Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Help me figure out what I have

jayn_jjayn_j Member, Singin Dancing Fool, Lobby Master Posts: 568 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
I have owned this for a very long time.  I bought it during a trip to Disneyland as a teenager in 1967.

Here is the deal.  I found this bin of animation cells in a store inside the magic kingdom.  They had 'genuine' cells with real backgrounds for the princely sum of $40/ea.  Lots of money in 1967.  This bin was buried in a corner and had a variety of cells of various Disney characters.  Every one was a bit different in pose, and some were missing body parts e.g. Micky might be missing an arm.  The clerk said they were original drawings, but they were marked as repros because they were on generic backgrounds instead of the film background.  The back is marked as an authorized reproduction though.  Anyway, I rifled through the box and picked out one that I thought was especially attractive.  I apid $5, which was a big chunk of a teen trinket budget back in 1967.  The cell has been on some sort of display ever since.  I had it in my dorm in the air force and college.  It has been displayed in all three of my kids bedrooms.

Means a lot to me, and I am not thinking of selling.  I'm sure my kids will want this after I am gone.  But I am curious to hear others opinions on what I have.  Do you think original art on generic background, or is it just cheap commercial reproduction?


- Jay -
Curmudgeon in training 

Comments

  • DavidDavid Member Posts: 10,163 admin
    Those 8x10s were produced and sold in the 1960s by Walt Disney and covered old classic films like Bambi, Pinocchio, Snow White etc etc as well as characters like Mickey as well as The Jungle Book.

    As the sticker says, they were produced from original cels

    They likely would have a value of  $50 - $75 +/-
    David
  • PaulPaul Member, Quad Master Posts: 1,590 ✭✭✭✭ Three-Sheeter
    Not sure on the worth, but I think David is correct in what he says, copied from original cels..

    I'd pay a bit more than $50...
    It's more than a Hobby...
  • jayn_jjayn_j Member, Singin Dancing Fool, Lobby Master Posts: 568 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    edited August 2017
    OK, I can buy that, but it does bring up a couple of questions.

    First, why use such a generic background?  If they were doing a repro, they could have just as easily done an offset print of a more appropriate one.

    Second, why were they all different and why did some have missing limbs?  I guess I could remove the backing and look for brush marks, but I'm reluctant to do that.
    - Jay -
    Curmudgeon in training 
  • DavidDavid Member Posts: 10,163 admin
    edited August 2017
    jayn_j said:
    OK, I can buy that, but it does bring up a couple of questions.

    First, why use such a generic background?  If they were doing a repro, they could have just as easily done an offset print of a more appropriate one.

    Second, why were they all different and why did some have missing limbs?  I guess I could remove the backing and look for brush marks, but I'm reluctant to do that.

    What missing limbs? It is remotely possible you have an original cel that has been re-packaged into the Disney Classic packaging (reasons unknown), but you will see why likely not below in the 2nd image.

    "The Walt Disney Classics line was introduced to replace the animation cels that had been a staple of Disneyland's Art Corner Shop since its opening in late 1955. By the late 1960s fewer animated films were in production, and with the release of Robin Hood (1973) Disney returned to presenting animation cels as fine art, offering them through retailer Circle Gallery at prices far higher than had been charged at Disneyland where they had been sold as souvenirs for only a few dollars apiece."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Corner#Store_offerings


    Generic background? My guess would be simply because they could produce a variety of the more popular of the core characters on the same background or simply change out the character onto different backgrounds

    eg







    Paul said:

    I'd pay a bit more than $50...

    My Disney wallet is smaller than yours.  =)
    David
  • jayn_jjayn_j Member, Singin Dancing Fool, Lobby Master Posts: 568 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    edited August 2017
    Thanks, David.  That last image is what seals it for me.

    I suspect there were still a few originals of lesser quality, thus the missing limbs on some of them.  Sounds like 1967 would have been around the time they transitioned to repros.

    BTW, that Donald background is similar, but different than mine.
    - Jay -
    Curmudgeon in training 
  • DavidDavid Member Posts: 10,163 admin
    Yep I was aware the DD background was similar, I was more showing the Mickey, same image different background. Donald was to show the style was similar.
    David
  • DavidDavid Member Posts: 10,163 admin
    jayn_j said:

    Sounds like 1967 would have been around the time they transitioned to repros.

    I think they would have been offering them earlier, The Art Corner closed in 1966 - a lot of those 8x10s may have been scattered to the wind.

    The original cels sold for not a lot when the store open in 1955 - $1.47 (item #4)







    David
  • DavidDavid Member Posts: 10,163 admin

    $1.47!!!!!



    $1.47 in 1956 had the same buying power as $13.24 in 2017
    David
Sign In or Register to comment.

This Vintage Movie Poster Forum is powered by some old cinema posters, the flame retardant properties of a Top Gun Daybill, and a
British Quad which has been folded just the right amount of times and shoved under one of the corners to stop the place from wobbling.