Every movie poster collector knows what a window card is, but only a handful of collectors have more than a passing acquaintance with that size of movie poster known as the mini-window card. I myself had been dealing in movie posters for several years and had never knowingly seen one. Then one day at a convention in Houston, fellow nostalgia fantastic Robert Brown showed me a whole album filled with the little gems, most of them on blockbuster titles and all of them just gorgeous. Even then, I thought they were very nice, but had no desire to own one. Nevertheless, being the opportunist that I am, I kept my eyes open in case I could find one to sell or trade to Robert. To my great surprise, I couldn't turn up even one in the several months following.
So the next year at the Houston convention, I quizzed Robert extensively on the little buggers. I even traded him out of a few of his duplicates, and against my better judgment, I bought a couple of them. I was hooked! I determined right then and there to collect as many different ones as I could, and more importantly, to get at least one more than Robert had, even if he got more. It has taken 12 years and many dollars, but that day has finally arrived. The actual numbers are academic because Robert has not counted his lately, but we both agreed at the Dallas Big D show in July that we have about the same number. We are each closing in on 300 different. Whether I have more than Robert or not doesn't seem to matter any more because I know I am within striking distance. It's more important now to see if I can get to the big three-oh-oh.
What is it about these midget cards, smaller even than lobby cards, that attracts and enchants the few of us who collect them for their own sake? I wish I knew. This article, besides telling you all you ever wanted to know about mini-window cards but were afraid to ask, will also be an attempt to answer this question.
The difficulty of capturing the essence of these little creatures shows itself even in a rudimentary description of them. For example, they can be anywhere from 8 1/2 x 11 inches to 8 1/2 x 14 inches, depending on the artwork and on whether or not the theater imprint has been trimmed off the top. The artwork of all of the early Columbias and First Nationals, most of the Warner Bros. and MGM's, and some of the RKO's and Paramounts, exceeds 11", leaving very little room at the top for the theater imprint. The artists at Universal, Fox and Twentieth Century-Fox hardly ever went over the 11" mark, and RKO and Paramount only rarely did.
Mini-window cards can be found then in four different ways: 8 1/2 x 14 untrimmed with or without theater imprint, 8 1/2 x 14 untrimmed with one or more imprints pasted or stapled over a blank or earlier imprint, and trimmed to any size down to 8 1/2 x 11. I personally prefer them untrimmed in good shape with a theater imprint, although there is probably little difference in value for any of the ways they are found. More about imprints later.
The paper stock these cards are printed on is also a complicating factor. In general, for example, when Warner Bros. printed the lobby cards for a movie on linen stock, the mini-window card was done the same way. Same for early Columbias and their coated stock. They were all printed on a slightly smaller weight paper than the lobby cards (nowhere near as thick as a regular window card).
One real mystery has developed which I hope to shed some light on here. There are two different mini-window cards for The Adventures of Robin Hood -- one flat and one on a linen-like paper. I have seen both, and I don't really know why there is such a discrepancy. This anomaly may also involve other Warner Bros. films, but none has yet come to light. At first, I thought it was an "other company" piece, but I ruled this out because the artwork is identical. Besides, I know of no "other company" mini-window cards. Of course, since all the lobby cards I have seen are on linen paper, the flat mini-window cards from this title could be counterfeit, but this is not likely. More probably, the flat one was either a purposeful experiment or a mistake. Some of the mini-window cards somehow got printed on flat paper instead of linen. The only other explanation I can think of, which has been advanced by at least two collectors, is that the flat one is a same year reissue. My own theory is that the flat ones were not a reissue but a second printing, and that the printer had temporarily run out of linen stock.
There are only two characteristics of mini-window cards that are not controversial. They are always printed on the vertical, like an insert, and they were hardly ever reissued. In fact, I know of only one reissue mini-window card--the 1939 reissue of All Quiet on the Western Front. Moreover, this one may have been reissued because when the movie first came out in 1930, there were no mini-window cards.
This brings me to my next point. When were they made? It seems that they came in with the talkies and were killed by the returning World War II soldiers and sailors. More likely, they were determined to be useful when the neighborhood concept materialized early in the Great Depression and they disappeared along with the bulk of the neighborhood candy and cigar stores and cafes after the war as people moved to the newly-built suburbs. They also could have succumbed to the paper drives during the war, and as the smallest poster size, were just never revived.
At any rate, my earliest card is dated 1932 and my latest one is 1947, and I have not seen any dated earlier or later. In a study of the 276 different that I own, which is probably a pretty representative sampling of those remaining, they average between 13 and 22 different for each year from 1932 until 1937, when I have no less than 38. I have 22 dated 1938, and 43 for that glorious year 1939. There are 20 for each of the next two years, and then they taper off gradually until 1947. What I know of Robert's cards bears out these statistics. While there is some overlap, the percentages are similar. The obvious, although unscientific conclusion, is that they were used steadily until the war began, and then, like nearly everything else during the war, they were gradually put on the back burner.
A breakdown of my cards by major studios yields interesting results also. The first and last years for each one follows:
Universal....1935-44
Paramount....1932-40
Fox/20th.....1932-44
RKO..........1932-40
Columbia.....1932-42
MGM..........1933-43
Warner Bros..1933-47
As can be easily seen, if this chart is accurate (and Robert's cards change these statistics only slightly and on the later end), it probably rules out both a Dracula and Frankenstein mini-window card, but does not preclude one for each of the many sequels and similar films through 1944. Moreover, there is a good probability of the existence of a King Kong mini-window card. Indeed, I have seen the pressbook, and there is a picture of one there. Whether any were ordered by a theater or a poster exchange is another question, however, and whether any were printed is even more tenuous.
Of even greater importance to many collectors is the likely non-existence of any silent mini-window cards or any of the great talkies before 1932 or those wonderful RKO film noir pictures from 1941 on (including Citizen Kane). Apparently, neither Paramount nor RKO had mini-windows printer after 1940. Sadly, it seems that Universal did not start using them until 1935, and then, along with Fox, Columbia, and MGM, the studio bowed to the wartime paper conservation. Warner Bros. was the only studio whose mini-window cards can be found from the beginning to the end of the run. I wonder if they knew that they were designing the last midget cards. Finally, the four poverty row studio mini-window cards I have (three World Wide/Tiffany cards and one Mascot serial card) date from the early 1930s. Alas, no Republic or Monogram mini-window cards have been reported, and very few cards of serials exist. Similarly, none of the great Disney or Fleischer studios cartoons were captured in the mini-window format.
As you would imagine, Warner Bros. mini-window cards are the most common, but Paramount runs a close second. This is surprising, since Paramount did not have a single mini-window card printed after 1940. Next down the line are MGM, Twentieth Century-Fox, and Universal in that order, with around the same numbers surviving (about two-thirds as many). Then comes Columbia, RKO, and Fox before the merger with Twentieth Century (about one-fourth of the surviving titles). Finally, with only two to four known are Tiffany/World Wide and Mascot. These figures include both blockbuster titles and non-star titles, because I relentlessly pursue any title I don't have.
My goal is to have one untrimmed mini-window card for every picture they were made for. As you can guess, this disease will be terminal. By the way, for the purposes of this survey, First Nationals were combined with Warner Bros., and Cosmopolitans were counted as either MGM or Warner Bros., as appropriate. Finally, Fox and Twentieth Century-Fox were arbitrarily kept separate.
Common sense would tell you that these tiny gems were used in tiny places, and your logic has not failed you. Like regular window cards, which were used in grocery stores and banks and other large outside store windows to advertise the movie at the local theater, mini-window cards were used in a similar way. They were mostly placed in glass cases inside the store by the cash register in such establishments as cafes, drug stores, cigar stores candy stores, and the like--usually taped inside the case facing out.
This fact alone accounts for the wholesale decimation of the mini-window card population, regardless of the print run, because these places tended to be mainly frequented by people from the neighborhood who would want to know what was playing down the street Tuesday and Wednesday at the Roxy. In fact, they might have no other way of knowing unless they happened to pass the theater and check the marquee. And if the star on the card happened to be a favorite of a good customer, the proprietor of the store would gladly give the poster to him to keep his business. Besides, it didn't cost him anything. Then, when the theater manager came to collect the mini-window card to send back to the poster exchange, if the shopowner had given it away, it wasn't any big deal because it only cost him three cents. You have to come to the conclusion that the very nature of their use contributed to the eventual destruction of thousands of these posters.
Another contributing factor to the small number of mini-window cards remaining was the subsequent treatment of them by theater poster exchange, movie memorabilia dealers, and even collectors. I heard one horror story of a poster exchange folding them in half and using them as alphabetical markers for one-sheets and lobby cards! Again, probably because of their size, their low cost, and their general flimsiness, theater managers and poster exchange operators tended to give or throw them away. Alas, mini-window cards became victims of their own beauty and economy. Similarly, they were largely ignored or treated as step-children by poster dealers who obviously thought that they would not be wanted by any serious collector. Collectors themselves unknowingly continued the destructive process by buying or trading for them only as fillers until they could get a larger piece on that particular film. Moreover, while a particular size of poster is even today typically in an upswing or a downswing of a cycle, mini-window cards have been since their inception on a perpetual downswing, never reaching anywhere near the popularity of first one-sheets, then lobby cards, and now three-sheets and foreign posters. Finally, there never were very many of them in the first place. There is no way, of course, to get an accurate print run, but an educated guess based on discussions with several collectors puts it at from 100 to no more than 500 for each title. Allowing for all of the destructive possibilities described above, there are probably only from zero to 20 remaining today for any one title. Exceedingly rare, to say the least.
When I first started collecting these midget jewels, I was amazed when I would go up to a big dealer from New York or California and ask him if he had any mini-window cards, and he would say, "What?" When I would describe them further, he would invariably answer, "Oh. No, I never see those." On the other hand, when I would approach a dealer from the middle West or the Southwest, I would often find one or two, or at least not have to describe them to him. Moreover, as I began noting theater imprints, I found them proclaiming such grand movie houses as the Kozy Theater--Granite, Oklahoma or the Orpheum--Lancaster, Wisconsin or the Deluxe--Spearville, Kansas or my personal favorite--the Empress Theater in Waurika, Oklahoma. I soon discovered that the vast majority of the surviving imprints came from the middle part of the country, and not from the two coasts or Chicago, as you might expect. In fact, I have found only one from the West Coast and none from the East. The Nifty Theater in Waterville, Washington is the lone coastal imprint.
It is my conclusion that most mini-window cards were ordered by small-town theaters in America's heartland, where there was only one theater per town. The rest, a small minority, were sent to neighborhood theaters in larger cities, but have since been lost through the processes described above. Another reason for their prevalence in the Southwest (and Oklahoma especially) may have been because the Smith Brothers, who operated a theater poster exchange in Canton, Oklahoma for many years, liked them and kept them (or sold them to Robert in Oklahoma City).
Incidentally, there is yet one more anomaly regarding mini-window cards. Many pressbooks will have a picture of one, but this is no guarantee that it was ever ordered or even printed. Furthermore, even though they may have been printed and used, there is no guarantee that any still exist today. Conversely, even though the pressbook may not list it, it may still exist. Some pressbooks were not very elaborate, and others may not be complete, either missing a page or not taking the trouble to have a photo of such a small, insignificant piece. At any rate, the pressbook should not be used as a bible; it is not infallible.
What films were midget cards produced for? Robert Brown says all of them within the years noted above for each studio, but that seems impossible. That would mean thousands and thousands of cards have been lost with no trace, since there are less than a thousand known titles. It seems more likely that there was some systematic way of deciding which movies needed them and which didn't. This is probably the most exasperating and unanswerable question of all.
Something needs to be said about the artwork itself. It should be remembered the mini-window cards were posters, not scenes from the film. They were designed, like the other posters, to get people to see the movie. Sometimes they were exact reductions of the one-sheet, and sometimes they were very similar to it, with minor color variations or rearrangements of the elements. Often they were completely different from all the other posters in the ad campaign. There is not much consistency, even within one studio, although Twentieth Century-Fox favored drawings rather than photos, and almost always simply reduced the one-sheet. Although each studio eventually developed a distinctive look, at any given period during the life of the genre, it could have drawings only, with no stars, or drawings with stars, photos only, or any combination of these. The only consistent thread running through 99% of them is that they are knockouts--even the non-name titles, but especially the linen cards. they all have fresh colors, no folds, and with the imprints, they are brimming with history. In a word, they are simply beautiful.
Finally, a little bit about pricing. First, there's the interminable argument about trimmed vs. untrimmed. My preferences having already been demonstrated, a slight premium is not inappropriate for an untrimmed mini-window card. Having said that, I realize I might have just cost myself several hundred dollars, but I have to be honest. Untrimmed cards are just more attractive. The final judgment remains, however, between the buyer and the seller, and it will always be so. Regarding price as related to one-sheets, lobby cards, etc., my opinion is that they should be priced about the same as, or a little more than, a title card. I've discussed this at length with many collectors and dealers, and the range has been surprisingly small. To a man, we agree that they are probably worth not less than the value of a scene card and not more than an insert form the same movie. From here on--caveat emptor!
Before I close, I would like to thank several people specifically for things they have done for me during my quest for these posters--Robert
Brown for getting me started and for keeping me going during the lean years; Gene Andrewski for first calling attention to their importance in the early days and for being one of the first real collectors; Steve Sallye for finding me my only serial card and for pointing me to midget cards at shows; Jon Warren for selling me a lot of early Paramounts at a reasonable price and for giving me the opportunity to finally get these thoughts down on paper; Lee Brinsmead for trading me a nice lot of cards and for being an all-around good guy about letting me have first shot at any he gets; Gary Vaughn, who kept Saratoga for me until I could get it back and who brokered the deal that lost Casablanca but got so many great others; and mostly Gene Arnold, who sold me the absolute best one in my collection and who still saves them all for me until he sees me; and all the other good guys who do the same. You know who you are. Thanks.
In conclusion, let me make the standard disclaimer. This article was written by picking the brains of several collectors and dealers, pooling all our ideas, and, using the information collected, coming to what I hope are logical conclusions. The information here was not gleaned from any written source, because I couldn't find anything on them; the conclusions are my own, and I take full responsibility for them.