Moving Picture Age (Jan-Dec 1921)

EDITORIALS (£p-t> Why Visual Instruction Is Coming ACCORDING to an editorial in one of the leading daily papers photographs of various celebrities were shown to the pupils of a school. In this, Washington and Lincoln were the only presidents, except recent ones, who were recognized. Charlie Chaplin and Douglas Fairbanks and other screen celebrities were recognized immediately. To some this would be a condemnation of moving pictures. To others it might indicate that moving pictures have such a tremendous power for impression and education that they should not be overlooked in planning instructional aid to the teacher. No educator would think of barring printed books from the school because of the "dime thrillers" which are printed. No broad-minded educator would feel similar aversion toward motion pictures because some films do not meet with his approval. Why You Did Not Get Your Film WERE you ever disappointed by receiving a film different from that which you ordered even though you had ordered it weeks in advance and getting a notice from your distributor that because of the delay in the return of the film from a previous subscriber he was forced to substitute another film than that called for in the contract? Perhaps you have been inclined to blame the distributor for substituting a film and renting yours to some one else, but a distributor who makes a deliberate practice of this substitution will not last long in the business and but few of them try it. Before condemning the distributor let us hear his story. In talks with distributors one of their main pleas is that film or slides should be returned promptly. One exhibitor had so much difficulty with one of his clients that he was forced to remove him from his list and refuse to serve him. At one time a film was held two weeks, at another three weeks, and at various times over a week before it was even turned over to the express company for return. Suppose you had expected the film, say, two weeks after the other man had used it. Of course, you would blame the distributor, but could he help it? He had a right to expect it back. When express service was better film distributors allowed one and occasionally two days for the delivery of a film and expected it back in about the same length of time after its use. This permitted scheduling a rental about every four or five days. They were sure that if a film was rented for one Sunday or one Wednesday it could be counted on and scheduled for the following Sunday or Wednesday. In many cases if the haul was short they could count on scheduling the film for Wednesday and Sunday. At the present time with the difficulties in transporting film many distributors allow an entire week to cover the time from the shipment and expected receipt of the return of the film, and that only if the film is returned promptly, before they dare schedule it for another showing. Many of these men complain that the delays in return have been so great that they are afraid to schedule a film for delivery until the film actually is back in their office. With this decrease in the available opportunity for rental the film distributors can have only one option and that is to increase the price of rental. If great care is taken in the prompt return this may not be necessary, but any individual or organization which holds films or slides longer than the agreed upon time should be obliged to pay rental for the time which they hold it overdue. This is only fair and honest business, because if a film or set of slides are rented for one day it does not give cause for holding them a week. This practice of delay, according to many industrial concerns who supply free films, is even worse with industrial films than with the rented films because the users are not afraid that they may have to pay additional rental. Some industrial firms have even threatened to eliminate non-theatrical film users from their lists entirely because they cannot rely upon prompt returns. If such a thing were done it would be very disastrous to the non-theatrical film users. Possibly this practice has been due to a lack of realization of the necessity of prompt returns. Surely the non-theatrical field was not guilty intentionally and will be prompt in future film and slide returns. "Immortality" THOSE in Chicago who had an opportunity to see the recent showing of "Immortality" at Beeban's theatre will not regret it. According to the manager many churchmen and educators attended and returned two and three times to re-view the picture. Some, it is to be regretted, indignantly walked out, hurt that they be forced to view "a church picture." "Immortality" is a film taken in the Holy Land and Egypt by an Italian concern and portrays the life of Christ from the Annunciation to the Ascension. In this the leading Italian artists of the screen take the important parts. It is a wonderful picture, well photographed, well acted, impressive and follows the biblical story, several of the scenes being photographed in colors. A special showing was made to the churchmen but the "run" was all too short for any active recommendations from the churchmen that their members and workers see the film. In spite of that, however, the manager states that the film drew better attendance than did one of the movie stars a previous week. Any minister or educator will do well to get in touch with the local theatre managers and ask them to obtain "Immortality," to put on with it, if anything, a good reel or two to balance out the show and that they will recommend it to their church, parishes or school, because everyone should see this picture. It will be some years before this film will be available for distribution to the non-theatrical field, but this is no excuse for not taking the first opportunity to see it and to urge that your fellow church workers see it. 9