Perry Doesn’t Love, Love, Love It.


I hope this RTC poster for Love, Love, Love goes through some revisions. I don’t like it at all. Intellectually, it may be smart in that it outlines themes in the play, but that’s an idea that won’t become obvious until after the theater-goer sees the play. See, here, for a good and on-going discussion, but as it is, to me it’s truly an eyesore.

My disappointment with the poster is not because there’s no image of Richard Armitage or his character, though in the play, I expect  there will be are several poses and costumes any of us would relish owning on a poster, even in silhouette or drawing form, and even with the addition of  Amy Ryan in character.  (I’ve read the play, and I’ve also looked at some stills from scenes of  previous productions.) I heartily agree that the RTC should consider printing a poster for Richard Armitage fans, if the company can think of way of overcoming the political ramifications of excluding other cast members. It can’t be that expensive a project, and theater posters go for around $ 20.00.

Even if not, they could start with adding some names to the off-putting example they’ve created. I would be much more likely to buy the poster, even though I don’t like it, if it had a credit for Richard Armitage, or even the entire cast. That his name is not on it, is a big drawback for me.

This piece of art offends my sense of design and color harmony. Part of it actually brings to mind vomit. For me, it’s too busy. The torn up look of the image confuses me, even though having read the play, I like to think that some of those paper tears look like portions of a world map. . I know when I see this from a distance, the color combinations are going to assault my senses. I don’t think the three words are even that easy to see. Sure, when one studies it, if we weren’t in mind of spoilers, there can have a vibrant analytical conversation. But as advertising, I think it’s awful.

Aesthetically, I like this one even less,  – that heart – really? But it contains some of what the RTC one is lacking, although it focuses unduly on only part of the play, and inaccurately, at that.  It doesn’t show a theme the way the RTC poster does.

Screen Shot 2016-07-20 at 9.30.51 PM

This one from a touring production that played in Argentina, is even worse  ( but note the graphics on the actual title)- and let’s all pray that our Kenneth doesn’t show up with an Afro.

Screen Shot 2016-07-20 at 9.11.55 PM

I kind of like this next one, which I think is from the original production, put on by Plainsplow – their 2011 Spring tour: (Yup, that’s our Margaret Hale)

Screen Shot 2016-07-20 at 9.44.45 PM


I think of all three posters that attempted the colors and design of the earliest time period in the play  that would include the top third of our RTC poster), the original, above,  captures it best. It has a slightly more psychedelic, 60’s look than any of the others – it’s a riff on a Pucci print, – also used as a costume on a London production at The Royal Court.

Love, Love, Love by Mike Bartlett directed by James Grieve at The Royal Court Theatre, London, Great Britain press photocall 2nd May 2012 Victoria Hamilton (as Sandra) Photograph by Elliott Franks Contact: Tel 07802 537 220 2012©Elliott Franks Agency space rates apply

©Elliott Franks

My taste always goes for the graphic, geometric – I like simple – so this one is the Love, Love, Love poster I currently like best, from a production in Bath:

Screen Shot 2016-07-20 at 9.05.33 PM

I can’t figure out which came first, whether it’s the one above, or this one below –  which is not a theater poster, it’s a graphic for an epub book (+ script) of the play.

Screen Shot 2016-07-20 at 9.53.35 PM


11 thoughts on “Perry Doesn’t Love, Love, Love It.

  1. Those yellow, yellow-brown, yellow-green shades really are colors I don’t associate with the aesthetic of the late 1960s.


    • Because they’r weren’t. Even the aqua isn;t quite right. And the middle portion, with more of the yellow, brown and olive, or puce, I wondered whether they were colors of some financial newspaper or something. I don’t get the texture in the dotted portion at all.


        • I don’t know. I think the comment on your blog that there are three areas, each reflecting the time period of the play, then the old style pixilated screen, at least as I remember it, was earlier. Honestly,I don’t know what the artist was thinking. I ca’t figure out the black and white at the bottom, either.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, that’s what I think, too. It’s a mess. One of the reasons, I think, is that most of the colors, including the text in most places, are similar in color value ( mid range), so nothing stands out. Including the title.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Perry, I agree with you about the poster. (I said this on Servetus’s blog)- I think the poster should have a red backdrop and the love, love, love in black letters, or a white backdrop and the love, love, love in England’s colors because the play is set in a British pad/apartment. what would be very good is Mr. Richard Armitage on the poster showing the different ages that he plays.


  3. Pingback: RA Pocket Shrine 126/? – Five Stars | Guylty Pleasure

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s