Rereleases and variations (Apocalypse Now and Saving Private Ryan)

[Charlie]

A thought has been creeping in my head since the Mad Max info came to light.  I have noticed there are three versions of Apocalypse Now and then there are the Dreamworks Crisp line and not so crisp line for Saving Private Ryan.  

I checked IMDB and Both of these films had re-releases:

Apocalypse Now:

USA    15 August 1979    
USA    28 August 1987    (re-release)

Also found these box office numbers:

$78,784,010 (USA) (31 March 1980)
$322,489 (USA) (19 August 1979)

From:  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078788/releaseinfo

The Three Variations

A.B.C.

Two Others: Review and Advance

D.E.

I would say the B, C, and E came out at the same time having the same title text weight and size....  D has darker text and is in quotation marks...

Could one of the three variations be a re-release?  If a movie is a re-release is there need for the title?  All are folded image up so the title would help the exchange houses...

Need some zoomed in images of "Litho in US"  I have Version C and it is GAUI logo.... So pre-1987/1983....  But why no NSS Warning?

Saving Private Ryan:

USA    24 July 1998
USA    5 February 1999    (re-release)

From:  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120815/releaseinfo

Check Dave's Explanation of the Dreamworks Line:  http://www.cinemasterpieces.com/cine_S.htm#saving

Could the low resolution line be the re-release being printed lower quality?

Just some thoughts....

[eatbrie]

There was only 1 poster printed for Saving Private Ryan.  It was not reprinted for the AA re-release.  I worked at DreamWorks at the time.  If there is a variation, it is either a bad printing job, or a bootleg.

T

[Dread_Pirate_Mel]

I'm convinced the Saving Private Ryan is a fake.  The suspected reprint has fuzzy printing, the back of the reprint is an exact mirror image (the real one is lighter/whiter), and it is slightly cropped on the right.  How many defects can be excused away?

[bondposters.com]

I'm not involved in any of the above, but sometimes the same posters can be trimmed differently and the printing colours etc can also be different.

I'm kinda glad in a way I specialise in Bond, because you guys must send yourselves round the bend at times with all the suspected fakes and whatnot! Good work though!

[paul waines]

Yep, It is quite difficult to fake older posters, I'm glad I don't buy much Modern stuff...  I can sleep at nights.

[bondposters.com]

Yep, It is quite difficult to fake older posters, I'm glad I don't buy much Modern stuff...  I can sleep at nights.

With the bedding you could make out of all your quads, I too would sleep at nights! 

[Charlie]

Well I found a pic of the 1987 re-release from Dan's Auction; so count the three out for re-release.  Why would there be three different printings?



http://cgi.ebay.com/Apocalypse-Now-ROLLED-27x41-1987-Reissue-Orig-Poster-/300580178189?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item45fbf9890d

[Harry Caul]

Well, from your box office reports, it looks like it was in theaters the better part of 8 months (if not more).  If I had to guess, which is all I can do, one poster was probably used for the first small LA/NYC release.  Then the advance and another printing for the wide release.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if the third poster was from a second printing after the movie lasted longer than expected or expanded to more theaters/markets than originally planned.

[Charlie]

Well, from your box office reports, it looks like it was in theaters the better part of 8 months (if not more).  If I had to guess, which is all I can do, one poster was probably used for the first small LA/NYC release.  Then the advance and another printing for the wide release.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if the third poster was from a second printing after the movie lasted longer than expected or expanded to more theaters/markets than originally planned.

C?  So you think they generally removed the NNS warning on  wider releases?

Well I did some statistic using Bruce's auctions...

Statistics for the Four Variations

A. No Title in Bottom Right with NSS Warning  (15/54 = 27%)  (Mod_Out 15/47 = 32%)



B. Title in Bottom Right with NSS Warning (34/54 = 63%).  All rolled copies were from this version (14/34 = 44% were rolled) could be that Bruce got a batch here...
    For Outlying rolled, remove half as adjustment (27/47 = 57%)



C. Title in Bottom Right without NSS Warning (4/54 = 7%) (Mod_Out 4/47 = 9%)



D. No Title, No NSS (1/54 = 2%) (Mod_Out 1/47 =  2%)



E. Re-release per Dan the Authenticator's Auction



Based on statistics I am leaning toward A (32% over 10 years) and B (57% over ten years) be the wide release versions, C (9% over ten years) being a limited release and D (2%) either a very first release/premier, international (no ratings box) or a fake...

Thoughts?

[Charlie]

I'm convinced the Saving Private Ryan is a fake.  The suspected reprint has fuzzy printing, the back of the reprint is an exact mirror image (the real one is lighter/whiter), and it is slightly cropped on the right.  How many defects can be excused away?

So I got my latest gamble of a bad photographed Saving Private Ryan for $10 in the mail today. (and a DS Groundhog Day ).  Turned out to be totally legit; solid line and shaded backside. And in Vg-F condition.  Go figure spend $30+ship on the first one that I thought was real (assuming it isn't).  Got to love this hobby.  So now, I can rest easy going into the next year that I at least have one or both original Saving Private Ryan poster(s)...