Exhibitors Herald (Mar-Apr 1924)

March 29, 1924 EXHIBITORS HERALD 59 LETTERS From Readers A forum at which the exhibitor it invited to express his opinion on matters of current interest Brevity adds forcefulness to any statement Unsigned letters will not bt printed. Ballin Started Something CASTALIA, IOWA.— To the Editor: I have just finished re-reading Hugo Ballin's letter to exhibitors, which was published in the March 8th issue of the Herald, in an effort to discover if possible, Mr. Ballin's real reason for writing in such a satirical vein, and the weight which he intended his words to carry. Viewed from the standpoint of a small town showman, with an understanding of all that the name implies, I am impressed with one fact: That Mr. Ballin has started something, and that something is nothing more or less than an interchange of opinion between producers and exhibitors through the columns of the Herald; which if done in a sportsmanlike manner will go far toward removing the proverbial thorn in the side that we all conceive as being jabbed by the fellow at the other end of the business. In painting a derisive picture of small town conditions, which, he contends, influences exhibitors' reports, he gives all parties concerned plenty of food for thought; but the fact that he assumes in his mode of expression an attitude which he is attempting to criticize, tends to knock the whole matter into a cocked hat, and causes his letter to lose whatever real worth it might have had. Again, I see that Mr. Ballin's opinion may have been formed from the vantage of a plush upholstered box in one of New York's finest theatres, and he loses sight of the fact that exhibitor reports are written, not as criticism from a production standpoint, but more as an aid to the fellow who is running a theatre over in the next state. It is true that many small town theatres are all not worthy of the name, and that in many (too many) cases a failure at the box office is due to negligence on the part of the manager. But on the other hand, the small town situation presents problems and difficulties that larger towns do not have, and in many cases a man from the city in taking over a small town theatre would last about two weeks. The faults in the game are not altogether on the side of the exhibitor either, for I have seen discrepancies in production that made one fairly froth at the mouth. This, of course, is exceptional, but it is only one of the many tribulations, such as broken framed films, amputated scenes, and so on through the list that an exhibitor contends with. True, the producer does not always know of these conditions, and very naturally wonders why a gilt-edged production should fail to draw a good business and merit a pleasing report. Viewed from an impartial standpoint, I believe that Mr. Ballin will agree that exhibitor reports form one of the most constructive steps in the industry today: — a fact, which is borne out by the present stir in editorial circles, by the increasing number of producers, who look to this department for guidance and the army of exhibitors, who swear allegiance in every shape, manner, and form to this real guide to worthy productions. However, exhibitor reports are but a step, not only toward the elimination of the poor picture, but also a broader understanding between both producer and exhibitor, and an effort to bring into close harmony an industry which in too many cases is playing both ends against the middle. Constructive criticism is always an asset in any business and I am certain that ninety-nine out of every hundred exhibitors would appreciate hearing the producer's views on his individual problems. Let us have more of these letters and see if the bond of fellowship which exists between the Herald exhibitor contributors cannot be extended to the producers as well. Mr. Ballin has started something to say the least. — V. G. Bollman, Castalia theatre, Castalia, Iow:a. Another Reply to Ballin OKOLONA, MISS.— To the Editor : Hugo Ballin's criticisms in Exhibitor's Herald March 8th seem to apply only to about ninety per cent of the industry, the small town exhibitor. Perhaps in a day of pedigreed opinion when "who said it" is of more importance than "what was said?", the little fish are supposed only to fry and not to sizzle; but the meanest criminal is allowed a defense in any court. As a member of the tribe with a decade of accummulation of views of his brother sufferers the following summary of opinions held by the attacked class is offered in behalf of the defendants: (1) Under our conditions programs must be changed daily and must be bought sight unseen on the representations of the producers or his agents. The good will of our patrons depends absolutely on the reliability for uniform merit of our shows. And yet producers still make us purchase half a dozen or more rotten pictures in order to get one or two of merit that we know will pleas* our patrons. Such tyranny is killing the show business in our class. (2) The complaint made against allowing children to attend the picture shows cannot be remedied by us, or by any one unless it is possible to stop the rearing of children. (3) The poverty of equipment criticised is caused by the meagerness of the business done which will not pay a return on a greater investment, and this condition of affairs is aggravated by the producers and his agents. (4) It has been the practice of producers in the past, and even now, to some extent to try to dig into the capital we invest instead of trying to establish a clientele of prosperous and wellthought-of exhibitors who would be the greatest advertising medium of the industry. "The selling campaigns" are frequently planned in the principle: "Get the exhibitor's money as soon as possible and then another sucker will step up in the ranks for us to shoot at." "That picture will cost you only $200.00 a day" says the salesman. "I am going to surprise you" replies the exhibitor. "I am going to offer you $20.00." "And I'm going to surprise you," the salesman continues. "I'm going to accept your offer." No wonder the small fellow is pinched by poverty until his equipment suffers for the next salesman gets him in spite of himself. (5) The producer aggravates the condition in another way he has of driving away patrons. Mr. Smart Alex of Small town goes to visit his city cousin. He finds he is abreast of the city people in current music, literature, in everything but pictures. Then he is startled to observe that the "Perils of Pauline," which he delights to talk about, was old stuff before Noah built the ark. He comes back home swearing to himself that he'll never go to see that "old stuff again" and. yet due to rules of the producers, his home exhibitor is unable to show current pictures although the cost to the distributing office of an extra print is no more at the beginning than after the first one has worn out. And yet the small towns are the life of a sluggish industry and would make the business fairly hum with activity if given half a chance. (6) In an Anglicized American country the producer pays not any attention to the natural atmosphere or leanings of the people; but must introduce every foreign or otherwise jarring element into every phase of the industry. Granted that financial brains and executive ability does not come from anywhere else, yet that is no reason for ignoring the American atmosphere in sentiment, in theme and in story. As an illustration, from the multiplicity of material available, the pictures are nearly all in plot alike — either adultery with a married woman, the sensual views of a moron or an illegitimate birth. Granted that all of these plots are good, why ride them to death until every one can tell after seeing the first hundred feet, all that is coming? (7) The truth of the business is that the producer is passing the buck, crying like Air. Ballin that the exhibitor who has built up the industry to its present volume is responsible for the slump, when, as a matter of fact, the public always has and always will go to see the pictures when everything is offered that is wanted. (8) Most of the producers acting through their agents, the distributor, do not live up to fair and square methods of doing business, demanding that the exhibitors live up to contract while not 'loin" so themselves. Thus rests the defendants.— George Baskervill, Princess Theatre, Okolona, Miss. Watch Your Projector TILDEN, ILL.— To the Editor: Yes, I partly agree with the exchange manager who wrote the article on the bad print situation. He says the exchange is not ruining prints. This is true, but there are times when a print is shipped out of an exchange in such a condition that it is almost impossible to get it through your machine. Now if you get a print in this condition it surely is the exchange's fault, that you get it but not their fault if it is in the condition it is in, but when they know that the print is in bad condition, why send it out? I do not always blame the managers for this, but the inspector should inform these managers when a print gets in bad condition. I also think that a manager should, after a print has been sent a certain length of time, take the time to inquire of the inspection department as to the condition of the prints. Perhaps if he did this, some of the prints we are getting would be taken out of service. I admit that the prints are ruined not at the exchange, but in the projection room, as this manager says, by the theatre owner not knowing enough about his own projector and depending too much on his operator. I know this to be the fact, as I was on a circuit at one time and was having considerable trouble trying to get film through the machine. I wrote the exchange two or three letters complaining of the condition I was receiving the film in. I finally went in and had a talk with the manager of the exchange and after showing me some of the prints I decided the fault was not with, the exchange but with the exhibitor who was using same before me. This manager said if he could ship to me direct I would find out that prints were leaving his exchange in good condition. I have not re