The first card looks more photographic...is this the one you guys are saying is a RR?
Sorry I see you mention 6 cards in total, but I'm at work and only some images are coming up, so if its more obvious with the images, perhaps I should wait till I get home...
Ves I haven't downloaded the full six cards I have mentioned that I believe are the first Columbia Pictures printings from 1932. These are the cards that have the small image in a circle included, so that is why you weren't able to see them. I think it would help if I do download the six images for all to see so that will happen shortly.
These are the six lobby cards I consider to be the original 1932 Columbia Pictures uncensored cards. There is likely to be at least two others as well in this style still out there somewhere. The title card has some credits appearing on the bottom of the card which was possibly considered at the time only necessary to have these printed only on the title card.
Two cards from a second set of The Blonde Captive. The adjusted Columbia Pictures censored cards with credits along the bottom, printed between 1932 and 1934.
From a third printing, again produced between 1932 and 1934 by Columbia Pictures, with the woman also no longer topless. Notice how this card was printed in the same style as the original released six cards displayed at top of page, except in this case the images in a circle were left off and the aboriginal holding the woman on the left side has been added.
Finally this image being, I believe, a front of house card / still from either the U.K. or the U.S.A.
That's all I have in these style of images. Ten cards in all. If anyone has any other images not displayed above for The Blonde Captive please let us see them as well.
The history of this film is getting more confusing by the minute. The film supposedly opened in the U.S.A. on the 30th of December, 1931. In an old The Film Daily yearbook the film was reviewed in December, 1931 and the distributor was credited as being Imperial film distributors under the title of The Blonde Captive. This would have to mean then that the additional footage was added before the Columbia Pictures release.
HAS lifetime guarantees on every item - IS eMoviePoster.com HAS unrestored and unenhanced images - IS eMoviePoster.com HAS 100% honest condition descriptions - IS eMoviePoster.com HAS auctions where the winner is the higher of two real bidders - IS eMoviePoster.com HAS up to SIXTEEN weeks of "Pay and Hold" to save a fortune on shipping - IS eMoviePoster.com HAS real customer service before, during and after EVERY auction, and answers all questions - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS 25% or 26% "buyers premiums" of any kind (but especially the dreadful "$29 or $49 minimum" ones) - NOT eMoviePoster.com HAS "reserves or starts over $1 - NOT eMoviePoster.com HAS hidden bidder IDs - NOT eMoviePoster.com HAS "nosebleed" shipping charges - NOT eMoviePoster.com HAS inadequate packaging - NOT eMoviePoster.com HAS no customer service to speak of, before, during and after any auction, and answers almost no questions - NOT eMoviePoster.com
Bruce had mentioned earlier on this thread he hadn't seen a poster with Columbia Pictures printed on a poster of The Blonde Captive, so we have now have one in the form of this window card.
I believe I can add some insight into the release of Blonde Captive as I have done extensive research in preparation for an eventual article on it's production.
The "blonde captive" footage was shot by Ralph King by December of '30. The first cut of the film, known by its then title of Found was shopped around by King in that same month.
In January '31 it was sold to an NY company that reedited it. It's copyrighted in November '31 by an Capitol Pictures by Herman Gluckman, an associate of William Pizor.
Pizor screens the film in NY with a Lowell Thomas "microphone lecture" in February '32.
Sometime in the week of April 10, 1932, Pizor sells the rights to Columbia. They're the ones who add the 'additional' footage with the Lowell Thomas at the Explorers Club as bookends.
The implementation of the Production Code in '34 doomed this as a Columbia release.
The history of this film is getting more confusing by the minute. The film supposedly opened in the U.S.A. on the 30th of December, 1931. In an old The Film Daily yearbook the film was reviewed in December, 1931 and the distributor was credited as being Imperial film distributors under the title of The Blonde Captive. This would have to mean then that the additional footage was added before the Columbia Pictures release.
Your explanation Peter doesn't explain to me why film was reviewed in December, 1931 with the title The Blonde Captive, when the "Blonde Captive'' footage according to you wasn't added until at least April 1932. In other words why was the film titled The Blonde Captive when the additional footage containing the newly shot footage wouldn't have been added to the film then, by your reconning
As I mentioned earlier I have read that the film , with an unknown title ( Found ? ), was released in a 59 minute version as deing a National Geographic style documentary by Willian Pizor's Imperial Pictures in late 1931. The final version was 73 /74 mintes in duration. Many questions unanswered in my eyes.
Lawrence, you misunderstood what I was attempting to say. The nekkid blonde captive footage was in the film by December '30 and was added by King once he had control of the negatives, so it was always a part of it when the movie was seen by the public. The extra 14 minutes was basically the Lowell Thomas/Explorers Club footage inserted for the Columbia release.
Ralph King (the cameraman and owner of a film lab) acquired the original footage as a result of the Hawaiian investors losing their nerve (and their shirts) when expenses starting to add up after it turned out they were also going to have to add sound to what was intended to be a silent film.
It's quite a story - well heeled socialites, eugenicists, and hookers, what's not to love? As all the principals were from Hawai'i it's also a question as to Blonde Captive being and Australian film or a film about Australia.
I will have more to say about The Blonde Captive soon, but before I do I am wondering Peter is you can pin down the date that the footage used at the start of the film at the Exploer's club was recorded ?
OK, it looks like the new footage was also a part of the Pizor screenings. Lowell Thomas recorded the narration in October '31, and the Explorers Club footage was in by November '31, per Film Daily.
Ah, found it. According to the Sept. 17, 1932 Harrison's Report, 2 reels were added between the March 12 review (the Pizor version) and the Columbia release at the end of May '32. So this new footage which was probably just padding added by Columbia to make it more of a feature length. Definitely not the blonde captive footage though, that was already there.
It is interesting that Lowell Thomas mentions at the Explorers' club twice that the expedition is yet to happen when in fact it had already taken place four years before in 1928. His final comment on this expedition was that they would be starting right now and after that the weird surprise. The expedition hadn't begun yet but he knew about the blonde woman ( the weird surprise ? ) in advance. I hadn't realised Lowell Thomas was a clairvoyant.
The original version ran 59 minutes then expanded by Columbia Pictures to 73 minutes. Of the extra 14 minutes only approximately four and a half minutes is from the Expolorers' Club discussion so as you say then the remaining nine and a half minutes must have been additional footage not previously used.
It is also interesting when viewing the actual film Capital Pictures Presents appears at the beginning of the film reel. This begs the question then that is the Capital Pictures poster above from the original pre Columbia screenings starting in very late 1931 and the that perhaps the two Imperial posters are from the 1935 re-release ?
Actually, the entire extra 14 minutes is probably filler since the LT footage was already in. It would be fun to try and figure out what was padded some day.
In the literature both Capital (aka Capitol) and Imperial are referenced before the sale to Columbia, with Imperial being about the 10:1 favorite. It doesn't really mater because Pizor was associated with both companies, but Imperial is clearly the dominant company when discussing the film.
More importantly, Capitol (aka Capital) Films at 723 7th Avenue doesn't appear in my research until 1942, which happily coincides with Pizor trying to get a certificate for the film to be re-released in 1942 and 1943, presumably as a part of the ethnographic film 'silver era' due to WWII creating an interest in exotic locales. Pizor, in all his corporate permutations, has a long history at 729th 7th though, most definitely during his initial distribution of the film.
If it was me, I'd rate the 2 Imperial posters as the first pre-Columbia release, while the Capitol is probably from the '40s re-release. I'd be interested in your '35 screening info, I've got a big gap between '33 and '42. Full disclosure: the 3 sheet pictured is mine.
I will have more to say shortly in detail but firstly to clear up something you had mentioned earlier. You said just above Capitol ( aka Capital ) doesn't appear in your research until 1942 yet you had mentioned previously The Blonde Captive was copyrighted in November 1931 by Capitol ( actually spelt Capital ) Pictures. This in my mind supports the theory the Capital poster was printed for the 1931 release.
Again, you misunderstood what I said (must be the accent). I said specifically that both Imperial and Capito/al are mentioned in the pre-Columbia period, but that Imperial was the primary company used in connection with the film's publicity.
What I was trying to say about the gap in my research is that I can find no information about US releases between late '33 and early '42. From '42 to the early '50s there are many screenings around the country, not a one during the gap. No trade paper articles, no newspaper advertising, nothing, that's why I'm curious about your '35 releases.
Just looking at the posters the Capitol poster has far more similarities with '40s era re-release ethnographic film posters. It would be extremely unlikely for a duo/tri-tone poster to be the first release poster in the early '30s and then full color chromoliths for re-releases.
Here are the ca. 1932 addresses for Capitol/Capital Films. Both Pizor and Gluckman were associated with the Capitol Film Exchange since the early '20s but I suspect ol' Herman branched out on his own with Capital Films. Note that both are not at the 723 7th Avenue address, while Imperial Film is at the 729 7th.
It's unlikely the duotone one sheet is original, pre-Columbia release, particularly since Capitol was at the 723 7th Avenue in '42, 10 years after their contract with Columbia expired and they were looking to distribute the film again.
Comments
Ves I haven't downloaded the full six cards I have mentioned that I believe are the first Columbia Pictures printings from 1932. These are the cards that have the small image in a circle included, so that is why you weren't able to see them. I think it would help if I do download the six images for all to see so that will happen shortly.
That's all I have in these style of images. Ten cards in all. If anyone has any other images not displayed above for The Blonde Captive please let us see them as well.
http://stylec.yuku.com/reply/119020/Latest-acquistions-April-2013#reply-119020
Western Australian Newspaper Perth, W.A. 5 Jan. 1933. Australian clipping covering 1932 U.S. release.
Is this poster a U.S. one sheet ?
HAS unrestored and unenhanced images - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS 100% honest condition descriptions - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS auctions where the winner is the higher of two real bidders - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS up to SIXTEEN weeks of "Pay and Hold" to save a fortune on shipping - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS real customer service before, during and after EVERY auction, and answers all questions - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS 25% or 26% "buyers premiums" of any kind (but especially the dreadful "$29 or $49 minimum" ones) - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS "reserves or starts over $1 - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS hidden bidder IDs - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS "nosebleed" shipping charges - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS inadequate packaging - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS no customer service to speak of, before, during and after any auction, and answers almost no questions - NOT eMoviePoster.com
Then this is the Columbia Pictures U.S.poster you were looking for.
Bruce had mentioned earlier on this thread he hadn't seen a poster with Columbia Pictures printed on a poster of The Blonde Captive, so we have now have one in the form of this window card.
The "blonde captive" footage was shot by Ralph King by December of '30. The first cut of the film, known by its then title of Found was shopped around by King in that same month.
In January '31 it was sold to an NY company that reedited it. It's copyrighted in November '31 by an Capitol Pictures by Herman Gluckman, an associate of William Pizor.
Pizor screens the film in NY with a Lowell Thomas "microphone lecture" in February '32.
Sometime in the week of April 10, 1932, Pizor sells the rights to Columbia. They're the ones who add the 'additional' footage with the Lowell Thomas at the Explorers Club as bookends.
The implementation of the Production Code in '34 doomed this as a Columbia release.
I have documentation for all this, if it matters.
--Peter
And welcome.
Your explanation Peter doesn't explain to me why film was reviewed in December, 1931 with the title The Blonde Captive, when the "Blonde Captive'' footage according to you wasn't added until at least April 1932. In other words why was the film titled The Blonde Captive when the additional footage containing the newly shot footage wouldn't have been added to the film then, by your reconning
As I mentioned earlier I have read that the film , with an unknown title ( Found ? ), was released in a 59 minute version as deing a National Geographic style documentary by Willian Pizor's Imperial Pictures in late 1931. The final version was 73 /74 mintes in duration. Many questions unanswered in my eyes.
Ralph King (the cameraman and owner of a film lab) acquired the original footage as a result of the Hawaiian investors losing their nerve (and their shirts) when expenses starting to add up after it turned out they were also going to have to add sound to what was intended to be a silent film.
It's quite a story - well heeled socialites, eugenicists, and hookers, what's not to love? As all the principals were from Hawai'i it's also a question as to Blonde Captive being and Australian film or a film about Australia.
--Peter
OK, it looks like the new footage was also a part of the Pizor screenings. Lowell Thomas recorded the narration in October '31, and the Explorers Club footage was in by November '31, per Film Daily.
The original version ran 59 minutes then expanded by Columbia Pictures to 73 minutes. Of the extra 14 minutes only approximately four and a half minutes is from the Expolorers' Club discussion so as you say then the remaining nine and a half minutes must have been additional footage not previously used.
It is also interesting when viewing the actual film Capital Pictures Presents appears at the beginning of the film reel. This begs the question then that is the Capital Pictures poster above from the original pre Columbia screenings starting in very late 1931 and the that perhaps the two Imperial posters are from the 1935 re-release ?
In the literature both Capital (aka Capitol) and Imperial are referenced before the sale to Columbia, with Imperial being about the 10:1 favorite. It doesn't really mater because Pizor was associated with both companies, but Imperial is clearly the dominant company when discussing the film.
More importantly, Capitol (aka Capital) Films at 723 7th Avenue doesn't appear in my research until 1942, which happily coincides with Pizor trying to get a certificate for the film to be re-released in 1942 and 1943, presumably as a part of the ethnographic film 'silver era' due to WWII creating an interest in exotic locales. Pizor, in all his corporate permutations, has a long history at 729th 7th though, most definitely during his initial distribution of the film.
If it was me, I'd rate the 2 Imperial posters as the first pre-Columbia release, while the Capitol is probably from the '40s re-release. I'd be interested in your '35 screening info, I've got a big gap between '33 and '42. Full disclosure: the 3 sheet pictured is mine.
I will have more to say shortly in detail but firstly to clear up something you had mentioned earlier. You said just above Capitol ( aka Capital ) doesn't appear in your research until 1942 yet you had mentioned previously The Blonde Captive was copyrighted in November 1931 by Capitol ( actually spelt Capital ) Pictures. This in my mind supports the theory the Capital poster was printed for the 1931 release.
What I was trying to say about the gap in my research is that I can find no information about US releases between late '33 and early '42. From '42 to the early '50s there are many screenings around the country, not a one during the gap. No trade paper articles, no newspaper advertising, nothing, that's why I'm curious about your '35 releases.
Just looking at the posters the Capitol poster has far more similarities with '40s era re-release ethnographic film posters. It would be extremely unlikely for a duo/tri-tone poster to be the first release poster in the early '30s and then full color chromoliths for re-releases.
It's unlikely the duotone one sheet is original, pre-Columbia release, particularly since Capitol was at the 723 7th Avenue in '42, 10 years after their contract with Columbia expired and they were looking to distribute the film again.