Helvetica was boring because it was a bad movie, not because it was about a font. The movie consisted of interviewing person after person about their opinion on the font, with significant dead time between interviews where they played slow music and showed signs.
They missed many opportunities to make this an interesting documentary. For example, one of the designers mentioned briefly how he got started in the industry years ago. He mentioned doing some sort of metal work (or something like that) to manufacture physical plates for the fonts. I think it would have been fascinating to show how fonts used to be designed back when Helvetica originated, pre-computers.
Another missed opportunity - they actually went to the building where Helvetica was created, took us to the basement, and pulled a folder out of a file which contained some of the original artwork. But then…nothing. They didn’t show the contents of the folder or explain what exactly goes into a design. Instead, they just cut to another boring interview.
Then they mentioned the concept of a “font foundry”, but failed to explain what that is. I really wanted to know. I want the history of the design, as well as the implementation process and how that has evolved over the years with computerization.
Instead…just a bunch of boring interviews. I get it. Sven LOVES the font, Ivan HATES the font. Sally LOVES the font, Barb HATES the font. Yawn.
It’s a documentary. Show the process…the tools…all aspects of font design and implementation. Instead, all we get is boring interviews.
I´m a little surprised… We showed the Helvetica Movie here in Hamburg at the Hamburg Design Days, the cinema was sold out, and the people were excited. So, sorry… you´re wrong. It´s a designer movie, not a technical one.
It sounds like you expected to see a shop film about type design, not a documentary about this particular typeface named Helvetica. You’re perfectly welcome to go research the history of the typeface and the tools used to build it without bashing the movie for failing to be an educational guide for the non-designer layman. It’s sort of like accusing “The Inconvenient Truth” of being boring and irrelevant because it didn’t delve into the history of climate research and what tools were used to measure it.
And even then, “boring” is quite subjective dismissal. How was it boring? Did you recognize the (notable) graphic designers that were interviewed, and why their opinion might in relation to the topic might be interesting?
“It’s a documentary. Show the process…the tools…all aspects of font design and implementation.”
It appears that you’ve completely missed the point of “Helvetica,” and perhaps what a film documentary actually is. Maybe you should have learned more about the field of type design before seeing this movie. Don’t blame a movie that wasn’t intended to explain the production aspects of typography on your personal lack of prior knowledge.
It depends what you’re into I guess. I’m a designer. I love typography. I know the work of the designers being interviewed. I found the film interesting and have watched it at least a half a dozen times. Obviously everything doesn’t appeal to everyone.
And a movie about Java would be interesting?
Helvetica was boring because it was a bad movie, not because it was about a font. The movie consisted of interviewing person after person about their opinion on the font, with significant dead time between interviews where they played slow music and showed signs.
They missed many opportunities to make this an interesting documentary. For example, one of the designers mentioned briefly how he got started in the industry years ago. He mentioned doing some sort of metal work (or something like that) to manufacture physical plates for the fonts. I think it would have been fascinating to show how fonts used to be designed back when Helvetica originated, pre-computers.
Another missed opportunity - they actually went to the building where Helvetica was created, took us to the basement, and pulled a folder out of a file which contained some of the original artwork. But then…nothing. They didn’t show the contents of the folder or explain what exactly goes into a design. Instead, they just cut to another boring interview.
Then they mentioned the concept of a “font foundry”, but failed to explain what that is. I really wanted to know. I want the history of the design, as well as the implementation process and how that has evolved over the years with computerization.
Instead…just a bunch of boring interviews. I get it. Sven LOVES the font, Ivan HATES the font. Sally LOVES the font, Barb HATES the font. Yawn.
It’s a documentary. Show the process…the tools…all aspects of font design and implementation. Instead, all we get is boring interviews.
I´m a little surprised… We showed the Helvetica Movie here in Hamburg at the Hamburg Design Days, the cinema was sold out, and the people were excited. So, sorry… you´re wrong. It´s a designer movie, not a technical one.
It sounds like you expected to see a shop film about type design, not a documentary about this particular typeface named Helvetica. You’re perfectly welcome to go research the history of the typeface and the tools used to build it without bashing the movie for failing to be an educational guide for the non-designer layman. It’s sort of like accusing “The Inconvenient Truth” of being boring and irrelevant because it didn’t delve into the history of climate research and what tools were used to measure it.
And even then, “boring” is quite subjective dismissal. How was it boring? Did you recognize the (notable) graphic designers that were interviewed, and why their opinion might in relation to the topic might be interesting?
“It’s a documentary. Show the process…the tools…all aspects of font design and implementation.”
It appears that you’ve completely missed the point of “Helvetica,” and perhaps what a film documentary actually is. Maybe you should have learned more about the field of type design before seeing this movie. Don’t blame a movie that wasn’t intended to explain the production aspects of typography on your personal lack of prior knowledge.
Yawn. It was boring. I couldn’t even watch the whole thing the pace was so slow. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
It depends what you’re into I guess. I’m a designer. I love typography. I know the work of the designers being interviewed. I found the film interesting and have watched it at least a half a dozen times. Obviously everything doesn’t appeal to everyone.