to milk even more money out of the series"
Oh I see it now I don’t like it there, but maybe it looks better in person
#21
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:53pm
Miles2Go2 said: "BroadwayNoob said: "Looks like the nest flew up atop the building to the right. I do like the unification with the logo revamp, but I also liked the elegance of the old logo because it made it feel less like a method to try to milk even more money out of the series"
Oh I see it now I don’t like it there, but maybe it looks better in person
"
That nest has always been there. There was also one on 42nd Street, which I'm assuming is still there.
#22
Posted: 9/4/19 at 10:55pm
CT2NYC said: "Miles2Go2 said: "BroadwayNoob said: "Looks like the nest flew up atop the building to the right. I do like the unification with the logo revamp, but I also liked the elegance of the old logo because it made it feel less like a method to try to milk even more money out of the series"
Oh I see it now I don’t like it there, but maybe it looks better in person
“That nest has always been there. There was also one on 42nd Street, which I'm assuming is still there."
Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying! I was thinking of the 42nd Street “nest.”
#23
Posted: 9/4/19 at 11:36pm
Noticing on the West End programmes it’s now branded as “J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Cursed Child.”
Not sure how I feel about the logo change; I agree with those who say it makes it seem too commercial and synergistic. But, to be fair, that logo has been used for the US version of the books since day one, pre-Warner Brothers, who also it for the movies. So, for the States anyway, it goes back a bit further than the UK, who only had it for the movies.
Not sure how I feel about the logo change; I agree with those who say it makes it seem too commercial and synergistic. But, to be fair, that logo has been used for the US version of the books since day one, pre-Warner Brothers, who also it for the movies. So, for the States anyway, it goes back a bit further than the UK, who only had it for the movies.
#24
Posted: 9/5/19 at 12:03am
I liked the original logo better. It looked a little more sophisticated and adult. This just looks like the movie is playing at the Lyric.
#25
Posted: 9/5/19 at 12:33am
I'm surprised they didn't use the original logo from Day 1 to have brand synergy. And it's a testament to the quality and iconography of the "lightning bolt letters" that Scholastic designed 20+ years ago when nobody knew what this could become. I don't think it's a bad change.
Anything Potter/Fantastic Beasts-related has been branded as "J.K. Rowling's Wizarding World," so the possessory credit is probably related to that. Also, I have to wonder if there was some bitterness with the Tonys: Rowling and Tiffany were not deemed eligible for their writing/story contributions to Cursed Child on Broadway. (Rowling still won as a producer, but not as an author; I believe all 3 won the Olivier for Best Play.) By using the possessory credit, that could help her be awards-eligible in Australia or around the country. Seemingly insignificant, but it's the type of things agents fuss over for high-profile clients.
Updated On: 9/5/19 at 12:33 AM
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95