Why do so many 30s movie posters feature red and yellow?

[Gurok]

Hello, film buffs! I've noticed quite a few movie posters from the 1930s that feature the same or a similar colour scheme:



I am constantly in awe of your collective knowledge about film history and was wondering if any of you knew why this might be. A lot of the films in this category are low-budget westerns, but not all. A lot of the prints are 4-colour reductions but not all. This can't all just be coincidence, can it?

[oldposterho]

Simple economics. Almost always these posters were created for reissues or roadshow performances (like the first 4 in your top row) and were printed regionally by whoever the el cheapo distributor could get to print them. It was just cheaper to print a duo-tone or tri-tone poster than a full color poster.

You've got some full color first release posters in there. I suspect the yellow background on those was just a way to make the image pop from the background. Kinda of like how modern posters usually have a black background nowadays. Unfortunately, most of those poster designers are unknown to us today, so perhaps there were one or two who just really liked yellow.

What's fascinating to me is how there are clearly 'eras' in studio poster design. Moving past the stone/chromolithographs of the silent and early '30s posters you get the stunning, bold colors of '40s Fox films contrasting with the dull as dirt 2 & 3 color printings of Warner Brothers posters from the same time. You don't even have to look to know which studio/time period those are from.

[Brooksie]

There's also the fact that most exploitation films and reissues were sold on the state's rights market. In most cases there was no studio sending out standard one-sheets, the operator of the local chain or the exhibitor would arrange things for themselves and no doubt do it as cheaply as possible. That's why you see so much variation in exploitation posters - sometimes they'll have scenes that don't exist in any known print today, or have artwork that has nothing to do with the film itself, and so on.

[Spiny Norman]

Simple economics. Almost always these posters were created for reissues or roadshow performances (like the first 4 in your top row) and were printed regionally by whoever the el cheapo distributor could get to print them. It was just cheaper to print a duo-tone or tri-tone poster than a full color poster.

You've got some full color first release posters in there. I suspect the yellow background on those was just a way to make the image pop from the background. Kinda of like how modern posters usually have a black background nowadays. Unfortunately, most of those poster designers are unknown to us today, so perhaps there were one or two who just really liked yellow.

What's fascinating to me is how there are clearly 'eras' in studio poster design. Moving past the stone/chromolithographs of the silent and early '30s posters you get the stunning, bold colors of '40s Fox films contrasting with the dull as dirt 2 & 3 color printings of Warner Brothers posters from the same time. You don't even have to look to know which studio/time period those are from.

Strangely fitting, considering your username!

OOI, could you give some examples of that last difference?

[oldposterho]

These are for 1943 films, first Fox Films (images borrowed from Heritage Auctions):



There's that yellow background! Maybe it's just me but there's a definite 'style' going on here.

And Warners films:



Allegedly Jack Warner was 'cutting down' for the war effort. Fox didn't seem to have an ink shortage.

--Peter (will turn tricks for posters...)

[mwalls]

Slightly off subject, but question then about the lobby cards. WB used linen type cards that most have darkened over the years. Did WB use that material because it was cheaper? I do not believe anyone else used that material.

Matthew

[oldposterho]

I've always felt (based on no evidence) that Warners used the linen cards to separate themselves from the rest of the pack and, to my eye, the linen paper does make them seem 'classier.' That Jack abandoned it for the lackluster tri-color poster style might have been a counter-reaction to the added cost vs. limited perceived benefit of the extra expense. That they didn't age as well as regular paper always struck me as an artifact of the 'linen paper' process. I imagine there was a lot of extra chemical processing to achieve that effect.

[Bert Greene]

I was always rather intrigued by the Columbia lobby-cards from around 1932-33 that had a sort of slick, waxy surface. Got about three or four of them (back around 25-30 years ago, when I was a semi-collector, going to memorabilia shows and such). They looked very impressive. I remember wanting to accumulate more and develop them into a little mini-collection, but they proved fairly difficult to find back then, in pre-internet auction times.