Lost In Translation One Sheet (Scarlett Johannson)

[Dread_Pirate_Mel]

I've had a digital repro of this poster for a long time and I finally landed an original one-sheet (one-sided).

It's pretty easy to distinguish them side by side.  The original is exactly 27x40 and the reprint is 27x 39 13/16.



The original has much richer colors:



Note the cropping on the reprint on the right and top:



Scarlett's face has a much warmer brown tone on the original.  The reprint has a greenish tinge:



Much sharper fonts on the original:





As shown on MoviePosterAuthenticating.com, the original and reprint Japanese B2 can be similarly distinguished.

[ddilts399]

Those were actually both domestic US one-sheets distributed in equal allocations when the film was originally released.

[Dread_Pirate_Mel]

Those were actually both domestic US one-sheets distributed in equal allocations when the film was originally released.

OK thanks for info.  If they were equally printed, why is it easy to find the Bill Murray but very difficult to find an original Scarlett?

[eatbrie]

Because Scarlett is hot and Bill... not so hot.

[ddilts399]

Correct! The Scarlett flew off everyones shelves, the Murray went considerably slower. Just a demand thing.

[Dread_Pirate_Mel]

Correct! The Scarlett flew off everyones shelves, the Murray went considerably slower. Just a demand thing.

Dale, do you know the number of SS and DS Scarlett posters the studio printed?  According to Wikipedia, it opened in 864 theaters.  

They seem to be extraordinarily rare.  Looking over the old forum archives they were in heavy demand in the mid-2000s.  A linen-backed copy sold for $186 in 2006 on Emovie.

In the last 15 months I've seen two DS Scarletts pop up for sale - one sold for $255 on Emovie and one sold for $115 on Ebay.  The dealer who sold mine apparently has a roll of SS and is the sole source publicly selling them to my knowledge.

[Marty Moose]

Is it just me that would rather have Murray than Scarlet on the wall?  The guy is a legend.

A friend of mine has the UK Quad equivalent up in his toilet.  The sight of Bill's disgruntled hangdog expression as he disapprovingly looks down on you as you sit pinching one out is a sight to behold.

[ddilts399]

They do not publish printing numbers anywhere that I am aware of, and anyone you ask will come up with their own guess but not reliable.

The theater folks I know, got an even split of the normal allocation. So if you normally get 10 posters, you would have gotten 5 of each on this one, not 10 of each, and more than likely you had to have a play date.

Keep in mind this was a Focus film and they were not heavily dishing out posters at that time and really still don't.

[archie leach]

They do not publish printing numbers anywhere that I am aware of, and anyone you ask will come up with their own guess but not reliable.

The theater folks I know, got an even split of the normal allocation. So if you normally get 10 posters, you would have gotten 5 of each on this one, not 10 of each, and more than likely you had to have a play date.

Keep in mind this was a Focus film and they were not heavily dishing out posters at that time and really still don't.

I am surprised to hear you say that.  Focus must be targeting a specific theaters, as my friend's place gets many more Focus posters than from just about any other studio.

Using number of screens (other than say 50 screens vs. 1000) is nearly useless in determining print runs.

[od_sf]

Many thanks for this post Mel, I just bought both the Murray & Johannson one sheets and this was extremely useful. 

[Disheveledamethyst]

I am surprised to hear you say that.  Focus must be targeting a specific theaters, as my friend's place gets many more Focus posters than from just about any other studio.

Using number of screens (other than say 50 screens vs. 1000) is nearly useless in determining print runs.

At our theatre, we literally never get Focus posters.