Skip to content

English One Sheets vs. US One Sheets

edited July 2016 in Poster by Country
While perusing some folded one Sheets on EMP, I saw an amazing Eng One Sheet. It got me thinking about the Daybills vs. Inserts comparisons, so I did a little more perusing. Add yours if you find some good comparisons...

*Thanks to the EMP Auction History for the images. 

Comments

  • The Third Man
    Eng OS

     
    US OS


  • The Jungle Book - 1942
    Eng OS


    US OS

  • The African Queen
    Eng OS


    US OS

  • first two were a 50 50 split, last one is too hard to call.  Both very nice!
  • English
    US
    Tie
  • Third Man-English
    Jungle Book-US
    The African Queen...US! ...i think... =)
  • Tie.
  • The Jungle Book is a poor re-release...
  • Paul said:
    The Jungle Book is a poor re-release...
    What do you mean?

    EMP does not identify it as a re-release for the '42 year release. I saw it was also made in '16 & of course later in '67. 
  • Paul said:
    The Jungle Book is a poor re-release...
    What do you mean?

    EMP does not identify it as a re-release for the '42 year release. I saw it was also made in '16 & of course later in '67. 


  • I have this poster and bought it as a re-release..
  • Paul said:
    I have this poster and bought it as a re-release..


    It has to be a re-release due to the very prominent billing of Sabu on the poster.  His name didn't appear on any original posters of this title in this bold style. He only became a big star after he went to America and appeared in the Maria Montez & Jon Hall films. The original release in the U.K. was by United Artists and the re-release poster shows the distributor as London Films who only gained back the rights to the film at a much later date. Citca 1950 is my guess.

    Do you agree Paul that The Third Man British poster is also a re-release ?

  • Took the words right out of my mouth Hondo.

    As for the Third Man, I was in two minds over this, but would have to say Yes, also a re-release..
  • Paul said:
    Took the words right out of my mouth Hondo.

    As for the Third Man, I was in two minds over this, but would have to say Yes, also a re-release..

    The original release film poster has the London Films logo on it and the post 1955 re-release has the Distributed by Lion International Films credit on it.
  • The Jungle Book is either an English re-release or a Canadian re-release. I will get it corrected and email the buyer offering a refund (two years later). I would say that bidder and every other surely knew it was a re-release as it only sold for $33, while the first release would surely sell for hundreds, but I will still offer.

    On The Third Man, we had a long discussion on that title here, when a man found what some said was a first release (we already knew of a true first release and a late 1950s or early 1960s re-release, and those were different from that). After trying to sell it as a first release, the man sent it to us and we auctioned it as a different re-release (based on exhaustive research). Here is what we wrote when we auctioned it:

    "Because of how popular this movie was, it was given two quick re-releases in England. The first one occurred around 1955, when Lion International Films was formed (it has letters and numbers at the bottom that were also on the very first 1949 English one-sheet), and the second one occurred later in the 1950s, or very early in the 1960s (and that poster is blank on the bottom). The poster offered here is from that first re-release. Note that there has been much controversy about this poster since it first surfaced early this year (and it is unfolded, which is very unusual for English one-sheets)! Some people argue that it had to be from 1949, and others argued that it had to be a re-release. But what makes it definitive for us that it is a re-release is that it has "LION INTERNATIONAL FILMS" at the bottom, and we found information on the Internet that this was not formed until very late in 1954, and that their first releases were in 1955. It certainly makes sense that one of their very first releases would be this most classic English movie, from just six years before, and it also makes sense that they would have had access to the original printing plates, and that they added "LION INTERNATIONAL FILMS" at the bottom, but that someone forgot to remove the original letters and numbers that had been at the bottom of the original. However, all bidders are free to decide for themselves whether this is first release or a re-release, but know that we believe it to be from the 1955 re-release (and there was also a quick additional re-release in the late 1950s or the 1960s, and that poster has no writing on the bottom)."




    Here is a handy checklist to help tell eMoviePoster.com apart from all other major auctions!
    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 "buyers premiums" - NOT eMoviePoster.com
    HAS "reserves or starts over $1 - NOT eMoviePoster.com
    HAS hidden bidder IDs - NOT eMoviePoster.com
    HAS no customer service to speak of - NOT eMoviePoster.com
    HAS "nosebleed" shipping charges - NOT eMoviePoster.com
    HAS inadequate packaging - NOT eMoviePoster.com

  • HONDO said:
    Paul said:
    Took the words right out of my mouth Hondo.

    As for the Third Man, I was in two minds over this, but would have to say Yes, also a re-release..

    The original release film poster has the London Films logo on it and the post 1955 re-release has the Distributed by Lion International Films credit on it.

    Great support Bruce to my statement above.
Sign In or Register to comment.






Logo

For movie poster collectors who know...

@ 2021 Vintage Movie Posters Forum, All rights reserved.

Contact us

info@vintagemoviepostersforum.com

Get In Touch