The Moving Picture World (1908)

THE MOVING PICTURE WORLD 5<>7 Moving Picture World Published Evkhy Satubday. Copyright, 1908, by The Worle Photographic Pnbllehlntf Company, How fork 12S last 23rd Street, (Beach Building) New York Telephone call, 1344 Gramercy. B&ited by J. F. Chalmers All communications should be addressed to MOVING PICTURE WORLD. P. O. BOX 460. NEW YORK CITY. SUBSCRIPTION 1 $2.00 per year. Post free In the United States. Mexico. Hawaii, Porto Rico and the Philippine Islands. oaaada and foreign couNTRXESt $2.50 per year. Advertising Ratesi 12.00 per taehf IB c*nt» per line. Tht contents of this magazine are protected by copyright and oil infringe- mentt will be prosecuted. Vol. 2 JUNE 13 No. 24 Editorial. Legitimate Competition. Whatever is in the wind, our readers who may have the opportunity of seeing any one of our contemporaries will agree that there is no limit to the "hot air" which is being ventilated on the film question and no end of fool suggestions and bad advice being tendered by those who ought to know better or who have axes to grind. The controlling factor in the future destiny of this industry of mushroom growth is the great and whimsical public. Exhibitor, renter and manufacturer alike would be wise to their own interests if they would turn a deaf ear to the rantings of agitators or the dictates of any one man whose policy may be solely based on selfish motives. The wiser plan would be for them to make a closer study of public opinion and steer their course accordingly. The most direct way in which this could be accomplished is for the manufacturer, the renter and the exhibitor to mingle more frequently with the audiences in motion picture theaters and listen to the sentiments expressed by the habitues of these shows. Very few do this. The average renter is content with running the subject in his exhibition room and the heads of several manufacturing concerns rarely see all the subjects produced by their house, much less mingling occasionally with the cattle whom they all like to milk, to see how the fodder is appreciated. Next to the public is the exhibitor. He, more than the renter or the manufacturer, is in a position to throw light on the path ahead. If he has any brains he will be guided by public sentiment, and he should certainly have a say as to what subjects he desires for his clientele, but the advice to select his service from both sides of the fence is as unwholesome as the source from which it emanated. It is well that there are two competing ele- ments in the field. It simplifies the question of providing separate programs to theaters which are in close-proxim- ity to each other and it gives the manager the opportunity of making a distinct change if he is subjected to treat- ment which is injurious to his business, as in the case of a correspondent in our issue of May 9th. Another good reason why the present situation is to be preferred is that the competition between the two fac- tions will tend to the production of subjects that are better in quality and tone. To suppress competition would re-\ move all incentive to raise or even keep up to the stand- ard. To attempt to Crush out competition by selling at cost or at ruinous prices is the method of the trusts and has been adopted with more or less success in several \ lines of industry, but the conditions existing in the film manufacturing field are not amenable to such methods. A prominent factor among the independent manufac- turers remarked that if his opponents were to give away their products it would not influence him to lower his prices and would not affect the demand for his output. Legitimate competition is good for all lines of business. Judging from the letters which we received from mem- bers * of the Film Service'Association, and which ^we published in last week's issue and in this, they are not afraid of or averse to the competition of the Independents. Judging from the hit made by a prominent Independent factor, advertised in last week's papers, the Independents are equally satisfied with the position they hold. As a matter of fact, both are too firmly established to be obliterated one by the other. Instead of fighting to monopolize all that may remain after the carnage, why not agree upon a course which will promote and ensure greater success for all concerned ? Failures of NicKelodeons. Each week brings to light a list of moving picture places that have passed into the hands of the sheriff.' The moving picture business is no more impregnable to such conditions than any other line. Poor locations, bad management and a score or more of other contingencies develop in the picture line with the same frequency that they do in commercial business. In many cases failures are due to a bad start. Too many people imagine that all they need is sufficient money to fit up a place and pay the first week's expenses. They count upon the re- ceipts to do the rest. The men who win out on this policy are few. Many managers have run a new place at a loss for weeks, but their capital has eventually placed them at the goal. The "talking pictures" are meeting with a large share of newspaper praise, and it must also be said that they have caught the public fancy. In the People's Theater in this city, where the chronophone has lately been in- stalled, the applause at the end of the numbers show how they are appreciated. This world that we live in is peculiarly constituted. The rich, the poor, the honest, dishonest, energetic, sloth- ful, the miser and philanthropist, all breathe the same atmosphere. They walk side by side; they rank elbow to elbow. True, they do not intentionally associate, but "they are always with us." Thus it is in the journalistic field.. We meet strange bedfellows—good fellows to a sense, but strange, nevertheless. We find fellows that have a combative, restless nature, for instance. Fellows who have no particular object in life. They reach out with no particular aim. They muddle things. The most pitiable object of all is the one who will betray personal confidence. In organized labor a "squealer" is the most despised being, and the "squealer" who "squeals" for immunity or sympathy is worse than the involuntary one. N..B.—Our readers will please note that this is not published as a loose-leaf supplement, but is embodied in the paper.