Hi -Ari, I understand your comments about the studio. They seem to be quite hit or miss. We're helping them fill in some of their missing silent material. Jeff seems to be trying real hard and I know several titles that they have really helped some other parties that we've worked with.
As for the relevance in the copyright statements. As a researcher, I believe that they are relevant. I believe that you're looking at it from the studio or film perspective only, which is normal. Because of the vast amount of undocumented territory in the hobby, we've had to develop the foundations to do the research from the accessory point of view, so we look at it strictly from the poster perspective. This has become necessary with the vast amount of posters that we try to identify with limited amounts of information. (Doesn't mean it's always RIGHT. but it drastically increases the odds :-) ) With that said, let me step through a couple of things that come to mind. We track both domestic and international studio logos for dating purposes, so I would normally examine the logo of the international distribution company, but unfortunately, Fox had their own and in the 1970s didn't make any differentiation in the logos for US and international usage. So we're working with our hands tied from the small amount of information It's quite apparent that NSS handled all of these. NSS's primary functions at that time was plates, accessories, trailers, titles, distribution and warehousing. Since they handled such a wide variety of services for clients that may only want printing or trailers and not distribution and constant changes to different distributors for reissues, they had a LARGE rights department. This would also include them having to keep records on rights for international distribution because quite often that was by a different distribution company and required different copyright tags. I have several of their master logs and one of their codings was specifically for rights changes because of their constant requests for material that had changed hands (and that was just for the US releases). Now, take a look at the 1975 Corben issue. Notice in small print across the bottom is the standard NSS tagline. Then on the bottom right is the standard litho tag and 20th Century 1974 copyright tag and regular NSS number 74/339 in the standard layout. BUT by the ratings box is a larger copyright Pressman Williams 1975 which appears to be added in (because it ignores the standard copyright line already on the bottom with the standard NSS tag and NSS number). For whatever reason, it was important enough to come back and ADD this new changed copyright tag on TOP of the standard tag across the bottom. This would definitely been noted in the NSS rights department. I don't believe that it was an error. (this is the time during Star Wars for Fox and copyright was being watched very closely). This poster is definitely different than the standard international issue and by this time, their print shops had computerized color coding to synchronize the colors between the different regional print shops to make sure all the shops put out the same poster. The color codes were already broken down and the printer would just put in the codes for the print areas. The order for this poster would have come from their international distribution department. The reason I say that is obvious.. No US ratings box and no NSS tags or info. Notice: from looking through your great international display (since I don't have most of these of file) that most of the European countries, including the UK, used the Corben artwork and NOT the original artwork except Australia (but Australia prints their own) and Canada (which the US supplied). This would imply that the artwork was already in the works which would also collaborate the standard copyright tag on the bottom of the US Corben issue. (Undoubtedly other things were going on behind the scenes) It therefore comes back to the greatest probability is that it is a international reissue for Canada and then the standard clause with NSS would have applied with them attaching the copyright date of when it was printed. I'll still let you know if the Fox archivist comes up with anything. Best, Ed Poole [email protected] owner LearnAboutMoviePosters.com <http://www.learnaboutmovieposters.com/> MoviePosterDataBase.com <http://www.learnaboutmovieposters.com/newsite/MOVIES/MPDB.asp> 504-298-LAMP _____ From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of The Principal Archivist Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:46 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MOPO] Can anyone identify this Phantom of the Paradise poster? Hi, Ed - Wow, thanks for all this legwork; what you've come up with is very interesting indeed. In 1974, the US Copyright Act of 1976 hadn't yet become law, so the benefits of registering every little piece of art with the copyright office were not as substantial as they were to become only a couple of years later; it certainly makes sense that 20th, and others, wouldn't have gone to the trouble of exhaustively registering everything they commissioned at that time. You're right that the film had some success, such as it was, in Canada, particularly as compared to its dismal reception in the US. I'm not sure, though, about the relevance of the change in copyright information in 1974 from 20th Century to Pressman-Williams: To my knowledge, the ONLY artwork to which Pressman-Williams claimed copyright was the Corben artwork in the Style C one-sheet, which is of course completely different from this piece. That is, Pressman-Williams never asserted any copyright interest in this particular poster, or the artwork contained within it, ever.. So the weird copyright date issue remains, to me, a mystery. Another correspondent has suggested that the "Copyright 1978" might just have been an error, plain and simple. As far as 20th Century Fox's archives. my understanding is that they have virtually nothing on this film, which is why Fox has, in the past, actually borrowed materials from me(!) on occasion. I'll be amazed if the archivist there comes up with anything, but of course extremely grateful. And thanks for the kind words about the site! I appreciate it! -Ari From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ed Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 06:34 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MOPO] Can anyone identify this Phantom of the Paradise poster? Hi -Ari, I had some collectors email and ask me to take a look at your poster. Phantom was definitely an unusual production with a LOT of oddities. Looking at the poster in question, it's laid out in standard international format without any US ratings or NSS information (which is obvious). At that time, NSS was printing most of 20th Century's 'printed in US' international pieces but just not putting the NSS information on them. I doesn't appear that this poster was actually registered in the copyright office so no information from that direction. But that was standard with 20th Century. There is a clause in their contract with NSS for them to just apply the copyright date without registering it. I checked the NSS logs and no record of distribution from NSS at that time. It appears that the film had more popularity in Canada. NSS printed and shipped this style poster to Canada. There were 4 major NSS outlets in Canada that would then apply local ratings by way of stickers. One possibility could be that an additional print was made in 1978 for one or more of the Canadian NSS outlets. With the change in copyright information from 20th Century in 1974 to Pressman Williams in 1975, the change back on a new printing to 20th Century would have caused them to apply the new date. This seems like the most logical reason for this issue. Unfortunately, I don't have anyone in Canada to confirm this. I know the archivist at 20th Century Fox, so I sent it over to him and asked if he would check to see if there was anything in their files that would indicate the purpose of this issue. As soon as I hear back from him, I'll be glad to post it. Best, Ed Poole [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> owner LearnAboutMoviePosters.com <http://www.learnaboutmovieposters.com/> MoviePosterDataBase.com <http://www.learnaboutmovieposters.com/newsite/MOVIES/MPDB.asp> 504-298-LAMP P. S. I looked at your presentation of Phantom on your site. You have done a fantastic job and really need to be commended. _____ From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of The Principal Archivist Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 12:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [MOPO] Can anyone identify this Phantom of the Paradise poster? Hi, I'm brand new to this group, but have been collecting film memorabilia, particularly material related to a 1974 Brian De Palma film called "Phantom of the Paradise," for about thirty years, and recently acquired an item that baffles me; I'm wondering if any of you might have any insight you'd be kind enough to share. The poster is pictured here: http://www.swanarchives.org/AJ/mysteryintl.jpg It's one-sheet sized: 27"x41", and is on the same sort of glossy stock as was used for American one sheets in the 70's. While at first glance it looks like a regular Style A one-sheet, (1) there's no PG logo (suggesting it might be for an international release); (2) there's no NSS verbiage at the bottom-center and no NSS number (just "Litho in USA"); and (3) most oddly of all, the copyright notice under the 20th Century Fox logo says "1978," when the film was released in 1974, and there was no international release (as far as I've been able to determine) that commenced in 1978. Also, it has three horizontal folds, but NO vertical fold, which seems odd to me. While the relative size of the artwork is correct as compared to the regular Style A one-sheets, the credits at the bottom are in a smaller font than on the one-sheet, and are also in yellow, rather than in in the white print that's found on the one-sheet. (For comparison, you could take a look at the one-sheet on my site, at http://www.swanarchives.org, at this particular page: http://www.swanarchives.org/Promotion.asp ) And, if you're actually interested in memorabilia from this film, the non-American stuff I've been able to find is here: http://www.swanarchives.org/Promotion_World.asp Although I've named the file "mysteryintl.jpg," that's just my own name for it, and the use of "intl" shouldn't be construed as evidence that it's a poster for an international release. I was just guessing. Any help? This is keeping me up at night. Thanks! -Ari Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.14860) http://www.pctools.com <http://www.pctools.com/?cclick=EmailFooterClean_51> ======= Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.14870) http://www.pctools.com <http://www.pctools.com/?cclick=EmailFooterClean_51> ======= Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
