Incidentally, I much prefer discussion of movie posters to discussions of politics or food (but I understand that people are free to talk about what they want).
Agreed! Glad a political thread hasn't sprang up here! As for food, well...
This is far and away the most interesting and civil discussion of movie posters I have seen on any forum in a very long time, and it shows there is massive expertise on this forum. Well done.
It has taken me some time to read/digest all the content -as not being to familiar with Aussie paper & methods of dating, but have learned a lot.
Now I hope one of you comes up with a "smoking gun", either way. It would be a shame if we are all left in suspense!
One thing certain on French and Italian posters is that they often printed re-releases printed from the same plates as the originals, so the image and credits appear identical, but you can tell they are re-releases by the tiny printer identification at bottom.
I don't know if this was true of Australia, but it DOES explain why sometimes a re-release can have the same image or studio info as the original.
They did not do this with Australian posters from this era. They were nearly always hand lithos in this era and the plates were wiped after the posters had been printed. That's why it is so hard to believe that the Australian printers would somehow be able to locate an original US 1938 3 sheet in 1949 and then copy it as a hand litho for the re release. It just doesn't make sense.
I have spoken to someone who worked for printers in Australia about logos, etc. He said that they did not always follow a "rule" with a studio logo, or printers details. The fact is that in many cases, the artist was given various press books, stills or posters - whatever was available at the time and asked to come up with a hand litho for printing. Some of the artists actually took the plates to their homes and did the artwork there. There are MANY examples where mistakes were made so logos or printers details in a certain format cannot always be relied on.
Question....anyone got any photo's of Aussies plates? from any film of the 40's 50's or 60's?
No one would have any photos of hand litho plates unless they were taken at the time prior to printing. Hand lithos plates were wiped clean after printing. Even if there were photos they would not show the colours.
The reasons why I believe ( and by me only it seems on this matter ) the 3 sheets of The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk are not originals but are re-releases are as follows.
The Victory Publicity logo with the VP preceding the word Victory that is printed on the two three sheets was only from the time after the VP was added in 1945 to all Victory Publicity printed Warner Bros posters when this new style was introduced. I have looked at hundreds in not thousands of images to verify this.
No record found of any posters printed by Victory Publicity for Warner Bros. in any format in 1938 or 1940.
Hackett Offset the preferred printer for Warner Bros. around that period 1938 to 1940 who printed the Australian first release one sheet poster of The Adventures Of Robin Hood were 3 sheet poster printers at that time also.
From research of looking at numerous daybill and one sheet posters from 1938 to 1941 the Warner Bros shield logo used in Australia was the just Warner Brothers across the poster and one only earlier WB shield image and not Warner Bros. Pictures Inc. It appears around 1942 Marchant & Co. on their printed daybills and one sheets introduced the Warner Bros. Pictures Inc. format then Victory Publicity retained this style when they took over the major part of Warner Bros. printing and used this style exclusively until circa 1952 when W.E.Smith took over from them and who went back to just using Warner Bros.on the shield.
I found an Australian press sheet for Juarez ( 1939 ) with the WB Warner Bros. only logo printed on it as well.
The Australian 3 sheet of The Adventures Of Robin Hood I believe was copied from U.S. artwork for the re-release in Australia.Two things stand out to me. Firstly the VP logo on the Australian poster wasn't introduced until 1945. Secondly the Warner Bros Pictures Inc. logo wasn't around in Australia until circa 1942 whereas an Original Australian poster would have had just Warner Bros only on it as appearing on all other Australian Warner Bros. one sheet and daybills I have sited printed between 1938 and 1940. In 1948 and 1950 the two posters in dispute had the Warner Bros.Pictures Inc. logo which was being used on Warner Bros. Posters printed by the Victory Publicity with the Lithographed & Printed By Victory Publicity Pty Ltd logo.
These are my reasons and they make perfect sense to me in supporting my opinion that the two 3 sheets are re-releases.
Lawrence, for what it's worth, I do get the feeling there is a possum up that tree. Hope that gives you the pep for some more study time! What would warrant the 3sht posters being printed is an appearance by Errol Flynn in Australia. Adventures of Don Juan was a swashbuckler WB film released in 1949. He may have made a promotional appearance and the other two films were shown in the lead up. Maybe ... And good luck, old boy!!
Just as a side note: We have seen from Day Earth Stood Still RR that printers could get their hands on original posters to copy the artwork.
Lawrence, for what it's worth, I do get the feeling there is a possum up that tree. Hope that gives you the pep for some more study time! What would warrant the 3sht posters being printed is an appearance by Errol Flynn in Australia. Adventures of Don Juan was a swashbuckler WB film released in 1949. He may have made a promotional appearance and the other two films were shown in the lead up. Maybe ... And good luck, old boy!!
Just as a side note: We have seen from Day Earth Stood Still RR that printers could get their hands on original posters to copy the artwork.
Thanks Mark for the encouragement and your comments.
A big thank you to Ves for asking about the Captain Blood RR daybill. It was re-released in Australia in 1949.
Now to add to my earlier tonight posted reasons for the two 3 sheet posters being re-releases the following thoughts. Firstly I hope everyone contributing to this thread agree this is a re-release? Right - I'm sure you agree?
This poster has the exact Victory publicity logo, the exact Warner Bros.logo and the exact Green background censorship classification as the two 3 sheets The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk.
It would appear to me in 1949 into 1950 for whatever reason Warner Bros. had these three films Errol Flynn starred in re-released.
it is a myth that printers would use the same 'plates' for reprinting posters years after the original. The metal plates would no longer exist. First of all, these plates are costly blanks and second of all, storing plates for thousands of printings in warehouses does not happen. Not that it may not have happened 100% but the possibilities of any printer - and especially an NSS - are so low as to be non-existent.
what DOES exist in file cabinets are the color separations and transparencies of the art. many thousands of these can be stored in on 4 drawer file cabinet. Moreover, I'd like one person to tell me that at any time did they visit an NSS warehouse and see printing plates stacked up to the ceilings in rows, taking up more room than the movie posters stacked on the shelves?
it is a fallacy that plates were stored. Also, for pre-1940 posters, storing plates for individual films would have been a no because of materials shortages. Plates would be sanded down to get a blank and another poster would be created, until the plate's gauge would become too thin for them to be sanded again and they would be melted.
another issue.. how about the cost of shipping a plate from the USA to Australia? These things are damned heavy and large and could be damaged in transit. A set of film separations however is a simple air mail packet and for cost conscious companies (like movie producers and especially - printers), saving the enormous costs of shipping plates 9000 miles is at the top of the list for saving money.
This poster has the exact Victory publicity logo, the exact Warner Bros.logo and the exact Green background censorship classification as the two 3 sheets The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk
That poster is certainly a reissue but it wasn't copied from an original US one sheet.
The Australian 3 sheet of The Adventures Of Robin Hood I believe was copied from U.S. artwork for the re-release in Australia.
That's one of the stumbling blocks here. It really is hard to believe that the Australian 3 sheet in 1949 was copied directly from a US 1938 3 sheet. It is still speculation as to why could possibly happen. I guess the only way to be sure either way would be to find a 1938 Australian Press Book and a 1949 Australian Press book for both Robin Hood and Sea Hawk
I have NOT seen "proof" on this thread that it is a re-release. I am hoping to see proof it is original.
Why?
Two reasons: 1) If a poster like this (full-color, resembling the first release U.S. three-sheet in printing and size) is a re-release, then I would have to start drastically hedging my bets when auctioning ANY undated posters, NOT giving a lifetime guarantee on every poster, but rather giving a limited warantee on posters, saying the buyer must live with the uncertainty, and that would certainly not be good for the hobby, as John says.
2) If it turns out to be a re-release, Heritage has no obligation (because it was sold Buyer Beware) and the buyer would have massively overpaid and have no recourse, and that would be sad, and again be bad for the hobby.
So I am very much hoping to see proof it is original.
So where does everyone think we are with this? Original or Reissue? Without seeing any press books I am still not sure either way.
After calling Lawrence out for barking up the wrong tree, I'm going to backflip and say they are later. There is probably some special reason that may be revealed with more study.
VP printed other material, including travel posters, so more on the logo change may be dug up that way. On the HA listing they claim the Robin Hood poster is a stone litho, whether that offers any clues I'm not sure.
Later for me & apologies to Lawrence for dismissing his findings without properly checking my facts.
VP printed other material, including travel posters, so more on the logo change may be dug up that way. On the HA listing they claim the Robin Hood poster is a stone litho, whether that offers any clues I'm not sure.
That's one of the problems. Heritage often describes Australian posters as stone lithos when they are actually hand lithos. If it actually is a stone litho then it would be very significant indeed.
So where does everyone think we are with this? Original or Reissue? Without seeing any press books I am still not sure either way.
A foot in each camp?
I would say original, not because I know it is but because we have yet to see actual proof (rather than circumstantial evidence) that it isn't. Innocent until proven otherwise...
I have tried to keep an open mind but in my opinion it has not been proven to be a 1940s re release as yet.
I wonder how Bruce and other major auctions will start describing vintage Australian posters after this thread ......
Bruce said... If a poster like this (full-color, resembling the first release U.S. three-sheet in printing and size) is a re-release, then I would have to start drastically hedging my bets when auctioning ANY undated posters, NOT giving a lifetime guarantee on every poster, but rather giving a limited warantee on posters
Maybe if a Robin Hood three sheet comes up for auction again it might be described simply as an undated Australian three sheet possibly original, possibly late 1940s. Maybe all Australian posters from this era might end up with similar descriptions.
"Maybe if a Robin Hood three sheet comes up for auction again it might be
described simply as an undated Australian three sheet possibly
original, possibly late 1940s. Maybe all Australian posters from this
era might end up with similar descriptions."
But that would only be true for eMoviePoster and not any others, since all others have no guarantee, and are buyer beware.
And it would only be true with three-sheets or one-sheets, since daybills have the massive size change.
But yes, this will be a game-changer for me with expensive Australian one-sheet and 3-sheet posters if it ends unresolved.
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
I hunted out WB posters I have from that period, here's a few...
Private Detective (1939) Torrid Zone (1940) Strawberry Blonde (1941)
WB Shield with Warner Bros across the face of the shield BUT each of the logos is different from the other!
and Daybills..
You're in the Army Now (1941) - WB wrapped inside a shield, words across the shield (but inside the shield) Smashing the Money Ring (1939) - WB inside a shield NO words!
So many variations of the Warner Bros logo for the same period but not a WB 3SH in sight.
I have to say that it would have been better to properly research this prior to making the claim. Some of the original points have been discounted and one major factor missed entirely.
I have to say that it would have been better to properly research this prior to making the claim. Some of the original points have been discounted and one major factor missed entirely.
John, don't despair, as nearly all of these issues can be answered by referencing Everyones / Film Weekly mags. The National Library has the full set running right through to the 1970s. Having them digitised would be of enormous benefit, and leave this forum with much less to talk about!
Someone (can't think who ) might befriend one of the library staff and start the ball rolling.
Did anyone look at the description in the Heritage listing? This should be the first point of research.
The entire upper panel was completely missing prior to it being linen backed. It had massive restoration and I think it very likely that the top section was re created entirely from the US three sheet. It is highly likely that they just guessed as to what it looked like because I haven't heard of another Australian three sheet turning up.
I would have thought it would be pretty hard to reliably date a poster when at least a third of it was missing and there was no other reference to go by.
Has anyone seen a complete unrestored Australian three sheet for Robin Hood?
Comments
You missed the food fight about the US elections earlier...
The reasons why I believe ( and by me only it seems on this matter ) the 3 sheets of The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk are not originals but are re-releases are as follows.
The Victory Publicity logo with the VP preceding the word Victory that is printed on the two three sheets was only from the time after the VP was added in 1945 to all Victory Publicity printed Warner Bros posters when this new style was introduced. I have looked at hundreds in not thousands of images to verify this.
No record found of any posters printed by Victory Publicity for Warner Bros. in any format in 1938 or 1940.
Hackett Offset the preferred printer for Warner Bros. around that period 1938 to 1940 who printed the Australian first release one sheet poster of The Adventures Of Robin Hood were 3 sheet poster printers at that time also.
From research of looking at numerous daybill and one sheet posters from 1938 to 1941 the Warner Bros shield logo used in Australia was the just Warner Brothers across the poster and one only earlier WB shield image and not Warner Bros. Pictures Inc. It appears around 1942 Marchant & Co. on their printed daybills and one sheets introduced the Warner Bros. Pictures Inc. format then Victory Publicity retained this style when they took over the major part of Warner Bros. printing and used this style exclusively until circa 1952 when W.E.Smith took over from them and who went back to just using Warner Bros.on the shield.
I found an Australian press sheet for Juarez ( 1939 ) with the WB Warner Bros. only logo printed on it as well.
The Australian 3 sheet of The Adventures Of Robin Hood I believe was copied from U.S. artwork for the re-release in Australia.Two things stand out to me. Firstly the VP logo on the Australian poster wasn't introduced until 1945. Secondly the Warner Bros Pictures Inc. logo wasn't around in Australia until circa 1942 whereas an Original Australian poster would have had just Warner Bros only on it as appearing on all other Australian Warner Bros. one sheet and daybills I have sited printed between 1938 and 1940. In 1948 and 1950 the two posters in dispute had the Warner Bros.Pictures Inc. logo which was being used on Warner Bros. Posters printed by the Victory Publicity with the Lithographed & Printed By Victory Publicity Pty Ltd logo.
These are my reasons and they make perfect sense to me in supporting my opinion that the two 3 sheets are re-releases.
What would warrant the 3sht posters being printed is an appearance by Errol Flynn in Australia. Adventures of Don Juan was a swashbuckler WB film released in 1949. He may have made a promotional appearance and the other two films were shown in the lead up.
Maybe ...
And good luck, old boy!!
Just as a side note: We have seen from Day Earth Stood Still RR that printers could get their hands on original posters to copy the artwork.
I have a couple of long daybills from '35 printed by Victory...no logos just a line credit...one for WB one for FOX.
I have some one sheets too, much later...40s and they seems to match up with what you are saying on the logos too.
Just a side note, what year was the Captain Blood aussie db RR from? It has the same victory logo as the 3 sheet.
Thanks Mark for the encouragement and your comments.
Now to add to my earlier tonight posted reasons for the two 3 sheet posters being re-releases the following thoughts. Firstly I hope everyone contributing to this thread agree this is a re-release? Right - I'm sure you agree?
This poster has the exact Victory publicity logo, the exact Warner Bros.logo and the exact Green background censorship classification as the two 3 sheets The Adventures Of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk.
It would appear to me in 1949 into 1950 for whatever reason Warner Bros. had these three films Errol Flynn starred in re-released.
what DOES exist in file cabinets are the color separations and transparencies of the art. many thousands of these can be stored in on 4 drawer file cabinet. Moreover, I'd like one person to tell me that at any time did they visit an NSS warehouse and see printing plates stacked up to the ceilings in rows, taking up more room than the movie posters stacked on the shelves?
it is a fallacy that plates were stored. Also, for pre-1940 posters, storing plates for individual films would have been a no because of materials shortages. Plates would be sanded down to get a blank and another poster would be created, until the plate's gauge would become too thin for them to be sanded again and they would be melted.
another issue.. how about the cost of shipping a plate from the USA to Australia? These things are damned heavy and large and could be damaged in transit. A set of film separations however is a simple air mail packet and for cost conscious companies (like movie producers and especially - printers), saving the enormous costs of shipping plates 9000 miles is at the top of the list for saving money.
After calling Lawrence out for barking up the wrong tree, I'm going to backflip and say they are later. There is probably some special reason that may be revealed with more study.
VP printed other material, including travel posters, so more on the logo change may be dug up that way. On the HA listing they claim the Robin Hood poster is a stone litho, whether that offers any clues I'm not sure.
Later for me & apologies to Lawrence for dismissing his findings without properly checking my facts.
M.R.
I would say original, not because I know it is but because we have yet to see actual proof (rather than circumstantial evidence) that it isn't. Innocent until proven otherwise...
I wonder how Bruce and other major auctions will start describing vintage Australian posters after this thread ......
Bruce said...
If a poster like this (full-color, resembling the first release U.S. three-sheet in printing and size) is a re-release, then I would have to start drastically hedging my bets when auctioning ANY undated posters, NOT giving a lifetime guarantee on every poster, but rather giving a limited warantee on posters
Maybe if a Robin Hood three sheet comes up for auction again it might be described simply as an undated Australian three sheet possibly original, possibly late 1940s. Maybe all Australian posters from this era might end up with similar descriptions.
But that would only be true for eMoviePoster and not any others, since all others have no guarantee, and are buyer beware.
And it would only be true with three-sheets or one-sheets, since daybills have the massive size change.
But yes, this will be a game-changer for me with expensive Australian one-sheet and 3-sheet posters if it ends unresolved.
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
I think it does show how scarce they are anyway - dating them is not the problem, finding them is!
Private Detective (1939)
Torrid Zone (1940)
Strawberry Blonde (1941)
WB Shield with Warner Bros across the face of the shield BUT each of the logos is different from the other!
and Daybills..
You're in the Army Now (1941) - WB wrapped inside a shield, words across the shield (but inside the shield)
Smashing the Money Ring (1939) - WB inside a shield NO words!
So many variations of the Warner Bros logo for the same period but not a WB 3SH in sight.
1945 3 Sheet - Victory Publicity Pty Ltd., Melb
1939
John, don't despair, as nearly all of these issues can be answered by referencing Everyones / Film Weekly mags. The National Library has the full set running right through to the 1970s. Having them digitised would be of enormous benefit, and leave this forum with much less to talk about!
Someone (can't think who
) might befriend one of the library staff and start the ball rolling.
1950s - Victory logo in the bottom left corner
The entire upper panel was completely missing prior to it being linen backed. It had massive restoration and I think it very likely that the top section was re created entirely from the US three sheet. It is highly likely that they just guessed as to what it looked like because I haven't heard of another Australian three sheet turning up.
I would have thought it would be pretty hard to reliably date a poster when at least a third of it was missing and there was no other reference to go by.
Has anyone seen a complete unrestored Australian three sheet for Robin Hood?