INTL. REVIEW BY PAUL VICKERS POSTED BY Brand New

Moulin Rouge does the Typographic Cancan

As French as the Eiffel Tower or Champagne, the Moulin Rouge Cabaret is an integral part of the history and culture of France and has been on the sightseeing trail of visitors since it was founded in 1889, in the Pigalle red light district, close to Montmartre, Paris. Birthplace of the famous Cancan dance, the red Windmill on its roof is a landmark on the city’s horizon and an iconic symbol of cabaret and nightlife worldwide. Long associated with the avant-garde and leading artists, with some of its early posters designed by none other than Toulouse-Lautrec, the Moulin Rouge has a long design heritage but was in dire need of an overhaul, having drifted into a popular, mass market experience with a cheap and tacky product image. The 120th anniversary of the Moulin Rouge is the occasion to roll out a new brand identity that pays homage to the legend and communicates the magic with a resolutely contemporary brand. Four agencies competed in the in the design pitch, proposing over 40 different proposals, according to this interview with the eventual winners, Paris-based agency John Brightman.

The previous logotype, a rather inelegant pair of red lips formed from the M and U in the name, a generic script typeface and a small, stylized windmill icon was a rather confused, illegible collection of elements that lacked coherence and impact. The inspiration for the red lips lay in the distinctive, graphic style of French designer and illustrator Rene Gruau, who produced a famous series of posters for the Moulin Rouge in the 1950s.

The brief was to rethink the identity of the Moulin Rouge as a global brand which encompassed all the current activities of the cabaret (The show, brand licence, franchises…). […] To make it above all representative, simple and dynamic with a touch of “enchantment.” […] The aim was really to revamp the windmill, to make it more feminine and glamorous! That’s why we thought of producing it in different shades of red, large and vibrant.
Interview with Stephane Gautier, Pauline Nicolas, Francois Gatault of John Brightman

Corporate version of the logo.

Licensing version of the logo.

The new brand — made up of two different logos, one for corporate use and the other for licensing — is strong, simple and reflects the typographic feel of the Moulin Rouge’s neon signs and its windmill sails with understated sophistication. A colour palette of silver grey and deep red, with a subtle drop shadow to the type, communicates a premium feel. The new brand firmly re-positions the Moulin Rouge as a premium experience that will enable it to continue to attract performers like Edith Piaf, Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra and Elton John, and to attract the spectators who consume an impressive 240,000 bottles of Champagne a year during the show.

Illustration style.

Jonny’s comment is:

Much prefer the Licensing version against the corporate mark.

The windmill in the corporate version has been placed off center, I wonder why they have chosen to do that? It doesn’t sit well with my eye.

On May.25.2010 at 06:05 AM

Alex’s comment is:

Lovely blousy letterforms yet good clarity. Funnily enough the simplicity of the licensing version appeals most. Discreet wallpaper is a subtle touch. Like.

On May.25.2010 at 06:22 AM

Florian’s comment is:

Wow, great. The licensing version is awesome.

Don’t know if thats a good thing for a logo but I’d use it as a desktop wallpaper.

On May.25.2010 at 06:33 AM

Woot Design’s comment is:

it’s good - it has a good balance of classic and contemporary elements and feel, which seems fitting given MR’s history and its desire to be a modern global brand.

The corporate version makes me think of cheese packaging in the UK - particularly mature cheddar for some reason. The windmill arrangement of the lettering in the licensing version is aces though.

On May.25.2010 at 06:50 AM

Rafe’s comment is:

I think I will miss the lips. I thought that they gave the mark a quality that reflected the somewhat risque image of the Moulin Rouge. It was fun and even a little irreverent. The new mark [licensing version]is a great design, but it projects an element of the architecture not the spirit of the cabaret.

On May.25.2010 at 07:16 AM

d_rek’s comment is:

The ‘corporate’ version of the logo stands well enough on it’s own…

The licensed version is an iron cross! Surely i’m not the only one that sees it?

On May.25.2010 at 07:36 AM

Canistel Design’s comment is:

i’m not sure how well they fit the subject, but they are definitely well crafted logo designs

the corporate logo looks like an unpopular clothing brand you’d see at macy’s and the licensing logo looks like a cologne.. these are unflattering descriptions lol, but i like the craftsmanship of the logos nonetheless

On May.25.2010 at 07:52 AM

Brand One Forty’s comment is:

Why the addition of drop shows and superfluous shading to such lovely mark? For a logo intended to be licensed, it may present challenges for reproduction.

On May.25.2010 at 08:46 AM

Cris’s comment is:

I do prefer the corporate version over the licensing logo. I do also though ‘iron cross’ when I first saw it, but what bothers me about is the gradient and the drop shadow. Wonder why none of the designers have yet to have a fit about that… The typographic windmill idea is good, but I don’t think the execution is well done.

On May.25.2010 at 08:52 AM

buruno’s comment is:

I can’t see any good in this “windmill” thing, honestly. Both visually and conceptually. Like every non-french speaker would think of a windmill when they heard of Moulin Rouge.

Shabby, IMO.

The corporate version looks ok.

On May.25.2010 at 08:54 AM

Everett’s comment is:

+1 Rafe’s comment. These logos are well made, but utterly too Disney-fied, clean, and aseptic for a client known for spectacular, over-the-top performances.

Doesn’t the size of the Registered symbol in relation to the rest of the mark bother anyone else? That thing is HUGE! It’s bigger than “Paris”.

On May.25.2010 at 08:55 AM

Roman Zima’s comment is:

GREAT! YES!

On May.25.2010 at 10:00 AM

Dave’s comment is:

There is nothing sexy about either of these logos. I am really surprised by the vote here.

On May.25.2010 at 10:11 AM

Jerry Kuyper’s comment is:

My immediate reaction was also iron cross.

On May.25.2010 at 10:19 AM

Marin Santic’s comment is:

When I saw a title of the post, I immediately clicked on it to see what it’s about, and then surprise… or not. Why? This is boring one. It’s not nice, neither fun at all. Maybe too much details instead of entire effect.

On May.25.2010 at 10:27 AM

Mattij’s comment is:

+ 2 Rafe. I also think it becomes over branded. Old one was certainly not good, but this one has no excitement about it.

The cross version has potential, maybe with different type (something more relaxed) it could have been perfect. This one is trying too hard.

On May.25.2010 at 10:28 AM

David Airey’s comment is:

The execution of the older “lips” logo may have been lacking, but I think the idea was much stronger than the redesign.

On May.25.2010 at 10:45 AM

jen’s comment is:

Hate the X, like the horizontal logo. The X is just a tad too awkward and far too clever for its own good - still too much going on. I agree with the commenter who said it’s Disneyfied. If you’re going to plunder your client’s history for inspiration, it should be a plunder that’s worth it!

On May.25.2010 at 11:08 AM

Harper’s comment is:

I’m not so sure about repeating the logo as a wallpaper but I like the logo overall. It’s a shame they felt the need to put the Registered symbol in there. I always feel like that ruins a logo.

On May.25.2010 at 11:17 AM

JC’s comment is:

Why didnt they just hire Baz Luhrmann’s art director?

On May.25.2010 at 11:24 AM

Eric’s comment is:

While I like the execution of the licensing version, both directions feel a little too silly. Moulin Rouge always conveyed a sense of danger and decadence – more Amsterdam than Las Vegas. These look like they were made for t-shirts for Americans.

And, echoing Everett and Harper, “Paris” should not be overpowered by the registered mark.

On May.25.2010 at 11:42 AM

Bill Dawson (XK9)’s comment is:

Beautifully done, without a hint of nostalgia or irony. Very refreshing.

On May.25.2010 at 12:14 PM

MSGDS’s comment is:

Well done, I prefer the corporate version.

On May.25.2010 at 01:01 PM

aaron’s comment is:

+3 Rafe. I agree that the old logo was too crowded with elements, but I don’t understand how people can see no wrong with this. For such a place, this logo is way too clean, and it seems less of a place for fun and excitement and more of a quaint little cozy house.
Does anyone else read “Old fashioned cookie recipe” from the corporate logo with the background?

On May.25.2010 at 01:08 PM

rynot’s comment is:

nice concept, not sold on the settled-upon letterforms to fill the blades though…

On May.25.2010 at 03:23 PM

rynot’s comment is:

dutch butter cookies.

On May.25.2010 at 03:44 PM

Olo’s comment is:

Even though it’s well executed, The cross symbol is still very dangerous to play with because of it’s history and I think, with the red and silver/white colors, it doesn’t play very well at all.

On May.25.2010 at 05:49 PM

Brian Son’s comment is:

Wow, gorgeous illustrations.

On May.25.2010 at 06:36 PM

Tez’s comment is:

Veeeerrrry Nice! Ticks all the boxes!

On May.25.2010 at 06:50 PM

Mondayne’s comment is:

Why would they add drop shadows/bevels/anything else?
Because they CANCAN!

Sorry, I had to say it.

On May.25.2010 at 09:16 PM

da5id’s comment is:

For an interesting alternate point of view, check out THESE versions for the Moulin Rogue movie (unused) done by font/logo guru Leslie Cabarga with Mike Salisbury Communications (they also designed the logos for Jurassic Park and The Shadow, and many more).

On May.25.2010 at 09:52 PM

Nudge’s comment is:

Very cool. Love it.

On May.26.2010 at 12:19 AM

Katie’s comment is:

Corporate logo: Moulin Rouge brand cookies, handmade in the New England tradition.

Am I the only one that thinks this is awful? The corporate logo looks like it belongs on a bag of mid-end cookies, and the licensing logo looks would be at home in the corner of the free stationary in every room at the Moulin Rouge Hotel and Casino.

None of it is titillating or exciting or daring. Is this really what the Moulin Rouge has become or where it wants to go? Bland and safe? I’m not interested.

On May.26.2010 at 12:57 AM

Katie’s comment is:

Reading over the comments, I’m glad to see that other people also noticed that the corporate logo belongs on cookies. If your nightclub’s logo screams cookies-from-New-England to one person (i.e. me), then maybe its just a personal association, but if a significant amount of the people in one comments section on one blog say the same thing, then your logo has a problem. We won’t be the only ones who notice.

On May.26.2010 at 01:03 AM

TBD Design’s comment is:

Nice solution. Definitely think it has some great print design applications. And as someone has already mentioned, the promotional collateral application is great.

On May.26.2010 at 02:37 AM

Cristi Rus’s comment is:

I am curious if the client imposed to have 2 identities.
In my opinion the Licensing version is far superior to the other one.
Might be the stubbornness of the client?

On May.26.2010 at 08:28 AM

Paul Galbraith’s comment is:

Both are well executed especially the corporate version, though the letterforms do feel a little uncomfortable in places. Overall much cleaner than the previous version, but quite a departure from the emotive lips.

On May.26.2010 at 08:35 AM

Michael McWatters’s comment is:

The old design had character, style, and a quirky out-of-datedness that was, in my opinion, in alignment with the actual brand. The new corporate logo looks like a dutch bakery, while the licensing logo is technically very nice and distinct, but without the quirks of the original.

We are throwing out perfectly good identities day after day in pursuit of ‘sameness.’ Everyone wants to be like everyone else. It’s kind of a shame.

On May.26.2010 at 08:45 AM

Ian Purvines’s comment is:

Many thanks for the cool post. 50 Cent is still on top and any person who has an issue with that can take it up with me!

On May.26.2010 at 09:01 AM

Zanda’s comment is:

An unnecessary schizophrenic revolution instead of a quiet evolution that could have done the job

On May.26.2010 at 10:38 AM

Dave’s comment is:

Pretty, hideous.

On May.26.2010 at 11:56 AM

obse.’s comment is:

Bleh.
Hate the R. And the G.

And OMG that “texture” behind the typographic windmill.

I only like the ribbon around the iconic windmill. And that’s pretty much it.
I don’t think this is a good brand.

On May.26.2010 at 01:25 PM

Ryan’s comment is:

“Mouge Roulin” - that’s pretty awful.

On May.26.2010 at 10:19 PM

Web traffic’s comment is:

Hmmz… I prefer the corporate version better. It is cleaner and clearer.

On May.27.2010 at 02:37 AM

Katerina’s comment is:

Love the illustrations and think they express totally what Moulin Rouge stands for and definitely pay homage to its heritage.

I can’t see how the new logos fit within this style. Certainly they are a break with the past rather than paying homage to it.

Prefer corporate logo for the flair of the ‘moulin’ and feminine colour.

On the licensing logo, even though I like the windmill created out of the words, think it’s far too technical, and without any female charm to it.

Agree registration mark is massive, but would imagine this might have been a request from the client ;)

On May.27.2010 at 03:22 AM

Amicus’s comment is:

D_Rek is absolutely on the Mark. It looks like an Iron Cross.

I don’t hate it, visually, but nothing in this logo really says French, or Cabaret or Risqué to me at all.

On May.28.2010 at 12:12 AM

Tobias Goth’s comment is:

There is much more a Cancan feel to the Licensing version of the logo but I still prefer the corporate one because of the color scheme and the beautifully crafted windmill mark.

On May.28.2010 at 03:37 AM

Nunnsey’s comment is:

Had NO idea why the logo was in a cross till I saw the corporate version. Old version is way more suitable for the idea of cabaret, and maybe they needed to change direction, but I still hate the new one.

On May.28.2010 at 07:17 PM

mike_bat’s comment is:

Both the marks are awful - I’m truly amazed by the poll results - yes, the type as a windmill is an OK reference to the architecture, but both marks lack ANY reference to the ‘soul’ of
the MR - the energy, the fun, the frivolity - all missing…

On May.29.2010 at 09:51 PM

em’s comment is:

i quite like the cheekiness in the old logo, it would have been nice to work with that.

On May.31.2010 at 01:57 AM

Hollis Ervin’s comment is:

Without remarking on the redesign in general, why have they all needed to specify Paris? I mean, I’m sure the client requested it, but isn’t a lot of the charm of the place the fact that there is only the one? It’s the most famous club in France, but having the city name in there makes it feel like the Hard Rock Café.

On Jun.02.2010 at 11:26 AM

fromage au lait cru wikip�dia’s comment is:

Nice the most effective that thread regarding cheese

On Jun.06.2010 at 02:17 PM

Susan Tate’s comment is:

It is Disney’fied and commercialized - looks like it should be the Moulin Rouge Hotel In Vegas. ® bigger than Paris? Can’t even speak to that! And really — if you need TWO logos? To me a logo should consistently serve both needs — otherwise one cannibalizes the equity of the other. It’s not that they are bad as logos in general — they just don’t speak effectively to the mood, historic personality and emotion of the brand. And two? More is not more. End summary — yes corporate logo - Dutch Butter Cookies and licensing logo - Vegas, baby!

On Aug.05.2010 at 10:04 PM