Forgetting about the Lion International factor I believe the missing London Films logo and any mention of London Films at all is a pivotal point in my thinking it is a re-release. All this talk about numbers is fine but let us see some proof.
I think ultimately this poster (and those others exactly like it) will leave two camps completely divided, and certainly on the face of it there is logic for both sides. What has been great(?!) is we all now know there are three (UK1SH) posters for this title whereas previously we lead to believe there was two; obviously I am saddened for those who have now discovered their original is now not so original, but try being a daybill collector, we walk that path almost daily!
I know the owner (who has followed this thread closely) has been extremely appreciative of everyone's input (and I can't emphasise that enough) as am I, it has been a remarkable journey and most have participated simply with a desire to seek the true facts rather than tear holes and criticise and for that I thank you - personally, I remain in the camp of an original release for overseas distribution. But unless anything new is uncovered I guess we are all talked out.
The owner has decided to leave the poster as is on BIDLL and after all this if it doesn't sell he will frame it and put it on his wall where it will take pride of place and come with a quite remarkable story.
Thank you for sharing and I think you summed up the situation well. I am in the camp of ''with a desire to seek the true facts''. This has always been and will continue to be my aim.
The following are facts and the evidence supporting a re-release post 1956.
British Lion product prior to 1956 was distributed in Australia along with London Films product by London Films Australasia Pty. Ltd. through Universal Pictures.
In 1956 with London Films closing down distribution operations due to the death of Alexander Korda British Lion product commenced being distributed by the newly formed Lion International Films Ltd. The product to be through 20th Century Fox. This arrangement was to be short lived as by the end of the 1950's BEF had taken over the physical distribution from 20th Century Fox.
This to my thinking as Lion International was formed in 1956 a 1949 poster wouldn't have had Lion Intrernational on it as it didn't exist until 1956 but it would have had London Films on it.
Hondo
Some new facts.
London Films through Universal had a small amount of films released in Australia in 1956 and one in March 28, 1957 when in the throughs of winding up their operations in Australia.
Lion International Films through 20th Century Fox commenced operations in Australia in 1956 with at least one release as early as July 12, 1956.
On the television print shown a few days ago on Australian television of Devil Girl From Mars which was originally released in the U.K. in May 1954 by London Films and in Australia by London Films in Sydney on the 21st of October, 1955, the opening has the London Films Logo but not the normal big ben chimes London Films logo but has the following at the commencement of the film. A LONDON FILMS ( INTERNATIONAL ) RELEASE followed by British Lion Film Corporation presents Devil Girl From Mars .The film was produced by The Danzigers Edward J. Danziger & Harry Lee Danziger for their independent production company Danziger Productions Ltd. as Gigi Productions and distributed by British Lion Film Corporation. No involvement with London Films at all in the making. On the British one & three sheets it has Distributed by London Films International on them along with the London Films logo and no mention of British Lion let alone Lion International.
The television print ( taken from original source material ) along with the two posters proves along with what I have previously stated ( to me anyhow ) that Lion International didn't come into existence until 1956 ( others say 1955 ). If as others say Lion international could have existed in other foreign countries other than Australia I sincerely doubt this as the ''A London Films ( International ) Release of a British Lion Film Corporation film'' then why doesn't it have Lion International Present on it as it is a British Lion release and not London Films. The original print of the film would have been for world wide release.
One last thing is if the Third Man had been released or rereleased before 1955/1956 it surely would have had London Films appearing on the poster somewhere.
Sorry another thing. Not one poster Before 1955 / 1956 has been shown to us apart from The Third Man being queried with Lion International on it.
He was selling it to offset the costs to adopt two children from India; he's a genuinely nice guy so I was keen to do what I could to help and spent quite a few dollars out of my own pocket advertising it to try to garner interest which we got but of course we also got a long discussion with everyone offering expert opinions.
Fortunately his savings have improved to the point that the sale is no longer a desperate situation so he is framing it, keeping it and now owns a very special poster - I am extremely pleased for him.
Comments
Well all I can hope for is that the proper amount of lubricant was used and the procedure went as quickly as possible...
Oh and that the nurses were hot
Forgetting about the Lion International factor I believe the missing London Films logo and any mention of London Films at all is a pivotal point in my thinking it is a re-release. All this talk about numbers is fine but let us see some proof.
Hondo
I have. What in particular am I looking for?
Hondo
Thank you for sharing and I think you summed up the situation well. I am in the camp of ''with a desire to seek the true facts''. This has always been and will continue to be my aim.
Lawrence ( Hondo )
It's solid gold!!
Miraculously I found it, in spite of my crappy search ability...enjoy!
http://stylec.yuku.com/topic/6364/Dracula?page=1#.VY9B67fALvY
Yes please