Boxoffice (Apr-Jun 1939)

PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY BY ASSOCIATED PUBLICATIONS Vol. 34 Number 20 April 8, 1939 Member Audit Bureau of Circulations Editorial Offices'. 9 rockefeller plaza, new york city; Publication Office: 4704 e. 9th ST., KANSAS CITY, MO./ Hollywood 6404 HOLLYWOOD blvd.; Chicago : 332 s. Michigan blvd. BEN SHLYEN Publisher MAURICE KANN Editor-in-Chief I. H. GALLAGHER General Manager William G. Pormby, Editor; Jesse Shlyen, Managing Editor; J. Harry Toler, Modern Theatre Editor; Louis Rydell, Advertising Manager; Ivan Spear, Western Manager. MR. HAYS OBLIGES TO TELL what will be told here today means to go chronological. We're on our way. Without necessarily seeking to make it dominant, we fail utterly to comprehend how the producers of films can overlook or ignore, or afford to overlook and ignore, the trends of the times in which they pursue their way. This is a reprint from the "Notes to You" department in BOXOFFICE, issue of lune 4, 1938. We do not subscribe to any theory this industry must stand forevermore faithful to the boy-meets-girl formula and dare not budge beyond. It has been doing exactly that for many years now and the consequences of the desire to avoid issues bedevilling the average man who is also the average filmgoer need no repetition at this juncture. We do subscribe to the theory, and it is not a new one, that the industry will reach its real majority when it learns to understand there is no permanent permanency in the escapist theme and that films are too close to the rank and file to perpetually dodge the problems of the rank and file. In order that this may be quite clear, it, no doubt, becomes essential to make it very evident this argument has nothing at all to do with alterations in the entertainment foundation line along which the industry must proceed. There is need, and it is a pressing need, of making films more vital without endangering the entertainment mould and it is in this direction we believe the industry finally must head. This is not a new idea, of course, and fortunately. Films constantly propagandize for some issue, some cause or some standard whether it be along properly established and widely accepted moral lines or for the glorification of the army and navy. The social and economic have been recognized, also, whether by design or accident. All of this from the same column, but from the issue of November 26. This may be a blind spot with this columnar conductor, the idea of having films say something. But he refuses to believe anything of the kind. He continues to maintain that motion pictures can, and must, become more adult as a natural development in their growth. The drama of today is the greatest untapped source of Hollywood's material. Constantly hammered home in pro-industry statements is the up, up, up in production quality. What does this mean? Merely improved photography, better sets, maturing direction and acting? Or does it not include a broadening at the base to envelop better and more intelligent material not circumscribed by the palpably obvious limitation of poor gal-rich fellow? If this is at all familiar, it means you read it once before and also in "Notes," issue of December 10 last year. Here we go again, xastride one of our most persistent arguments: the need for the industry to transmute its awareness of events occurring around it into terms of its' product. Not all of its product, of course. Not any of its product in propaganda form, but always comfortably and adroitly within the accepted framework of the entertainment formula. We think there is no escape frp;cn it, now or ultimately. And it begins to look further and faster a case of now, not then. From "The Fog Lifts Over Hollywood," an editorial published on January 14, 1939. fr», . Hays is sensitive to reactions outside the industry. JjjLe is aware published opinion in many directions has been creating a clamour about the state of the film institution. It is calling upon Hollywood to stop boring its customers. It is petitioning the producer to cease shadow boxing with the vibrant issues of the day. It is urging Hollywood to do this if only sufficiently to recognize their existence by reflecting something of their presence on the screen, again and always within the entertainment framework. We take it, and we do it in all caution, that Hays is approaching a point where the message on the signpost is restlessly awaiting some sort of a reply. The issue, persistent and inescapable, cannot perpetually be put off. An extract from an editorial, “Mr. Hays Reads a Signpost," published on January 28. What marks Hollywood as apart irom the world it lives in is its refusal, thus far, to substantially recognize what is going on in that world and to reflect in its output something of the burning issues of the day. No substantial reason comes to mind why the contemporary scene cannot be reflected in terms of widely accepted entertaihment. Romance, love, comedy, drama, action and all the climaxes do not at all have to be routed out because an underlying, or even a dominant theme, deals with an economic or social condition obviously crying for adjustment or correction. Back to "Notes" and now from the issue of February 18. There need be no fear in any exhibitor minds that all which has been said in these columns means Hollywood must convert itself into a machine for propaganda. That term has been deliberately tossed about to befog the issue, anyway. But there is need, exactly as there is room, for a portion of the product that has something vibrant and alive to say; for product that is modern because it deals with modern causes and effects; for product that strikes into new channels worn through by the pressure of the times in which we live. Culled from "Another Reading of the Signpost," February 25, editorial. It is BOXOFFICE'S point of view, and certainly anything but a secret by this time, that motion pictures can heighten their dramatic — and their entertainment values — by paying some attention to matters current (Continued on page 8)