I did see I Confess come up with writing on back. I also bought this poster from small auction house in Sydney late last year. Hell of a nice poster, and I suspect it was displayed locally. They often list them on Aussie press sheets as 22 x 28 coloured cards. Possibly a hire arrangement, not sure.
Thanks Matt for the nice and rare The Frightened Man ( 1952 ) daybill image. Ii is certainly new to me. One can certainly see where the artwork was copied from looking at the below U.K. press book image..
Yes the This Island, Earth card may have been displayed in Australia, but without any Australian censorship stamp appearing on it, we will never know for sure.
As no answers were forthcoming I will now reveal that the two This Island Earth 22 x 28 half sheets, styles A and B, were printed with a comma immediately following the word Island.
As seen above on the U,S. accessories listings every other poster was printed without a comma.
Lobby cards have the comma. Grammar is organic, and US is different to Brit / UK etc. I would say the comma is correct grammar, but may have been deleted with the title spread over two lines. The forum's resident journo would know best.
Yes the lobby cards which were not pictured on the accessories listing also have the commas printed on them as seen on the following title card. I was only pointing out the differences in the presentation, and not thinking too much about which usage was correct.
Interestingly the following U.S.A. advance poster with the title printed on one line is minus a comma.
Very little Aussie material around for TIE. The half sheet was auctioned with other 1950s sci-fi posters, including various daybills. I would love to confirm that it was used here, but at the same time, a censor stamp would detract from the image (imo). About the only thing missing is a robot. Great artwork, typical of the era.
The following information has been edited from an earlier forum thread titled Aussie 22 x 28s? The details are all my comments.
The only known Australian film distributors that I have confirmed imported and distributed U.S.A. 22 x 28 half sheets, and the known period of time this occurred, are as follows.
Paramount Pictures known usage in Australia from 1941 to very late 1960s. MGM usage 1950s and 1960s. United Artists usage late 1960s to early 1980s.
The Half-Sheet was discontinued in the early 1980's.
During the period from 1941 to the early 1980s the cards were described on Australian press sheets under various descriptions.
22 X 28 cards ( United Artists ) 22 X 28's ( United Artists ) 22 x 28 coloured cards ( MGM ) 22 x 28 lobby cards ( Paramount ) 22 x 28 photos ( Paramount ) 22 x 28 stills( Paramount )
Some additional thoughts have come to mind. We will never know the number of imported 22 x 28 cards imported into Australia due to two reasons.
Firstly the number of Australian press sheets that detail this information are scarce in number and very difficult to find.
Secondly it would appear that the majority of the 22 x 28 cards would have met the same fate of the commonly used U.S.A. 11 x 14 lobby cards when they were displayed in Australia, with very few having any censorship rating snipes attached to them.
Did Columbia, Universal, Warner Brothers and 20th Century Fox ever import any of their U.S A. 22 x 28 cards into Australian for use here, one has to wonder?
It would now appear that Universal ( Universal-international ), in at least the 1940's through to the 1960's also imported U.S. 22 x 28 half sheets into Australia. Australian press sheets For Criss Cross ( 1949 ) and The Black Shield Of Falworth ( 1954 ) advertise as having 22 x 28 coloured enlargements, and Madame X ( 1966 ) list as having 22 x 28 coloured photographs available.. Unfortunately no card example has been located by me that has an Australian censorship stamp or snip applied to a card.
Here's a 22x28 of Libeled Lady (1936) I sent to Bruce to auction a couple of years back. Note that it has been overprinted with a small correction in the title "Libeled Lady was changed to Libelled Lady". I purchased this poster from a dealer in Sydney in the late 80s and I think he purchased it locally. It was with about 7 other 22x28s that had been under linoleum so were a little stained. Makes me think it was used locally on first release.
Bruce's description.
Important Added Info:Note that there is something very unusual about this poster. It was found in New Zealand, and in England, Australia, and New Zealand, the movie was released as "Libelled Lady", with a second "l" in "Libeled", because that is how that word is spelled there. So the distributor in New Zealand had that title stenciled over the original title area with red and yellow paint. That kind of paint can't be easily removed from a poster, and even if it can be, the area underneath it is almost surely badly stained. Since the new stenciled title is spelled almost the same as the original, the person who had this very rare half-sheet restored had the restorer simply leave the stenciled title alone. One could have the original title painted over the stenciled title, but that seems silly to us, but of course, it will be the choice of the new owner of this poster!
FYI - The other titles under the Lino were: Everybody Sing 1938 Gorgeous Hussy 1936 Mannequin 1938 Rosalie 1937 Smilin' Through r1941 Suzy 1936 Maytime 1937 San Francisco 1936
It is good to know that Warner Bros. and RKO Radio also imported 22 x 28 cards into Australia in the 1930's as well. I actually located yesterday a Warner Bros. Juke Girl ( 1942 ) Australian 1940's press sheet listing 22 x 28 fully colored photos being available. Interestingly on the very limited RKO Australian press sheets located there is no mention of 22 x 28 cards found at all.
The alteration to the Libeled Lady name on the 22 x 28 card I believe would have taken place in Australia by MGM before sending over to New Zealand. All Australian press and newspaper advertising had the spelling altered to Libelled Lady. It would be interesting to sight an Australian poster.
Something has just registered with me about Australian name change alterations, Many decades ago I remember sighting a The Last Wagon ( 1956 ) U.S.A. lobby card with a very obvious snipe covering over The Last Wagon with The Last Waggon spelling.
Juke Girl (1942 ) Warner Bros. Australian press sheet. listing 22in. x 28in. fully colored photos ( sets of 2 )
I have just noticed the two spelling versions for the Photos product. The Australian spelling of coloured for the 11in, x 14in. cards, then followed by the U.S, spelling of colored for the 22in. x 28in. cards,
I have included the above beautiful Australian daybill image for anyone that may not have seen it previously. It is certainly worth admiring again even if one has seen it before.
The above listed 22in. x 28in. photos are advertised as being available in sets of two. My question is were U.S.A. half sheets ( 22 x 28 ) usually printed in two versions, being styles one and two? If this was the case this would certainly explain the sets of two.
Extracted from a 1930's Australian press book accessories page a notation that 40 x 30 photographic enlargements, attractively framed and treated were available to hire.
This is the first time I have noticed this size poster advertised for usage in Australia. Looking extensively at U.S. material on 40 x 30 posters I haven'r found any mention of this size poster ever being framed and treated ( whatever that means ).
Any thoughts that these posters are U.S,. 40 x 30 produced with film scenes and credits appearing on them?
Many years ago in a poster sale catalogue there were advertised large size ( measurements unknown ) film star portraits included. Also many decades ago in the foyer of a N.S.W. south coast cinema many Golden Years Of Hollywood movie stars portraits were displayed on the walls inside. Finally the owner of an antique centre once informed me that he had at his home similar sounding large portraits of classic movie stars.He was very hesitant to fill me in with any detais though. I am uncertain if the previous mentioned posters were photographic or paintings.
Again Bruce any thoughts. along with any other members comments, would be most welcome?
This below daybill had been discussed previously. My updated thoughts on whether the poster is an original first release printing or a second printing shortly.
In the meantime I would like to hear any comments from anyone regarding their thoughts.
I am going to soon present a case in favour of the known Devil Girl From Mars Australian daybill as having been originally printed for the first release in Australia.
My first thought was that most duotones are from second printings or re-issues, but then I was reminded about this Daleks poster which is a first printing. Two colour printing is obviously cheaper and would be more suited for lower budget releases and smaller distribution companies. Devil Girl was released on double bills as the second feature from what I can see in old newspaper ads.
In am going to present here all my reasons why I believe that the following Australian daybill of Devil Girl From Mars ( 1954 ) was originally printed for the 1955 first release in Australia.
My original thinking was that the poster was an early second printing. I have now ruled that out as happening for the following reasons.
The film was a London Films production that was released in Sydney 25 / 8 / 1955. London Films founder Alexander Korda died 23 / 1 / 1956, and shortly after that the film distributing arm folded up. Next up London films were distributed in Australia by Universal and in the period the film was released the daybill posters were all printed by F. Cunninghame. who had taken over from W.E. Smith as the preferred printer in the previously not too distant period of time.
In searching through all my London Films daybill images that I have collected over many years, something certainly stands out to me. I located three only London Films F. Cunninghame printed daybills that were produced in reddish brown colouring. The key factor here I believe is that the three daybills of Devil Girl From Mass, Eight O'clock Walk and Devil On Horseback were all produced for films released in Sydney between 25 / 8 /1955 and 21 / 10 / 1955, This being only just a little under two months apart. What are the chances then that the three posters are first release printings, and I am even wondering if they were all perhaps printed at the same time as each other?
A second printing daybill poster of Devil On Horseback, along with also a The Green Scarf example shows what the quality of second printing versions of London Films usually looked like.
Taking all this into consideration then, I therefore believe then that the Devil Girl From Mars. along with the Eight O'Clock Walk and Devil On Horseback daybills would surely have to be original produced posters. Would you agree?
My first thought was that most duotones are from second printings or re-issues, but then I was reminded about this Daleks poster which is a first printing. Two colour printing is obviously cheaper and would be more suited for lower budget releases and smaller distribution companies. Devil Girl was released on double bills as the second feature from what I can see in old newspaper ads.
A good example to highlight.
Another example is for the Lord Of The Flies from 1963. .
The yellow version certainly seems to be a better printed version, It's annoying that there are small differences that don't seem to make much sense as to why they'd be changed. Might have been a version they did for the office Christmas party that year - spot the difference!
Probably should have said 4 colour vs 3, as there is black around title. Text is different - look at the 2 in 2001. The one sheet is very scarce, and the only copies I've seen have yellow and match daybill on left. I suspect that cheaper version is a RR, but that is only my personal opinion
My thoughts on the printing order of the two daybills to follow, but why stop there with two versions when there are three in total that are similar in design.
( Wil )
The above daybill image has just been sent to me by Wil . He pointed out the different colouring of the rocket on this version compared to the other yellow version.
All posters were printed by Robert Burton and have some small differences as mentioned by Peter and Wil. One most noticeable difference appears in the For General Exhibition censorship triangle presentations, two have a blue background colour, while the other has a white shading background. Any differences unfortunately don't provide any clues in helping us solve this query.
This rare original Australian one sheet printed with a different arranged, though similar design, provides me with the closest explanation that I can suggest may provide an answer.The two yellow versions would appear to be the slightly higher in quality daybill versions. Seeing that the the one sheet also has nice artwork, and also the same censorship colour presentation as the yellow daybills, my thoughts regarding the three daybill designs are as follows.
The above two daybill versions and the one sheet I believe are strong candidates for likely having been printed for the original 1968 Australian first release.
This daybill was possibly printed as a later follow up version, sometime before November 1971 when this Australian censorship classification changed to the following presentation. To the best of my knowledge 2001 wasn't re-releaed in Australia pre November 1971.
Finally you may want to have a think about the following rare Australian one sheet as well, and have a think about when it would have tied in with Australian screenings.
Comments
Yes the This Island, Earth card may have been displayed in Australia, but without any Australian censorship stamp appearing on it, we will never know for sure.
What is a little different about this poster. Any idea?
As no answers were forthcoming I will now reveal that the two This Island Earth 22 x 28 half sheets, styles A and B, were printed with a comma immediately following the word Island.
As seen above on the U,S. accessories listings every other poster was printed without a comma.
Interestingly the following U.S.A. advance poster with the title printed on one line is minus a comma.
The following information has been edited from an earlier forum thread titled Aussie 22 x 28s? The details are all my comments.
The only known Australian film distributors that I have confirmed imported and distributed U.S.A. 22 x 28 half sheets, and the known period of time this occurred, are as follows.
Paramount Pictures known usage in Australia from 1941 to very late 1960s.
MGM usage 1950s and 1960s.
United Artists usage late 1960s to early 1980s.
The Half-Sheet was discontinued in the early 1980's.
During the period from 1941 to the early 1980s the cards were described on Australian press sheets under various descriptions.
22 X 28 cards ( United Artists )
22 X 28's ( United Artists )
22 x 28 coloured cards ( MGM )
22 x 28 lobby cards ( Paramount )
22 x 28 photos ( Paramount )
22 x 28 stills( Paramount )
Some additional thoughts have come to mind. We will never know the number of imported 22 x 28 cards imported into Australia due to two reasons.
Firstly the number of Australian press sheets that detail this information are scarce in number and very difficult to find.Secondly it would appear that the majority of the 22 x 28 cards would have met the same fate of the commonly used U.S.A. 11 x 14 lobby cards when they were displayed in Australia, with very few having any censorship rating snipes attached to them.
Did Columbia, Universal, Warner Brothers and 20th Century Fox ever import any of their U.S A. 22 x 28 cards into Australian for use here, one has to wonder?
It would now appear that Universal ( Universal-international ), in at least the 1940's through to the 1960's also imported U.S. 22 x 28 half sheets into Australia. Australian press sheets For Criss Cross ( 1949 ) and The Black Shield Of Falworth ( 1954 ) advertise as having 22 x 28 coloured enlargements, and Madame X ( 1966 ) list as having 22 x 28 coloured photographs available.. Unfortunately no card example has been located by me that has an Australian censorship stamp or snip applied to a card.
Bruce's description.
Important Added Info: Note that there is something very unusual about this poster. It was found in New Zealand, and in England, Australia, and New Zealand, the movie was released as "Libelled Lady", with a second "l" in "Libeled", because that is how that word is spelled there. So the distributor in New Zealand had that title stenciled over the original title area with red and yellow paint. That kind of paint can't be easily removed from a poster, and even if it can be, the area underneath it is almost surely badly stained. Since the new stenciled title is spelled almost the same as the original, the person who had this very rare half-sheet restored had the restorer simply leave the stenciled title alone. One could have the original title painted over the stenciled title, but that seems silly to us, but of course, it will be the choice of the new owner of this poster!
FYI - The other titles under the Lino were:
Everybody Sing 1938
Gorgeous Hussy 1936
Mannequin 1938
Rosalie 1937
Smilin' Through r1941
Suzy 1936
Maytime 1937
San Francisco 1936
Peter
25th July, 1934
15th January, 1936
Peter
It is good to know that Warner Bros. and RKO Radio also imported 22 x 28 cards into Australia in the 1930's as well. I actually located yesterday a Warner Bros. Juke Girl ( 1942 ) Australian 1940's press sheet listing 22 x 28 fully colored photos being available. Interestingly on the very limited RKO Australian press sheets located there is no mention of 22 x 28 cards found at all.
The alteration to the Libeled Lady name on the 22 x 28 card I believe would have taken place in Australia by MGM before sending over to New Zealand. All Australian press and newspaper advertising had the spelling altered to Libelled Lady. It would be interesting to sight an Australian poster.
Something has just registered with me about Australian name change alterations, Many decades ago I remember sighting a The Last Wagon ( 1956 ) U.S.A. lobby card with a very obvious snipe covering over The Last Wagon with The Last Waggon spelling.
Juke Girl (1942 ) Warner Bros. Australian press sheet. listing 22in. x 28in. fully colored photos ( sets of 2 )
I have just noticed the two spelling versions for the Photos product. The Australian spelling of coloured for the 11in, x 14in. cards, then followed by the U.S, spelling of colored for the 22in. x 28in. cards,
I have included the above beautiful Australian daybill image for anyone that may not have seen it previously. It is certainly worth admiring again even if one has seen it before.
A question for Bruce.
The above listed 22in. x 28in. photos are advertised as being available in sets of two. My question is were U.S.A. half sheets ( 22 x 28 ) usually printed in two versions, being styles one and two? If this was the case this would certainly explain the sets of two.
Extracted from a 1930's Australian press book accessories page a notation that 40 x 30 photographic enlargements, attractively framed and treated were available to hire.
This is the first time I have noticed this size poster advertised for usage in Australia. Looking extensively at U.S. material on 40 x 30 posters I haven'r found any mention of this size poster ever being framed and treated ( whatever that means ).
Any thoughts that these posters are U.S,. 40 x 30 produced with film scenes and credits appearing on them?
Many years ago in a poster sale catalogue there were advertised large size ( measurements unknown ) film star portraits included. Also many decades ago in the foyer of a N.S.W. south coast cinema many Golden Years Of Hollywood movie stars portraits were displayed on the walls inside. Finally the owner of an antique centre once informed me that he had at his home similar sounding large portraits of classic movie stars.He was very hesitant to fill me in with any detais though. I am uncertain if the previous mentioned posters were photographic or paintings.
Again Bruce any thoughts. along with any other members comments, would be most welcome?
In the meantime I would like to hear any comments from anyone regarding their thoughts.
Peter
My original thinking was that the poster was an early second printing. I have now ruled that out as happening for the following reasons.
The film was a London Films production that was released in Sydney 25 / 8 / 1955. London Films founder Alexander Korda died 23 / 1 / 1956, and shortly after that the film distributing arm folded up. Next up London films were distributed in Australia by Universal and in the period the film was released the daybill posters were all printed by F. Cunninghame. who had taken over from W.E. Smith as the preferred printer in the previously not too distant period of time.
In searching through all my London Films daybill images that I have collected over many years, something certainly stands out to me. I located three only London Films F. Cunninghame printed daybills that were produced in reddish brown colouring. The key factor here I believe is that the three daybills of Devil Girl From Mass, Eight O'clock Walk and Devil On Horseback were all produced for films released in Sydney between 25 / 8 /1955 and 21 / 10 / 1955, This being only just a little under two months apart. What are the chances then that the three posters are first release printings, and I am even wondering if they were all perhaps printed at the same time as each other?
A second printing daybill poster of Devil On Horseback, along with also a The Green Scarf example shows what the quality of second printing versions of London Films usually looked like.
Taking all this into consideration then, I therefore believe then that the Devil Girl From Mars. along with the Eight O'Clock Walk and Devil On Horseback daybills would surely have to be original produced posters. Would you agree?
Another example is for the Lord Of The Flies from 1963. .
This includes all posters, whether they may have been produced in full colour, limited colour versions or even duotone.
Any interest in the long term in this subject being covered?
Peter
The Clown And The Kid from 1961 is another good example of a first release and a second printing daybill.
The two 2001: A Space Odyssey ( 1968 ) daybills in question.
Peter
The one sheet is very scarce, and the only copies I've seen have yellow and match daybill on left. I suspect that cheaper version is a RR, but that is only my personal opinion
My thoughts on the printing order of the two daybills to follow, but why stop there with two versions when there are three in total that are similar in design.
The above daybill image has just been sent to me by Wil . He pointed out the different colouring of the rocket on this version compared to the other yellow version.
All posters were printed by Robert Burton and have some small differences as mentioned by Peter and Wil. One most noticeable difference appears in the For General Exhibition censorship triangle presentations, two have a blue background colour, while the other has a white shading background. Any differences unfortunately don't provide any clues in helping us solve this query.
This rare original Australian one sheet printed with a different arranged, though similar design, provides me with the closest explanation that I can suggest may provide an answer.The two yellow versions would appear to be the slightly higher in quality daybill versions. Seeing that the the one sheet also has nice artwork, and also the same censorship colour presentation as the yellow daybills, my thoughts regarding the three daybill designs are as follows.
The above two daybill versions and the one sheet I believe are strong candidates for likely having been printed for the original 1968 Australian first release.
This daybill was possibly printed as a later follow up version, sometime before November 1971 when this Australian censorship classification changed to the following presentation. To the best of my knowledge 2001 wasn't re-releaed in Australia pre November 1971.
Finally you may want to have a think about the following rare Australian one sheet as well, and have a think about when it would have tied in with Australian screenings.
,