And the good thing with EMP is... if there is info about a poster
that is wrong or incorrect, that is then later realized, they will
update their database and also inform the buyer(s).
On Jun 20, 2015, at 9:49 PM, Wim Jansen wrote:
That’s hitting the nail on the head. The info on EMP/HA is not as
reliable as it is often given credit for. EMP in particular does
not use the term „according to a collector” for nothing and
rightly so. There’s just too little info around in general.
As there’s no printer’s info at all on the other re-release
posters on EMP/HA I would not be surprised to hear later that those
are from re-releases in the very late fifties or even sixties.
I still like the idea that this is a British re-release poster, in
any case this one is surely a rare one.
You really need the press books from the various releases (if such
a series exist) to be sure. Has Bruce not a couple of British press
books in his collection?
Op 21 jun. 2015, om 04:46 heeft David <[email protected]> het
volgende geschreven:
So if that is NOT a 1949 original UK1SH for foreign distribution
but perhaps a 1955 first release foreign 1SH (and I am not saying
one way or another), it does lead down the dark path to the next
most obvious question: what are and what date are these sold by
EMP and the same question for these ones sold by HA (who have sold
the same poster both as an original 1949 and as an R-50s) all of
which look like poor quality productions of this BIDLL one and
this EMP one and none include the printer's details nor the litho
details etc etc.
I guess when Jeff you said "More research should be done on this
before calling it a "for certain" '49 original release OS, one
would think" it seems obvious the seller did exactly that by and
referred to the two biggest databases around, taken the
information as presented and understandably has now put his piece
up for auction based on all that information.
Obviously there are a few stones to look under before we get there.
David
Jeff Potokar wrote on 21/06/2015 8:17 AM:
It does.
And Bruce may be mistaken, as well.
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2015, at 3:01 PM, David wrote:
Question to all...
Doesn't the BIDLL one look a whole lot like this 1949 version?
http://www.emovieposter.com/agallery/archiveitem/12681291.html
David
Wim Jansen wrote on 21/06/2015 5:07 AM:
Okay this is bugging me, I have done a quick reference search
based on pics of Heritage (nice details!) and Emovie (aaargh
not enough detail) of London Films productions from Imdb.
Here we go:
FALLEN IDOL 1948 onesheet London Film logo, nothing on Lion
International Nottingham only
MAN BETWEEN 1953 one sheet London Film logo, nothing on Lion
International printer not visible
CAPTAIN�S PARADISE 53 halfsheet London Film credits no logo,
British Lion logo (actual lion) Nott.ham only
HOBSON�s CHOIce 1954 one sheet London Film logo, nothing on
Lion International probably just Nottingham - unclear
BELLES OF ST.TRINIANS 1954 3sheet London Films International
and logo printer not visible
RICHARD III 1955 onesheet �distribution controlled by London
Films International", no logo Nottingham and London
Kid FOR TWO FARTHINGS 1955 one sheet London Film
logo Nott.ham and London
IRON PETTICOAT 1956 six sheet Lion International, no London
Film printer not visible
I think I have solid ground for my position that it�s a
rerelease, I�d say after 1955. There�s a book on the history
of the Stafford Company by a local heritage writer, but
there�s not a copy available on the net. Grrr, I want that.
However I would not be at all surprised the Biddll one is
printed in London in late 1955 the earliest.
Wim
Op 20 jun. 2015, om 20:22 heeft Jeff Potokar
<[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
From the British Lion website. A brief history of the company,
also mentioning that BL became a distribution company in 1955,
after it fell into receivership.
http://www.britishlion.com/british-lion-history.shtml
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2015, at 11:04 AM, Wim Jansen wrote:
I disagree, I think the absence off the London Film logo is
pretty crucial. Anyway I�m gonna find my Carol Reed book,
maybe that has some more details on the release schedule,
probably not though.
Looking at the re-release posters on Heritage and emovie I�m
wondering how sure are we that those are not international
releases and the Biddl one is the real English rerelease.
That would also explain the differences in the printer
information.
W
Op 20 jun. 2015, om 19:49 heeft Simon Oram
<[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
I'm more in the thinking that it's a International UK 1
sheet for the first release in one of the colonies. Due to
its obvious closeness and decent printing standard it's very
close to the original release date. David said that The
Third Man was released in Australia March 1950. OK the
poster is in New Zealand but I think with that sort of info
that sways me into thinking that way.
Simon
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
From: Richard C Evans
Sent: Saturday, 20 June 2015 18:06
To: [email protected]
Reply To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MOPO] [FA] ULTRA Rare English One Sheet - The
Third Man (1949)
The unfavourable scenario (presumably no one is thinking
fake), is that it could be an International RR?
(Prior to that horrible "RR" which is based on it. I think
based on the actual printed poster, and no connection to
original plates.)
Would they bother doing it for International RR? Especially
with decent quality printing, (as good as the domestic).
Everything points to it being contemporary to the domestic
printed version, and any variances between the posters make
sense.
One print run for domestic version, one run for
international. Whether done at the same branch of the
printers or not.
A different version would require a different set of plates
to be made up, hence any minor differences with illustration
along with required changes. (?)
Sent from my iPhone
On 20 Jun 2015, at 16:40, Paul Gerrard <00000060c3f9be9c-
[email protected]> wrote:
Different companies! Eagle-Lion was Rank as you correctly
say; but Lion International was part of London Films/
British Lion. It's just that we can't be 100% sure when
Lion International started...
Paul
www.movieposterstudio.com
In a message dated 20/06/2015 15:19:47 GMT Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
Hi David,
I would presume Lion International was part of Eagle-Lion
owned by J. Arthur Rank. Eagle Lion were founded in 1946.
This is interesting from Wikipedia, especially the last
part �From 1946-1949 Eagle-Lion was under the control of
Arthur Krim who in addition to releasing films by Rank and
reissues of David O. Selznick films�.
Obviously I�m not saying the poster on Bidll is definitely
a reissue/re-release but I think it would be worth checking
on more.
Regards Simon
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?
SUBED1=MoPo-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-
L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-
L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MoPo-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.american.edu/scripts/wa-american.exe?SUBED1=MoPo-
L&A=1
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.
