Steve, you have a variety of issues defining this as a "snipes poster"
1) no such snipes layout has ever been seen and would be unlikely to be printed in such a manner, If they were going to prints snipes in such a sheet and cut them down (which would be cut at the printer) it would all be a single title. Theatre owners would not have 13 weeks of posters delivered at once and in teh case of serial posters, they also weren't all printed at one time. One style is delivered at a time with the reel of film shown that week
2) we do indeed know that serials were shown complete, after the entire serial has been shown an episode each week. These showing took place on Saturdays to fill the theatres with kids and would be followed by a feature film. We know this.
3) because the initial post did not mention where it sold, I had to go look (once it was mentioned where it was sold)
unfortunately, I can't see a gigantic image, but there is no text in the bottom area other than 51, so it isn't an NSS poster and very possibly is a locally printed poster.
anything else is pure conjecture.
His listing says "Apparently, when they re-released this serial in 1951, they made a generic one-sheet (which we have never seen before, nor have we ever seen anything from the 1951 re-release of this serial)"
well there is no re-issue of this title known to exist. The IMDB does not mention any reissues, so his definition description has no evidence to back his claims
we also know (by his own admissions in this thread:
http://vintagemoviepostersforum.com/discussion/1649/the-adventures-of-robin-hood-australian-3-sheet/p10 ) that his database has THOUSANDS OF MISTAKES. That is in addition to his thousands of corrected (or more specifically, sanitized) mistakes. Who's to say this isn't another mistake, just like the Vacation 'teaser poster' that no proof was postulated by the claimant that it is a movie poster at all.
note: thousands of mistakes in this case= thousands of times that they sold a poster incorrectly described
note #2: is sanitizing his database for the hobby's benefit, or to cover his mistakes, so people think he doesn't make them?in my world, when I have such a poster as this, where no identifiable data can with certainty show what this poster is, I don't offer it for sale until such a time as it can be properly identified. I have several items that defy identification in stock, and so they remain in a drawer or box until they can be. That's because I refuse to sell anything to anyone without being able to guarantee what it is and this item is so anomalous as to defy description. If I were to offer the poster, I would make no pontifications that it is "this or that". It is unidentifiable. Their mistake is giving it a definite description, without any proof it is anything like what they sold it as.
I say it's a poster to be displayed just as it is, probably next to a copy of the regular one sheet (chapter one, full serial poster), he thinks it's a poster of snipes, even though no such format has ever been seen before. He's just guessing, just like with that Vacation poster that he calls a teaser. I say that's a plain art poster, just like the Frazetta 'Gauntlet" poster.
you have to
prove your points, if you're going to dispute what I'm saying.
You have to prove him right, before yu can prove me wrong.
