Boxoffice (Jul-Sep 1938)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

WT WAS to be expected that an undertaking so colossal in conception and so widespread in execution as the current “Motion Pictures’ Greatest Year” campaign would from the start be subjected to heckling from without and within the industry it is designed to benefit. Albeit, it is difficult to understand why, thus far, most of such bickering has come from sources which should have been among the first to contribute their moral and material support toward helping to make the drive an outstanding success. One example of the picayunish carping was the manifesto issued by the Legion of Decency, much of which was reproduced here last week, which undertook to warn the makers and distributors of motion pictures that the ecclesiastical censorship czars who comprise the Legion would not permit one whit of relaxation in their stern code — the obvious inference being that the Legion, to which a great industry has bowed and scraped for too many years, is convinced that it is impossible for motion pictures to regain their waning popularity without reverting to the practices which were sold down the river to appease the Legion’s avid urge toward cinematic reformation. Another Judas-like gesture — although in a lighter vein — came from Walter Winched, whose only contribution to the business-building drive was the devotion of an entire daily column prior to the campaign’s debut to facetious suggestions penned in his characteristic smart-aleck style, as to how motion pictures might be improved. Columnist Winchell’s “GoodWill Program for the Cinema” dealt in both personalities and generalities and undertook criticisms of practices and persons most of which have been voiced by countless fans on countless previous occasions, and many of which are very probably justified. But Winchell has been afforded two opportunities to contribute his Thespic bit to the improvement of motion picture entertainment. With what success? A most perfunctory consensus of opinion among the fans who suffered through his mummery attempts supplies the sad answer. And, it is to be remembered, the hardlya-Barrymore-columnist was paid princely amounts by the motion picture industry for his acting — spare the mark — sorties. In view of which and considering further that practically every metropolitan newspaper has devoted liberally of its news and editorial columns to urging support for the campaign, and wishing it the success it merits. Winched should be the last to encourage the tongue-in-cheek public attitude toward the industry which his alleged wisecracks could easily engender, particularly at a time when the very life of motion pictures depends upon regaining public confidence and patronage. The time-honored bromide about experience being the best teacher apparently doesn’t apply to Hollywood’s publicity experts and near-experts. Less than a year ago the popularity of the rapidly -rising Robert Taylor was seriously jeopardized through the unde printing of several unfortunate and ill-advised stories to which the theatre-going public reacted in a manner far from encouraging to Taylor’s future success. Metro’s busy blurbists have sweated plenty trying to work out from under the effects of that faux pas, in which effort they have been only partially successful. Yet, they flirt with the same danger as concerns the fast-growing popularity of Mickey Rooney. Witness such press department releases as: “Mickey Rooney has received permission from M-G-M to reserve the racing colors he wears as a jockey in ‘Stablemates’ so that he can use them for his own stable which he hopes to buy when he becomes of age. The studio has the colors copyrighted.” Also from M-G-M: “As a sideline to acting, Myrna Loy has gone into the lime growing business. The M-G-M star yesterday sold 50 boxes of limes, grown by herself, to a Central Ave. wholesale house." Why use trees? The same results could be obtained merely by cutting up “Parnell." Paul Snell of Principal’s praisery rises to contribute a new screen credit to the already overwhelming list. On “Peck’s Bad Boy at the Circus” is a line reading: “Publicity unit man . . . Paul Snell.” Why not inform a palpitating public that the copy was written by Paul Snell; edited by Paul Snell; envelopes sealed by Paul Snell; stamps personally licked by Paul Snell? In commenting on Metro’s “Boys’ Town,’’ Louella Parsons bubbles: “I left the theatre so impressed with the story of Father Flanagan’s fight to build up a refuge for homeless boys and save them that I wanted to take the soapbox myself.” The soapbox had better be substantially screened. Reversing the usual order of things. Bill Hebert is sticking to his twin fleas, Sam and Sadie, to the bitter end. This week the Paramount flea editor comes through with a touching sob story about the untimely demise of the two histrionic insects who were brought here from New York City to appear in “Zaza" with Claudette Colbert. The corpses, Hebert avows, will be shipped east to be buried with appropriate ceremonies in a Westchester pet cemetery. And thus endeth, it is hoped, the saga of Sadie and Sam. Since Walter Wanger broke his nose in a polo game, the Screen Directors Guild is advocating polo as an extra-curricular activity for all producers. A laurel to the Columbia Cohns for refusing to permit the roadshoiving of “ You Can’t Take It With You,” when that Frank Capra masterpiece certainly boasts more topflight entertainment than several other offerings which during the past year have been treated to a two-a-day , boosted-tariff debut. It is making such pictures available to the masses at this time and at regular admission prices which will more than anything else make the inasses realize that “Motion Pictures Are Your Best Entertainment.” A Scintillating Singleton What with the heat wave and the long Labor Day weekend, previews were as scarce as Republicans in Hollywood last week, forcing the hungry reviewers to catch up on their sleep at home instead of in theatre seats. But what was lacking in quantity was more than compensated by quality in the one feature projected for critical acclaim, which was unstintingly accorded it. The singleton offering was Metro's “Boys' Town." Assured of widespread acceptance and popularity among film fans of every taste, this commendably restrained sally into the sociological, must, by any measuring stick, rate high among the new season's celluloid achievements. Never veering into the maudlin, despite the opportunities the story background offered. Director Norman Taurog and Producer John Considine jr., can take their bows along with Mickey Rooney, Spencer Tracy and others of a sterling cast for a handsome piece of entertainment. BOXOFFICE :: September 10, 1938 H 31