The problem is that while there are plenty of very good books, (though this appears in only one that I know of), despite the writers' best efforts inevitably there are going to factual errors.
And once these errors are in print they are taken as fact and are near impossible to correct. The UK poster for Chelsea Girls was first reproduced in print in John Barnicott's "Posters" in the late sixties/early seventies. He reproduced a commercial printing not the original. Since then the error has been repeated in publications and it's the commercial printing that's been considered the original and commanded high prices. Not helped by the fact that the original printing is near non existent. Christies are still doing well with those. There are still dealers crediting Saul Bass for the design of West Side Story, though it has now been well established that the design was by the less commercial Joe Caroff. Likewise with The Birdman of Alcatraz, again commonly credited to Saul Bass, though it seems far more likely that the design was solely by Bob Peak. For you Geraldine, in your role as arch nemesis of Grey Smith, it may suffice for me to say that the main source of info on this poster is Heritage. It may well be entirely accurate, and I don't doubt the honesty of the intention, but there are in it at least minor inaccuracies. I don't think it would particularly matter if it was a test run, or that it did indeed run, it's still a great piece. It may well have run, I'm just not entirely convinced, and given what's known it seems odd that Kubrick (who had total control over CO) would have approved it. More of that here: http://stylec.yuku.com/topic/7834 And it does seem strange that the only print run that wasn't used for the movie poster that I can recall offhand, (aside from the Bass specials, and withdrawn posters like the "rare" UK Deer Hunter) is the Saul Bass design for Schindler's List. You'd perhaps imagine there'd be more examples than that. On 25 Jun 2012, at 05:18, Geraldine Kudaka wrote: > Our Pelham copy wasn't rolled. > > Interesting that you are having hard time finding info on it. > > We really didn't know what we had in our collection because we weren't into > buying and selling. When we started thinking about selling and realized the > first step was going to be identifying what we had, it seemed like an > insurmountable task. So I'm surprised at how hard it is for you -- a > collector -- to find the information. And to what lengths you have to go to > find the information. Here, I'm assuming you have movie poster guides and > reference materials on your desk, but not finding what you need in your > resources -- well that's interesting. And contacting Kubrick's archive -- > that's impressive. > > Kinda reminds me of Abel Gance's Napolean. The amount of research necessary > to get the info you need -- in Gance's case, it was Kevin Brownlow's life > long obsession with the film that resulted in its reconstruction. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napol%C3%A9on_%281927_film%29 > > I don't know if Mike Kaplan is still alive -- he was older than Charley -- > but he certainly would know. > > In fact -- if one could find him -- you'd have the info you needed to know > and probably from the best source. Filmmakers don't think of the posters -- > they think of their films -- and the poster artist generally is thinking of > their whole artistic career, so Kaplan would really know why the Pelham was > made and what happened to that campaign. > > From: Richard C Evans <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 1:41 PM > Subject: Re: [MOPO] Rich - Pelham poster > > Thanks Geraldine. > > Very difficult to find info on this, have already made extensive efforts. > > Though I'm reasonably sure the printing (though not the design it's based on) > originates in the US. > > Next step for me is the Kubrick archive, who have told me on the telephone > they have nothing relating to this poster, (but they do have Bill Gold's > cruxifiction design which Kubrick rejected). They may though have something > relating to it in Kubrick's communications with WB. > > Whether it did actually ran or is a print run of a proposed poster, still no > clue. > > Does seem that these only come to market rolled and via execs, though I may > be wrong on that. > > Thanks for the info, much appreciated. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 24 Jun 2012, at 18:18, Geraldine Kudaka <[email protected]> wrote: > >> When Charley first worked at MGM, Mike Kaplan was his boss. 2001 had opened >> initially a "Hardware" campagn, it had a good box office but shortly after >> opening fell off at the box office. Mike convinced Kubrick that they should >> replace the Hardware campaign with the Star Child campaign. The Star Child >> campaign was a massive hit, bringing is a huge resurgence at the box office. >> It was the BO success of 2001 that convinced 20th Century/Fox to fund Star >> Wars. >> >> 2001 huge success is evidenced by these figures -- in Dec. 75, the film >> broke even. In March, 1976, Kubrick received his first profit sharing >> residual check. >> >> March 1976 was the same month Star Wars started filming >> >> After conceiving the Star Child campaign for 2001, Mike Kaplan left MGM and >> went to work for Kubrick on Clockwork Orange. When Charley was in London >> working on Star Wars, Mike gave him posters. >> >> Any other history on the Pelham poster or its availability would be best to >> find by googling UK. >> >> From: Richard Evans <[email protected]> >> To: Geraldine Kudaka <[email protected]> >> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:53 AM >> Subject: Re: [MOPO] Rich - Pelham poster >> >> Thanks Geraldine, no rush. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On 24 Jun 2012, at 14:15, Geraldine Kudaka <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> It's Sunday morning and Charley's still asleep so i can't ask him about the >>> Pelham Clockwork Orange. >>> >>> I'll find out later today and let you know. >>> 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. > > 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. > 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.
