Being promotional is all well and good, but it makes it so that the artwork's relevance is only retained for a couple of weeks after it débuts.Susan Arendt said:Well, it is an advertisement, after all. Doesn't do anyone much good if they don't know when the movie comes out.King of Asgaard said:I see what you did there.Clearing the Eye said:Ugh. I'm sick of Batman. This reboot has been the BANE of my existence >_>
OT: The only gripe I have with the painting is that it has the dates and stuff you'd see on a poster, and it kinda doesn't mesh well. Aside from that, it looks stellar.
Though in fairness I'm not sure you can live in the United States and not know when Batman is out.
After that time period it will look behind the times.
It's the same thing with film posters at the cinema or on billboards; eventually they're replaced with posters of more modern films because the previous posters become outdated. Should the same be done to this, or is it going to be a permanent feature of the building? If it's the former, I doubt it will be economical to keep repainting the side of the building for every big blockbuster. If it's the latter, surely not everyone would want to live in a building with Batman on it. That, and it's probably going to affect property value in a negative way.
That being said, this is just my cynicism talking. The geek part of me thinks this is awesome, and a well-painted piece of artwork.