Oh Dear.
you mean, you’re not proud of this 
?
As someone pointed out elsewhere it looks like Lisa Simpson giving Bart some, er, special attention.
Ow GAWD, I’ll never watch TV again..!!!
Is this not a direct copy of the 1906 San Francisco Olympics logo showing the city’s skyline after the quake?
I don’t get why they couldn’t keep the candidate city logo. That one was a thousand times better.
I was reading earlier that there are petitions going around like crazy to get rid of it .
It’s disgusting. I don’t understand how that can pass for good today. I could maybe understand in the early 90’s, most things were hideous like that. Seriously.
One sportsperson (could be one of either sex these days) kneeing the other in the groin. Pretty much reflects the competitive ethos as practised in professional sport - which includes the Olympics, which I mercifully won’t be @r§€d to watch as nobody Irish has a hope in hell of doing well in them.
There was an online petition to get it scrapped, whih was closed after 3 days when it was (apparently) clear that the thing is here to stay. There were nearly 50,000 signatures in that time.
I think the shape is hideous, the colours are hideous, so bright they make my eyes water, I have no idea way london is spelt with a small “l” and I will never buy anything with this brand on it. Seb Coe says this is “Everyone’s Olympics” - so far everyone’s united in their disgust at this logo, which btw cost the paying public $800,000.
However the Olympic Committee have covered their arses by saying the design will evolve over the next 5 years. Let’s hope it evolves into something completely different.
The best bit about this logo is that it apparently causes epileptic siezures in some people who view it.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1943486.htm
I don’t know about you lot in the UK, but here in America it’s a rare thing for a product paid for with taxpayer dollars to actually deliver MORE than promised. Methinks you should be counting your blessings with this, not complaining.
I think the logo is unfortunate, myself. It speaks of chaos. That, and Bart and Lisa Simpson.
But a thought: is the design supposed to bring to mind the principal districts of London?
I think it’s supposed to be the home nations. Clockwise from top left: Scotland,Wales, Ireland, England
That doesn’t exactly work so well either, does it.
From what the news story said, it’s supposed to be then year 20 12 done up in a horribly ugly way. Well, they didn’t say it was ugly, but my kids could probably make something better than that.
Oh, if it is 2012, which I can sort of see, I don’t think it was very successful if people were actually supposed to get that. I don’t seem to mind it as much as the other folks. Knowing what the shapes mean helps me to organize it in my head.
You know, I’m prepared to entertain the idea that the reason we all think it’s ugly is because it’s cutting-edge design, or beyond. The designers’ brief was for an event that a few years off, and they wanted something that’s still going to look futuristic when the time arrives.
We all get conditioned to see the unfamilar as ugly. Remember, when the french impressionists first showed their art, the public thought it was hideous. Now, the most expensive paintings in the world is a van Gogh.
But, if that’s the look of the future, I want a second opinion. It’s thoroughly unpleasant.
Not very good, is it…
A lot of people think that, far from being modern, the design looks like 80s graffiti, and feel if they were going for the graffiti look, Banksy would have done it far better.
http://technorati.com/tag/banksy
It feels like the designers are trying to appeal to yoof culture, and have missed by a mile.
He would, indeed.
Look. If it’s gonna be bad art, at least make it apropos:
