The above are three Australian daybill posters that were printed for the 1955 'b film' The Looters. This film was destined to be screened on the bottom half of a double bill programme The first image was obviously printed for the first Australian release, but what about the other two posters, What would be the reason for printing the two follow up versions. Any thoughts? Interesting to note that the two later printed posters had an upgrade in the film's censorship rating.
When I booked film titles from the major 16mm film distributors that were to be screened at the film society that I was involved with, I always received numerous copies of original daybills with every booking. If one takes into account the large number of 16mm commercial screenings, then later numerous club screenings and film society screenings that would have been sent daybills, this would certainly account for a large number of required posters for these screenings. I am thinking that after the original number of printed posters were despatched to theatres numbers then would have dwindled, so cheaper designed versions and stock posters for 16mm distribution were printed.
The following Across The Wide Missourt and The Naked Spur daybills printed for 1950's films in what appears to be in the 1970's would have to have been surely printed for later 16mm bookings.
The Naked Spur original Australian daybill and the shortened incorrectly titled Naked Spur poster that would appear the printer's had little artwork to have assisted the poster artist.
I think in a lot of those cases of bad artwork on poorly drawn posters it's a matter of "just draw a poster for me before you go on your lunch break". Very little time allocated to the design and execution of the designs. It really looks like they were given to a work experience junior to get some experience on. God knows what effort we'd have if they'd tried to copy the original daybill!. Forgive me if I'm denigrating the "artists" who drew the designs...but really!
I think in a lot of those cases of bad artwork on poorly drawn posters it's a matter of "just draw a poster for me before you go on your lunch break". Very little time allocated to the design and execution of the designs. It really looks like they were given to a work experience junior to get some experience on. God knows what effort we'd have if they'd tried to copy the original daybill!. Forgive me if I'm denigrating the "artists" who drew the designs...but really!
Interesting comments which may well be true., but my printed for 16mm remarks are what I am most interested in hearing thoughts about.
Treasure Island (1950) and Pollyanna (1960) rare daybill posters originally printed for 16mm only distribution for the company 16mm Pty Ltd. They had to have been printed for distribution in a fair period of time after the original release of the films took place in the cinema . My guess is possibly this was in the late 1960s. These are the only two examples of daybill posters being printed for 16mm release and credited as such.
The above Australian daybill of The Cars That Ate Paris that was produced for the 1974 film is interesting. I have sighted a number of images of this particular poster over many years, and only for this version. The Cars That Ate Paris was classified by the Australian censor then released in Australian cinemas on June 15,1974. This was then followed by Picnic At Hanging Rock that was classified August 1, 1975 and the released on August 8, 1975. One then has to ask why has 'From the director of Picnic At Hanging Rock'' been printed on the daybill over a year before this film was released here in Australia? One has to think then that the daybill is a later second printing, and ask where is the original printed version? Comments are welcomed
How does one justify the over twelve months in advance of release statement then?
I have picked up on numerous errors appearing on the NFSA website with the crediting of film information. I have also spoken to various staff members there over the years and I have found that they are young people with limited information regarding the material that is contained there.
How does one justify the over twelve months in advance of release statement then?
I have picked up on numerous errors appearing on the NFSA website with the crediting of film information. I have also spoken to various staff members there over the years and I have found that they are young people with limited information regarding the material that is contained there.
I just read your original post properly and agree about the mention of Picnic At Hanging Rock (obvious really). The NFSA description doesn't actually state that it's the original daybill. I suspect there wasn't one produced for its original release due to the way it was originally distributed.
See this from Wikipedia (which is how a lot of Australian films were distributed at that time).
My thought is that the producers (and possibly funding bodies) would have only produced a single poster. Without a major distributor they might not have had a reason (or budget) to produce different poster formats.
This is the style of poster I recall from the release (I was only 14 or 15 at the time but remember the promotion of the film vividly).
I'd say there was only this poster made until later when it "changed distributors" which would be when the above daybed would have been made to cash in on the "Picnic At Hanging rock" Fame.
Also, this is where it was released. A very limited first release that wouldn't have justified any large print run of posters.
This is the only place it was screened in Melbourne CBD Cinemas, but it got a three week season. Australia 1 was a small "Newsreel" sized cinema, so not a big release at all.
Now some facts from me. There seems to have been at least three Australian distributors involved here for The Cars That Ate Paris screenings.
No Australian distributor credited or censorship classification either, so as Peter had hinted it was possibly printed by the makers originally. I believe it was to be displayed at the number of film festivals that it was originally screened at. The unusual Sydney Australia credit would have been aimed for the overseas film festival screenings one would think.
The film was submitted to the Australian censor and classified by them on 1 July 1974. The interesting thing here was that the applicant was Warner Brothers Australia. Where do they fit inro the puzzle then?
The BEF release then occurred in the next year 1975 it would appear.
The following Australian lobby card was printed for GUO (Greater Union). As BEF changed their name to Greater Union only later in 1976 this card is definitely a later ongoing release poster.
Are you saying that the above poster is Australian?
Unknown, it's obviously from when New Line took over distribution, but perhaps it was only for the US release? Needs more research. I'll look into it later.
I am currently delving deeper into the release and produced posters of The Cars That Ate Paris. An email has just been sent to a person that may be able to assist me with my enquiries, but it may take some time to hear back from him. Only earlier today I found some valuable information on what styles of posters were printed for the film's BEF theatrical release, which will be included here soon.
Are you saying that the above poster is Australian?
Unknown, it's obviously from when New Line took over distribution, but perhaps it was only for the US release? Needs more research. I'll look into it later.
My response to this later after I also will do some more researching.
Are you saying that the above poster is Australian?
That New Line poster is a bit of a puzzle because they retitled the film "The Cars That Ate People", so theoretically it should have that title. Unless of course that poster, (or ad copy), was made before the name change, or much later.
This link details the differences between the two versions.
Comments
The above are three Australian daybill posters that were printed for the 1955 'b film' The Looters. This film was destined to be screened on the bottom half of a double bill programme
The first image was obviously printed for the first Australian release, but what about the other two posters, What would be the reason for printing the two follow up versions. Any thoughts?
Interesting to note that the two later printed posters had an upgrade in the film's censorship rating.
The following Across The Wide Missourt and The Naked Spur daybills printed for 1950's films in what appears to be in the 1970's would have to have been surely printed for later 16mm bookings.
The Naked Spur original Australian daybill and the shortened incorrectly titled Naked Spur poster that would appear the printer's had little artwork to have assisted the poster artist.
Peter
Is anyone aware of, or has a different version of a printed daybill of this film
The Cars That Ate Paris was classified by the Australian censor then released in Australian cinemas on June 15,1974. This was then followed by Picnic At Hanging Rock that was classified August 1, 1975 and the released on August 8, 1975.
One then has to ask why has 'From the director of Picnic At Hanging Rock'' been printed on the daybill over a year before this film was released here in Australia?
One has to think then that the daybill is a later second printing, and ask where is the original printed version?
Comments are welcomed
Peter
This is a description from the NFSA.
Peter
I have picked up on numerous errors appearing on the NFSA website with the crediting of film information. I have also spoken to various staff members there over the years and I have found that they are young people with limited information regarding the material that is contained there.
See this from Wikipedia (which is how a lot of Australian films were distributed at that
My thought is that the producers (and possibly funding bodies) would have only produced a single poster. Without a major distributor they might not have had a reason (or budget) to produce different poster formats.
This is the style of poster I recall from the release (I was only 14 or 15 at the time but remember the promotion of the film vividly).
I'd say there was only this poster made until later when it "changed distributors" which would be when the above daybed would have been made to cash in on the "Picnic At Hanging rock" Fame.
Peter
This is the only place it was screened in Melbourne CBD Cinemas, but it got a three week season. Australia 1 was a small "Newsreel" sized cinema, so not a big release at all.
Peter
Now some facts from me. There seems to have been at least three Australian distributors involved here for The Cars That Ate Paris screenings.
No Australian distributor credited or censorship classification either, so as Peter had hinted it was possibly printed by the makers originally. I believe it was to be displayed at the number of film festivals that it was originally screened at. The unusual Sydney Australia credit would have been aimed for the overseas film festival screenings one would think.
The film was submitted to the Australian censor and classified by them on 1 July 1974. The interesting thing here was that the applicant was Warner Brothers Australia. Where do they fit inro the puzzle then?
The BEF release then occurred in the next year 1975 it would appear.
The following Australian lobby card was printed for GUO (Greater Union). As BEF changed their name to Greater Union only later in 1976 this card is definitely a later ongoing release poster.
Peter
Peter
Peter
This link details the differences between the two versions.
http://www.peterweircave.com/cars/differences.html
Peter
Peter