Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Daybill oddities

RickRick Member Posts: 932 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
Here are a few oddities, Lawrence might know the story beh9ind the different images and colours and which were the originals.

May be an image of 3 people and text


May be an image of text that says THIS IS THE ACTION PICTURE THIS IS THE ACTION PICTURE 20 FRANK SINATRA FRANK SINATRA LADY  IN CEMENT LADY IN CEMENT RAQUEL WELCH RAQUEL WELCH DAN BLOCKER COLOR DAN BLOCKER COLOR Not Suitable for Children MAPLinmm


And why a 0 on 69?


May be an image of motorcycle


Comments

  • dedeposterdedeposter Member Posts: 118 ✭✭ One-Sheeter
    Rick said:


    And why a 0 on 69?


    May be an image of motorcycle

    My guess would be that they were trying to avoid any sexual connotation.

  • PanchoPancho Member Posts: 698 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    'Hell's Angels 69' - like a lot of the biker pics from the late 60s / early 70s - wasn't released here until a few years after it was released. Being released in 1972, calling it '69 was thought to be silly - so they thought 690 was far better! :-)
  • PanchoPancho Member Posts: 698 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    I have a daybill for 'Class of '74' that's re-titled as 'Class of '77' for the same reason.
  • PanchoPancho Member Posts: 698 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    No idea specifically re: Duel, but I believe this is the original printing:

    Image result for duel daybill
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector
    Rick said:
    Here are a few oddities, Lawrence might know the story beh9ind the different images and colours and which were the originals.

    May be an image of 3 people and text





    There is also this one as well to add to the sub standard printings.





    Agreeing with Pancho in that this M.A.P.S. version would appear to be the original poster printed.

    On saying this regarding the Australian daybill a problem does arise though with the similar designed Australian one sheet.

     M.A.P.S. Australian one sheet. Robert Burton Australian one sheet.

    Both the Australian one sheets printed by two different printers are the same in  design except for slight colour differences.

    Both printed for the Australian first release one would believe, but naming which one was printed first would only be a guess. 
    Lawrence
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector
    edited February 15



    Identifying which Lady In Cement ( 1968 ) daybill came first is clearcut.

    The blue daybill  above was the first one printed. This version was designed and printed by Royetttone Prints Pty. Limited. Royelltone were active in the mid '60s to late1969, mainly printing 20th Century Fox product, including daybills, one sheets and at least one 3 sheet. Lady In Cement was released theatrically in Sydney on 31 January 1969. As M.A.P.S. only commenced printing film posters in late 1969 the above green version, which has a 'Not Suitable For Children'' censorship rating appearing on it, would then have to be a second printing and this would have taken place sometime during the period of late 1969 and November 1971, when the rating for this film would have been changed to NRC,
    Lawrence
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector
    Rick said:


    And why a 0 on 69?


    My guess would be that they were trying to avoid any sexual connotation.

    Pancho said:
    'Hell's Angels 69' - like a lot of the biker pics from the late 60s / early 70s - wasn't released here until a few years after it was released. Being released in 1972, calling it '69 was thought to be silly - so they thought 690 was far better! :-)

    My original thoughts were the same as Ricks.

    Pancho now makes a good point with his comments.

    Something of interest to consider though  is that of the four Australian daybills Bruce has on his website, all have the 0 removed from the title for release in New Zealand, Keep in mind this film would have also received a circa 1972 release as well. What would have been the thinking behind this alteration? I will endevour to find out the reason from a contact I have in N.Z. 






    Lawrence
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector

    O.k., here is a title I thought was suitable to be included here on this thread.

    Blazing Saddles ) 1974 ) had al least the following five daybills printed during the film's run in Australia.



    The above first example with no printer credited is I believe to be the original first release printing. Due to the unexpected success of the film I am thinking the following two daybills printed by M.A.P.S. were early follow up printings.



    The two most interesting daybills though are these two adapted stock posters. The first example contains images of movies made before 1974, the year Blazing Saddles was released. This would have been probably a late 1970's printing replacing the first three previous posters when their stocks ran low.

    The most interesting poster though is the last example appearing above. This one is at least 1979, but most likely printed in the early 1980s due to the multiple images used on it that are from the 1979 film Dimboola.

    If there are any other examples existing of any other different style Blazing Saddles daybills not included above, I would love to see them.
    Lawrence
  • BruceBruce Member, Captain Movie Poster Posts: 1,128 ✭✭✭✭ Three-Sheeter

    Something of interest to consider though  is that of the four Australian daybills Bruce has on his website, all have the 0 removed from the title for release in New Zealand, Keep in mind this film would have also received a circa 1972 release as well. What would have been the thinking behind this alteration? I will endevour to find out the reason from a contact I have in N.Z. 






    A giant reason we have a lot of New Zealand daybills in our sales history is that we have had a lot of New Zealand consignors!

    Come on, Australian poster collectors and dealers, do your part to close the gap by consigning lots of your daybills, so that Australian daybills are better represented! :)\
    We (eMoviePoster.com) hold 3,000 auctions every other week + 6 major auctions a year.
    See all of our current auctions in one gallery here: http://www.emovieposter.com/agallery/all.html
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector





    Hell's Angels 690 Australian daybill from 1972, and the same style daybill altered to it's original title of Hell's Angels  69 when the film was screened in New Zealand.

    Some interesting facts are as follows.

    The film was submitted to the Australian censor on 35mm under the original U.S.A. title of Hell's Angels 69. On 1 July 1972 the film was passed and classified with a M certificate with this name.

    In New Zealand the film was submitted twice on 35mm to the chief censor with details following.

    The first submission and classification was in 1973 when the film was  titled Hell's Angels 69. The film was classified R16, with a very minor excision to be made to some content.  The recorded running time was 97 min.33 sec.The N.Z distributor was Mr. J. Marquet.

    Again in 1976 the film was again submitted as Hell's Angels 69 and was passed with a running time or 97 min. The new N.Z. distributor this time was International Film Distributors Ltd. 

    Interestingly the name of the Australian distributor Filmways wasn't crossed out on any of the numerous N.Z. Hell's Angels 69 posters that I have sighted over the years.  

    It appears to me that Filmways in Australia and not the Australian censor were responsible for altering the title of the film, for whatever reason when first released here in Australia, Whether is was Dede's suggestion to avoid any sexual connotations or Pancho's thinking of altering the then outdated year to just a number will most likely remain a mystery.

    No sexual concerns or an outdated title in N.Z. though with the release there. When the Filmways posters were received in N.Z. in 1973 it would appear that the minor N.Z. distributor just altered the film's title back to it's original name. I don't know for sure, but it is even possible that with  the second release in 1976 by I.F.D. there may have been another daybill version printed. This was a common practice to have taken place by I.F.D., who were part of the huge Kerridge Odeon cinema chain owned by Sir Robert James Kerridge. They had mainly mediocre daybill posters designed and printed for titles of films that they distributed originally in Australia by some Australian distributors, but who in some cases didn't have the N.Z. distribution rights as well. For whatever reason I.F.D. weren't able to use the original Australian daybill designs.

     
    Lawrence
  • RickRick Member Posts: 932 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    Thanks for all the responses. I should have thought of adding the Blazing Saddles variations. I have three different styles of the one-sheet as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.