The logo is "available in four colours – pink, blue, green and orange - the new emblem is modern and will be dynamic, evolving in the years between now and 2012". And, yes you are right. It's shit isn't it. It took me ages to work out that it said '2012' and it looks like an 80's Wella ShockWaves hair product. Wolf-Ollins shat it out and they're supposed to be good! Still, at least we've got 5 years to get used to the bastard.
Why couldn't we have had something understated like the beautiful stylised maple leaf that came with Montreal in '76 or the structured and uplifting Soviet entry from 1980. Mexico's is frankly a thing of beauty and even London's from '48 is better.
One of the best comments I've read relating to it comes from the Guardian website - "Pretty much sums up the ambiguous vacuousness that is England these days where the image is so blurred and without meaning you need a consultant to help explain what it says and represents." He's got a point don't you think? The colours are bizzare (Steve just pointed out that it looks like they've chosen them to keep printing costs down) and are far from pleasant. And I've been so incensed by how crap the whole thing is I didn't even notice the sheer rubbishness of the word 'London' in the top left. Who the hell put that together! Looks like someone did it on the train on the way home. I've heard talk of the SS, 80's anti-war propaganda graphics and even Lisa Simpson giving head. The problem is that it seems to say something to everyone but 'London Olympics' to no-one.
No comments:
Post a Comment