Skip to content

Gone With The Wind original daybill.

HONDOHONDO
edited June 2015 in Dating the Australian Daybill & One Sheet

I recently go up close and personal to a framed original daybill poster of Gone With The Wind for sale and it looked fantastic.It was marked that is was originally from the Sydney St. James Theatre and on speaking to the owner and inquiring about it I was told the sale it came from was in the 1970's but no specific date was known.I have been curious for years to know the exact date the Sydney St. James had their sale. Does anyone have an article or at least a date on when it took place?

The other thing I would like to mention is that on close examination I noticed the Not Suitable For Children classification which is white writing on red within a red background circle which covers the green & black dress of the Vivien Leigh image. If one looks closer and I did, you can notice a very small yellow rim all around and under the circle but ever so small and it is the same colour yellow as the background yellow  featured throughout the daybill. I am in no way suggesting anything is amiss with this poster but am just curious as I am thinking the circle was originally yellow and for whatever reason it was decided to paint over it but a 100% completion didn't happen with the process.I don't think it would have been anything to do with the censorship rating as the For General Exhibition rating would have been within in a triangle unless the triangle was featured on the yellow background then completely painted over.

image

image

Not the actual framed poster in question I viewed.


Hondo







«1

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    It's probably just a registration issue during the litho process.  I have lots of daybills with background colours poking out here and there...
  • DavidDavid
    Are you 100% sure it was an original?

    The St James closed with “Gone With The Wind” on 20 March 1971 and was demolished to make way for a 26 storey office block. Seems to me they'd be handing out/selling commemorative posters as part of the occassion.
  • HONDOHONDO
    David said:
    Are you 100% sure it was an original?

    The St James closed with “Gone With The Wind” on 20 March 1971 and was demolished to make way for a 26 storey office block. Seems to me they'd be handing out/selling commemorative posters as part of the occasion.


    This guy is the real deal. Has posters stored in the U.K. operates in N.S.W. and  has been around for years. He once purchased  United Artists stock from their warehouse.He has a nice long daybill of Cardina Richelieu  with a theatre coming attraction on the top, Maria Walewska long daybill which is a  magnificent Simmons designed poster, The  Story Of Vernon And Irene Castle long daybill and The Blob among others framed for sale but none of them are cheap,


    Hondo

  • DavidDavid
    I am not suggesting he is not the real deal, but a stack of original other titles don't make the poster an original

    Here's another GWTW poster that was purchased by a guy who got it from another guy who was given it by another guy who gave it to him about 40 years... in Sydney, and he had four of them.

    Has the little 'yellow' border round the red censors circle... and has a rather unfortunate type of printing when looked at up close.

    imageimage


  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    edited June 2015
    Hmmm I don't know what to make of it David.  There was another on eBay pasted to a board some time ago that had a similar printing pattern.  It threw me off and made me suspicious.  The Heritage copy that sold last year seems to have the same print pattern.  Are we sure it is not just part of the Hackett photographic printing process?

    image
  • DavidDavid
    edited June 2015
    Don't know Chris, is that HA one the real deal? Do we know for certain?

    Why does that one (you posted) look different from this one also sold by HA:

    image

    Anything is possible.

    I am relating a story that has it's origins in the same city at the same time (about 40 years ago) when the same movie theatre (was closing) which, as part of it's 'celebrations of closing' showed as its final good-bye the movie Gone With The Wind which by chance had just finished celebrating 30 years since it's release in Australia.

    I don't know much about printing back in 1940 but it looks remarkably like Dot Matix printing, commercial printers were in use by the 1970s, and it also looks a lot like the printing found here:  http://www.caldwellgallery.com/original_copies.html


  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    I know members here have GWTW posters that they believe to be authentic, 1st release long daybills.  What does the printing pattern look like on those up close?  From what I can find - albeit quickly - dot matrix was first introduced around 1968
  • HONDOHONDO

    I have it seems stirred up a hornet's nest here. Didn't mean to though .I just remembered the seller I was talking to  said  he had obtained  a few from the St. James sale in the 1970's. 


    Hondo

  • DavidDavid
    HONDO said:

    I have it seems stirred up a hornet's nest here. Didn't mean to though .I just remembered the seller I was talking to  said  he had obtained  a few from the St. James sale in the 1970's. 

    Nahh, not a hornet's nest, but we all want to be 100% certain about all posters we (or others) buy, trade or simply lust after, whether it is a Gone With The Wind, King Kong or even that hard to find Danny Kaye. 
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    Ninotchka - also from 1939 and also by Hackett seems to have the same photographic print pattern going on:

    image
  • HONDOHONDO
    edited June 2015
    David said:
    HONDO said:

    I have it seems stirred up a hornet's nest here. Didn't mean to though .I just remembered the seller I was talking to  said  he had obtained  a few from the St. James sale in the 1970's. 

    Nahh, not a hornet's nest, but we all want to be 100% certain about all posters we (or others) buy, trade or simply lust after, whether it is a Gone With The Wind, King Kong or even that hard to find Danny Kaye. 


    I was just joking I am here to help in any way to authenticate if posters are what they claim to be in every respect as that's what I  do.       

                                                                                                                                                                                      There are some real problems with the Australian Jungle Jim series daybills that need to be tidied up which I intend to do somewhere in the future. Been putting it off for ages.


    Hondo

  • RickRick
    Mine has the little yellow bit around the censor circle.
  • DavidDavid
    Rick said:
    Mine has the little yellow bit around the censor circle.
    Does it have the "dot matrix" style print?
  • JohnJohn

    I think we need to be very careful when expressing opinions about Australian posters. Its great when the theories are 100% accurate but some of the unproven theories obviously leave doubt about the origins of Australian posters and that is a big concern to me.

    I have around 40 original long daybills printed by Hackett Offset, the printer of the GWTW daybill. I have had a very close look at them. Hackett appeared to print in two different styles. One style was using the pure hand litho process, the other part photo litho blending with hand litho. When I get a chance I will post some photos that will shed more light on all of this.

    https://www.moviemem.com
  • theartofmovieposterstheartofmovieposters
    John said:

    I think we need to be very careful when expressing opinions about Australian posters. Its great when the theories are 100% accurate but some of the unproven theories obviously leave doubt about the origins of Australian posters and that is a big concern to me.



    Yep, definitely this...

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]
    I agree with your sentiments John but I certainly see no harm in open discussion/theorizing so long as no one is making any concrete statements without substantial facts
  • HumphreyBogartHumphreyBogart
    CSM said:
    It's probably just a registration issue during the litho process.  I have lots of daybills with background colours poking out here and there...
    This is 100% true and is the case with the yellow around the rating circle here.
  • HumphreyBogartHumphreyBogart
    David said:
    Are you 100% sure it was an original?

    The St James closed with “Gone With The Wind” on 20 March 1971 and was demolished to make way for a 26 storey office block. Seems to me they'd be handing out/selling commemorative posters as part of the occassion.
    This is bullock's. Have you any proof they handed out commemorative posters then?
  • HONDOHONDO

    Just out of interest the framed daybill poster for sale that I looked at was on sale for $4,400.


    Hondo

  • HumphreyBogartHumphreyBogart
    David said:
    HONDO said:

    I have it seems stirred up a hornet's nest here. Didn't mean to though .I just remembered the seller I was talking to  said  he had obtained  a few from the St. James sale in the 1970's. 

    Nahh, not a hornet's nest, but we all want to be 100% certain about all posters we (or others) buy, trade or simply lust after, whether it is a Gone With The Wind, King Kong or even that hard to find Danny Kaye. 
    Yes we want to be 100% certain with every poster we collect. But making absurd comments as "Was it original" is the one from HA "the real deal". This type of speculation without zero proof is banana's and is no good for the hobby. Sorry David but if you wanna start speculating like this, go do your home work then come foward and then let's have it..
  • HumphreyBogartHumphreyBogart
    John said:

    I think we need to be very careful when expressing opinions about Australian posters. Its great when the theories are 100% accurate but some of the unproven theories obviously leave doubt about the origins of Australian posters and that is a big concern to me.

    I have around 40 original long daybills printed by Hackett Offset, the printer of the GWTW daybill. I have had a very close look at them. Hackett appeared to print in two different styles. One style was using the pure hand litho process, the other part photo litho blending with hand litho. When I get a chance I will post some photos that will shed more light on all of this.

    100% Agree with this!
  • DavidDavid
    HumphreyBogart said:

    This is bullock's. Have you any proof they handed out commemorative posters then?
    Yes we want to be 100% certain with every poster we collect. But making absurd comments as "Was it original" is the one from HA "the real deal". This type of speculation without zero proof is banana's and is no good for the hobby. Sorry David but if you wanna start speculating like this, go do your home work then come foward and then let's have it..


    Reg I am happy to do my homework, I even regularly try to contribute to the homework pool along with others, but it seems to me you are only happy to accept the results only if it suits you.

    I have seen miss-dated dated posters just like you, and like you I see sellers trying to put one over people too with BS dates too so I don't give a flying fig if you (or others) don't like me throwing down a question about a poster if I have a question about it. Telling me to shut up and go away will get you no where, you should know that by now. 

    This is a forum for an exchange of ideas and theories, a place to disseminate information to improve the lot of collectors in general. Sure, I may ask stupid questions, probably because I am just not that smart, but I'll keep asking them if it gets people talking to help solidify the information. There are people with a lot of knowledge but there is some with knowledge that is also based on flawed facts that is simply regurgitated as the truth because no one dares question it.

    From the day this forum started 'Dating the...' section has unearthed many a poster that has been miss-dated for many years by supposed experts with years and years of expertise, buggered if I am going to roll over and accept carte blanche what they say just because they say it. And sure you may think this sort of theorising is bad for the hobby but this is a member's only area so hopefully members much smarter than me will discuss these things out for the betterment of the hobby. 

    I'm married, I've learned to not mind being wrong.
  • JohnJohn
    edited June 2015

    I have had a look at some of the articles on the internet about dot matrix posters. The suggestion seems to be that if a 1930s or 40s poster has a dot matrix print then it must be a fake or a repro.

    A GWTW daybill has something that looks like a dot pattern through the photographic image. As a result, its authenticity has been questioned. Chris posted a photo of the Hackett printed Ninotchka which also has the dots through the photographic image.

    As I said, I have about 40 Hackett printed daybills. Some are hand lithos and others are photo lithos - different styles of printing for different films. I don't think anyone else has that sort of sampling to examine up close. I looked at all the photo lithos and they all have the same dot pattern as GWTW as part of the poster.

    What does that mean? Well, surely that must indicate that they are either all original or all reprints. I have absolutely no doubts that the long daybills I have examined are original so draw your own conclusions about GWTW and Ninotchka.

    image


    https://www.moviemem.com
  • DavidDavid
    John said:

     draw your own conclusions about GWTW and Ninotchka.

    What was your conclusion?
  • JohnJohn

    I haven't seen the daybill that was stuck to board so I can't comment on that but the theory about the dot pattern being an issue does not wash.

    Now, what are your thoughts?

    https://www.moviemem.com
  • DavidDavid
    edited June 2015
    Fence sitter. ;)

    Based on the evidence presented (other posters) there definitely seems to be a printing style that was done back in the day that although is like dot matrix printing so I would agree there is no reason to suspect a Gone With the Wind Poster done at that time by this printer is not the real deal.

    Unfortunately HA's photographic style seems to ensure we don't have absolute comparative proof the dot print style was used on all the GWTW posters, hopefully others here will give us a close up of their own.

    The story about the St. James theatre sale leaves me a little perplexed - I find it a remarkable co-incidence that the final movie shown at the theatre was Gone With the Wind and the one poster that has surfaced from that 'theatre closure' from that 'sale' is at least five GWTW posters. On that basis if a GWTW poster was offered to me at top dollar and the only provenance was the St James, I would not buy it. Now, would you?
  • JohnJohn

    Not fence sitting at all.  I can only comment on the posters I have actually seen. Hackett photo lithos have a definite dot printing style. That is a fact. My understanding is that the daybill that was sold at Heritage is consistent with other Hackett posters so no reason to be concerned about it.

    My concern is that when doubt is cast over one poster it is cast over them all.

    https://www.moviemem.com
  • HONDOHONDO


    All This, And Hackett Too.



    image

    Hondo





  • DavidDavid
    edited June 2015
    John said:

     My understanding is that the daybill that was sold at Heritage is consistent with other Hackett posters so no reason to be concerned about it.

    My concern is that when doubt is cast over one poster it is cast over them all.


    Of the four sold/unsold by HA only one I can absolutely see as being of the dot print style, the others one cannot be seen with such detail - more to do with the fact the poster cannot be blown up any more without distortion.. 


    Which is why we await others to hopefully present their copies.

    Of course doubt may result about others and perhaps that is unfortunate but is that a reason to never ask a question?
  • JohnJohn
    edited June 2015
    HONDO said:


    All This, And Hackett Too.



    image

    Hondo



    That is one of the hand lithos. As I said they used two separate printing processes - for some films hand lithos and for others photo lithos,.



    https://www.moviemem.com
Sign In or Register to comment.






Logo

For movie poster collectors who know...

@ 2025 Vintage Movie Posters Forum, All rights reserved.

Contact us

info@vintagemoviepostersforum.com

Get In Touch

facebook

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2026