2001: A Space Odyssey 40x60 McCall – Genuine 1968 Original Paper or “Just” R-1971? Need Your Expert


Hey everyone,
Just snagged this beautiful rolled 40x60 Robert McCall poster for 2001: A Space Odyssey at Heritage Auctions for only $450 including buyer’s premium. Total steal!
What’s interesting: Heritage originally listed it as a **1968 Original**, then changed the description to **MGM R-1971**.
On the white credit strip at the bottom you can see the printed NSS code **“68/103”** – it’s pretty faint to the naked eye, so I ran a quick Photoshop curves adjustment to make it pop. Right next to it is the red reissue stamp **“74 294”**.
After digging around, here’s what I found:
The code 68/103 matches every confirmed first-run 1968 McCall printing (including other formats). The “74 294” stamp is a standard NSS reissue mark used for the 1974 re-release. So it looks like genuine 1968 original paper that was simply reused in 1974 – a true “reused original.”
Now I’m curious what the community thinks:
Does this count as a **1968 Original with reissue stamp** in your book, or is it still just an R-1971? Has anyone seen similar cases with other titles?
Would love your opinions and especially photos of comparable copies!
Thanks in advance!
2001-a-space-odyssey
robert-mccall
40x60-poster
1968-original
r-1971-reissue
nss-68-103
reissue-stamp
heritage-auctions
vintage-movie-poster
scifi-poster
stanley-kubrick
reused-original
mccall-artwork
bus-stop-size
1

Comments
However, it appears for those re-releases they solely made Star Child one-sheets and no other.
So I feel real comfortable in saying this IS a 1968 poster that was reused and stamped in 1974.
Our position at eMoviePoster.com is that, since such posters WERE printed in the original year, and solely STAMPED for a re-release, to always call them an original, but of course to note the stamp and that it was reused during that re-released.
And such stamps CAN be removed or painted over.
HAS unrestored and unenhanced images - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS 100% honest condition descriptions - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS auctions where the winner is the higher of two real bidders - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS up to SIXTEEN weeks of "Pay and Hold" to save a fortune on shipping - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS real customer service before, during and after EVERY auction, and answers all questions - IS eMoviePoster.com
HAS 25% or 26% "buyers premiums" of any kind (but especially the dreadful "$29 or $49 minimum" ones) - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS "reserves or starts over $1 - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS hidden bidder IDs - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS "nosebleed" shipping charges - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS inadequate packaging - NOT eMoviePoster.com
HAS no customer service to speak of, before, during and after any auction, and answers almost no questions - NOT eMoviePoster.com
Hello Bruce,
It’s a pleasure to meet you. Thank you very much for your thorough assessment — especially since it aligns with my own. 🙂
I will contact Heritage and share my findings with them. I would appreciate it if they would amend the listing, as it is currently “officially” described as a 1971 release… I’m not quite sure how they arrived at 1971 despite the 1974 stamp.
I’ll keep you updated. In the end, this is quite significant when it comes to properly assessing the value of a poster.
I won! Heritage changed it, and now it’s the 1968 issue again. So cool! Bruce was right, and so was I. I won it for $475 (including buyer’s premium). But the URL still says “R-1971,” which is obviously wrong.