The aussie phantom daybill always bothered me. Always thought it weird there was no phantom.
The Australian one sheet poster has an image of the Phantom on it, so it would then appear to have not been a censorship problem regarding the absence on the daybill. Very odd indeed.
I wonder why they used different printers? Was that a common occurrence? Did different printing companies specialise in different sized printing formats?
Possibly a load of questions that can't be answered...
The one sheet was printed by F. Cunninghame, while the daybill was printed by W.E. Smith. Although W. E. Smith dominated the daybill poster printing in the 1940s it wasn't the case with one sheets.
Australian one sheets, as well as being printed by W,E. Smith were produced by many other different printers. Prominent among these were Victory Publicity, F.Cunninghame and Offset Prinitng. W.E. Smith printed the majority of the daybills in the 1940's, but didn't always get to print the one sheet as well.
Original U.S.A. one sheet and insert poster images for The Vampire from 1957.
The Australian one sheet and daybill images that were clearly altered to comply with strict Australian censorship advertising guidelines Where is ''The Vampire's'' image?
Australian and New Zealand film poster censorship examples.
An Australian printed daybill of Toys In The Attic (1963) for New Zealand distribution (An identica Australian printed version with an Australian censorship rating not found), and some original artwork used in the U.S.A. anD around the world featuring the slapping scene. The scene was substituted down here in Australia to adhere to Australian censorship requirements.
The Australia daybill followed by the same New Zealand version of In Harm's Way (1965). Firstly the assault scene was allowed to appear on the Australian daybill only two years after the Toys In The Attic assault scene was disallowed, A different story though in New Zealnnd where the scene was blacked out on the daybill and the one sheet.
How interesting is the following rare original Australian 1932 Frankenstein certificate of registration. containing the wording of the SPECIAL CONDITION instruction regarding the ''Suitable only for adults''rating instruction.
Comments
The Australian one sheet poster has an image of the Phantom on it, so it would then appear to have not been a censorship problem regarding the absence on the daybill. Very odd indeed.
Peter
Possibly a load of questions that can't be answered...
Peter
Australian one sheets, as well as being printed by W,E. Smith were produced by many other different printers. Prominent among these were Victory Publicity, F.Cunninghame and Offset Prinitng. W.E. Smith printed the majority of the daybills in the 1940's, but didn't always get to print the one sheet as well.
Peter
Original U.S.A. one sheet and insert poster images for The Vampire from 1957.
The Australian one sheet and daybill images that were clearly altered to comply with strict Australian censorship advertising guidelines Where is ''The Vampire's'' image?
U.K. artwork for comparison.
Peter
An Australian printed daybill of Toys In The Attic (1963) for New Zealand distribution (An identica Australian printed version with an Australian censorship rating not found), and some original artwork used in the U.S.A. anD around the world featuring the slapping scene. The scene was substituted down here in Australia to adhere to Australian censorship requirements.
The Australia daybill followed by the same New Zealand version of In Harm's Way (1965). Firstly the assault scene was allowed to appear on the Australian daybill only two years after the Toys In The Attic assault scene was disallowed, A different story though in New Zealnnd where the scene was blacked out on the daybill and the one sheet.
Peter