Skip to content

Dating Trader Horn

Sometimes when there is no other record available then you have to go with probability, that is until something else comes along...

This was dated as an original poster from 1931, it is not - at best it will be from the 1938 re-release of the movie.

image


Reason Number One

The censorship "For General Exhibition" was not brought into law until 1932, a year after that this article appeared in the papers: 

The new system of censorship provides that films shall be classified as "for general exhibition" or "unsuitable for general exhibition." The new regulations provide even for parents suffering from impaired vision. The indication of the class of film to' be exhibited must be advertised on posters In the same type as that of the rest of the matter contained, in the case of general exhibition pictures in a triangle approximately one-twelfth the size of the poster,and in the case of those considered unsuitable for the young in a circle of similar dimensions. 

Reason Number Two

This is the original (soon to be auctioned):

image

For your edification, here is a review of the movie, Sydney Morning Herald, 7 September 1931

image





EMP has been advised.
«1

Comments

  • Wow...am finding out just how shallow my knowledge of posters is -- read through some of the dating the Daybill threads--am guessing that Aussie paper did not have a year/numbering system as did the NSS system in US? Did a quick visual look at some Aussie & English one sheets and they do not appear to have a numbering system as well. Is the dating difficulty found there as well or is it more prevalent with the Daybill?
  • Unlike the USA there was no recording system in Australia for the poster to indicate when the poster or for that matter the movie to which the poster was referencing came out, although some (rare) do have dates on them.

    This has presented a big problem for collectors being able to correctly identify the date of the poster, the problem has been compounded over the years as sellers simply guess, although places like EMP have always tried to be accurate mistakes happen and then other sellers come along take the (incorrect) EMP information as gospel and suddenly you have a re-releases being touted all over the place as original or dated incorrectly.

    Some of the examples in this section show how bad it has gotten over the years, but where it is frustrating is some sellers, particularly the unscrupulous ones on eBay, will simply refuse to change their information because reality comes with a discount. To his credit EMP will correct his database when we correctly identify dates in this forum.




  • Is that original release Trader Horn 30x40?
  • edited January 2015

    CSM said:
    Is that original release Trader Horn 30x40?

  • David said:

    CSM said:
    Is that original release Trader Horn 30x40?
    Printed by Ltd Litho, Sydney
    Oh I know it's an Aussie release - I was just curious as to the dimensions.  I have an Aussie one sheet from 1940 that is 30x40 and I have seen others from the 30s that are the same odd size...
  • You beat my edit - it's 101 x 72 cm
  • Can you post that 30x40 Chris, I can't seem to remember it.
  • David said:
    You beat my edit - it's 101 x 72 cm
    Thanks David so it's the usual Aussie size of approx 28x40 or 27x40
  • Matt said:
    Can you post that 30x40 Chris, I can't seem to remember it.
    Sure can:

    image
  • Wow Chris. That must look more impressive up close!
  • Matt said:
    Wow Chris. That must look more impressive up close!
    Thanks Matt.  I like it - great colours, great title and it's something different
  • Btw Chris-like the Wolf/NY poster-nice contrast of the brown wolf against the background of bldgs!
  • The image with the blue background credited as being am original Australian 1931 release is a worry to me. It has no printers credits, which on other Australian one sheets of this period were shown as being printed by Simmons Pty. Limited Sydney. The company mention  as being ''Metro Goldwyn Mayer's Trader Horn'' is different from other 1931 releases such as Politics, Sidewalks Of New York & This Modern Age which have ''A Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Picture'' printed on them but the biggest concern to me is the lack of actors credits on the poster. This makes me wonder if this poster is a 2nd printing or a later re-release poster.

    Hondo

     



  • Trader Horn and that Wolf look marvelous!
  • Interesting that I have just noticed e'movieposter.com have the exact poster image credited as the country of origin being the U.S.


    Hondo 

  • edited March 2015
    HONDO said:

    The image with the blue background credited as being am original Australian 1931 release is a worry to me. It has no printers credits, which on other Australian one sheets of this period were shown as being printed by Simmons Pty. Limited Sydney. 

    Printer's credits are bottom left. Unfortunately I can't read it all but what I can read says "xxxx Ltd Litho. Sydney"
  • eMovieposter.com have altered their two poster images information from  U.S. one sheet to Australian one sheet. for the blue background Trader Horn poster after contacting them and speaking to Bruce. I now believe this poster is from the original Australian 1931 release. I will post more information on my reasons for this within a few days after I receive confirmation regarding some information I recently came across.


    Hondo 

  • Good work guys!
  • edited April 2015
    HONDO said:

    eMovieposter.com have altered their two poster images information from  U.S. one sheet to Australian one sheet. for the blue background Trader Horn poster after contacting them and speaking to Bruce. I now believe this poster is from the original Australian 1931 release. I will post more information on my reasons for this within a few days after I receive confirmation regarding some information I recently came across.


    Hondo 

    Those two images (on Bruce's site) are the same poster image used twice. Also same question for this: where's the printer's info?

    I think it is great that Bruce adjust his info when it is corrected but I sure wish he would note that the item has been edited since originally published/sold, especially when he is changing the information of an auctioned item. This is normal practice for almost all types of publications.

    Problem is he shows an item that was sold for (say) $100 as an original and he then changes it later to show it was a re-release (or visa-versa) so people see it and see think that's the price of the re-release (now with the corrected information) - or visa-versa. 

    There have been a lot of Daybills adjusted (some as a result of the research done on this site), but no one is the wiser as to whether the price was for the items as described or as previously described.
  • David said:
    HONDO said:

    eMovieposter.com have altered their two poster images information from  U.S. one sheet to Australian one sheet. for the blue background Trader Horn poster after contacting them and speaking to Bruce. I now believe this poster is from the original Australian 1931 release. I will post more information on my reasons for this within a few days after I receive confirmation regarding some information I recently came across.


    Hondo 

    Those two images (on Bruce's site) are the same poster image used twice. Also same question for this: where's the printer's info?

    I think it is great that Bruce adjust his info when it is corrected but I sure wish he would note that the item has been edited since originally published/sold, especially when he is changing the information of an auctioned item. This is normal practice for almost all types of publications.

    Problem is he shows an item that was sold for (say) $100 as an original and he then changes it later to show it was a re-release (or visa-versa) so people see it and see think that's the price of the re-release (now with the corrected information) - or visa-versa. 

    There have been a lot of Daybills adjusted (some as a result of the research done on this site), but no one is the wiser as to whether the price was for the items as described or as previously described.
    Very true David. There should be a notation on all listings that have been changed after the auction.
  • Got this email from Phil a couple of days ago, which is good to see.


    This e-mail is regarding your purchase of TEN COMMANDMENTS Australian daybill poster on 6/12/2011 for $37.

    At the time we auctioned this poster, we believed it was from the original 1956 release of this movie in Australia. But we recently discovered that the poster is actually from an undated (probably 1960) re-release. The printer "Robert Burton" did not exist until 1959 (we did not know this previously). You may have known this when you purchased the poster, but we did not, so we wanted to be sure you knew.  If you did, that's great, but if you did not realize this was from a 1960 re-release, you are welcome to return it for a full refund, because we guarantee everything we sell, no matter how long it is after the sales date.

    Just let us know whether you want to keep it or return it (and if you want to return it, we will send you instructions).  Of course, we very much apologize for our mistake, and we assure you that we had no idea that it was a re-release, because we NEVER intentionally deceive any of our customers.  We've made notes about this in our system so we do not make this mistake again.

    We are the only auction we know of who offers refunds for mistakes even YEARS after the fact, and we are also the only one we know of who tracks down the buyers and doesn't wait for them to discover the mistake themselves!

    We await your reply.

    Thanks,
    Phil



  • My reply would be something like "Yeah thanks a lot for screwing me over...there's no fucking way a linen backed re-release copy is worth $37. Flaming a$%eholes"


  • God awful poster anyway. Send it back.

    I see now that those two "original" posters has now been re-dated and edited as R60 with the description "...Undated (probably 1960) Re-Release"

    It does add weight to the fact that changes after an auction has ended should be noted as an edit - the Ten Commandments is a good example as the course that it shows the price as $37 and $106, for a re-release whereas those prices paid were for (what was believed to be) original posters it seems to me that the pricing database is flawed if the price paid is for something that doesn't exist.

    It might be one of the biggest databases in the world for movie posters (sales/auction) but what good is it if it is not accurate?
  • edited April 2015

    I agree with David that it is very commendable that Bruce does everything possible to get things right in his listings. However, I also agree that it is important that the database reflects what actually happened at an auction. 

    There obviously have been many corrections to the database, usually where a poster has turned out to be from a later release. However, there are also some examples where a poster was mistakenly listed as say, a 70s re release when it turns out to be actually a much earlier release or even original. The error in the listing date must have an effect on how much it sold for.

    When you look at the database long after the auction has ended, you don't see whether the listing might have been corrected/changed and how that may have affected the price.

  • Matt said:

    My reply would be something like "Yeah thanks a lot for screwing me over...there's no fucking way a linen backed re-release copy is worth $37. Flaming a$%eholes"


    Well given the Aussie exchange rate you'd probably actually be making $$$ returning it at this point in time!
  • I originally posted I had some concerns with the blue background Trader Horn Australian one sheet. When I mentioned there were no printers credits I had only examined closely the eMovieposter.com image. Bruce has since  informed me the poster was most likely trimmed at the bottom removing the printers details.He also sent me an image of the Fred Powis signature which is very hard to read but it is his signature and this would make it original release i'm sure.Also an original Australian newspaper advertisement for the 1931 release has "'the miracle of pictures'' printed on it which appears on the one sheet. And the last thing is Pickles auction in 1998 sold two Trader Horn posters  and all the posters in the catalogue were from between 1927 and 1932 with the majority being from 1931, so it is more than likely this is were the poster originally came from.


    Hondo.

  • So, VMP Forum had it right...  :D
  • Thought this image of interest.

    image

    t

  • edited April 2015
    Wonder when it was published, obviously post 1931.

    Off Wiki:

    Alfred Aloysius "Trader" Horn (born Alfred Aloysius Smith; 1861–1931) was an ivory trader in central Africa. He wrote a book, Trader Horn: A Young Man's Astounding Adventures in 19th-Century Equatorial Africa (ISBN 1-885211-81-3), detailing his journeys into jungles teeming with buffalo, gorillas, man-eating leopards, serpents and "savages". The book also documents his efforts to free slaves, meet the founder of Rhodesia, Cecil Rhodes, and liberate a princess from captivity.

    A silent film exists of Horn, as well as recent writings about him online

    Film adaptations


    Here's a pic of the young man in 1929

    image

    And some more, this time from the film whilst shot on location:

     

     
    Trader Horn publicity shot with Edwina Booth, Duncan Renaldo, and Harry Carey
      
      
    movie ticket Ten Commandments
    Trader Horn (1931), dir. W.S. Van Dyke

    Above: Edwina "The White Goddess" Booth, Duncan Renaldo,
    Harry "Trader Horn" Carey, and Mutia Omoolu

    MGM dispatched Van Dyke and his crew of Culver City sound men and camera operators to shoot and record the movie in Kenya and Uganda, the first synchronous sound film shot on location in Africa. The synch sound documentary by Martin and Osa Johnson—Congorilla—followed in 1932.
    The shooting of Trader Horn was matinee movie Hollywood at its 1930s apogee: accidents, moonlight, and camp-tent romances. Tse-tse flies swarmed. Locusts marauded. Booth fell out of a tree. Carey almost lost the foot he dangled above crocodiles. Barefooted, unnetted, and skimpily clad, Booth contracted "mysterious jungle diseases" (malaria), languished for years, and sued MGM for her career-ending illness. In the movie, she spoke not a word of English, grunting instead in "African dialect." One Kikuyu crewman succumbed to a charging rhino; another slipped into the gullet of a crocodile. Duncan Renaldo's wife sued Booth for alienation of affection.
    Inscribing a copy of Horning Into Africa, the memoir he wrote on filming Trader Horn, Van Dyke wrote " To the girl of my secret adoration—Eleanor Packer—from W.S. Van Dyke. In tiny script he added, "Eleanor, I've never dared say what I wanted to but I can think what I damn please. Van."
    [Myra Loy played "Eleanor Packer" in Van Dyke's production of Manhattan Melodrama (1934). Van Dyke and Myrna Loy collaborated on nine films together, most notably The Thin Man series.]
    Nominated for "Best Picture" of 1930/31, Trader Horn lost to RKO Radio Pictures' Cimarron.
     
     
      
     
    page from "Trader Horn" by Alfred Aloysius Horn
     Trader Horn: Being the Life and Works of Alfred Aloysius Horn: an "Old Vinter"...the works written by himself at the age of seventy-three and the life, with such of his philosophy as it the gift of age and experience, taken down here and edited by Ethelreda Lewis (New York, 1927), pp. 212-213 (excerpts) 
     Horn drifts through his picaresque life in Equatorial Africa in the pages of this memoir. In the page above he recollects his rendezvous with Nina, the "white goddess"of the forest. Readers in 1927 devoured it. The book launched the movie. 
    Trader Horn publicity shot with Edwina Booth
    Edwina Booth, publicity shot for Trader Horn
    "We went back to camp and were overjoyed to learn that Edwina Booth had shot a nice lion and Eddie Cornwall, my generator man, had shot another. I raced to where the carcasses were and found the natives had just finished skinning the animals. I gave one howl of despair and fainted."
    W.S. Van Dyke, Horning Into Africa (19310, p. 161.
    shooting Trader Horn on location in Africa
    Joseph Breen letter condeming King of the Gorillas
    Hollywood-based MPPDA Code Administrator Joseph Breen letter to New York-based MPDAA executive Francis Harmon (excerpts)

     

     

     

  • The previous posting by David shares some information off Wikipedia stating there was a 1934 film adaptation of Trader Horn. I can't film a single shred of evidence that there was a 1934 Trader Horn film. I am always happy to be proved wrong so if someone can enlighten me with some details it would be most appreciated?


    Hondo

Sign In or Register to comment.






Logo

For movie poster collectors who know...

@ 2025 Vintage Movie Posters Forum, All rights reserved.

Contact us

info@vintagemoviepostersforum.com

Get In Touch