Boxoffice barometer (1947)

ill iK.ur'cii i^ommunitied SUPPORT FIRST-RATE THEATRES? AN EXCHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE AND POINTS OF VIEW ON THE PROBLEM OF SMALL-TOWN THEATRE CONSTRUCTION. C/ l/E ARE INDEBTED to Ml’. Van V. BrowHing of Broken Bow, Oklahoma (P. O. Box 241) for an opportunity to further clarify our oft-expressed contention that rural patrons are entitled no less to the comforts, conveniences, eye appeal and other refinements of modern theatres, than their urban colleagues, the city patrons. Also, we believe Mr. V.V.B. deserves much credit for presenting so forcefully, and admittedly with considerable logic, the small-town exhibitor’s point of view on conditions that currently prevail. Since our convictions are particularly strong, but conscientious wherewithal, we present the following exchange of correspondence, not to be argumentative; but rather to air the prevailing conditions in the hope thereby that something may be done about them — and that perhaps we may be of help. Points of View We have numbered in parentheses certain paragraphs of Mr. Browning’s letters containing points we think should be answered for the enlightenment of all concerned, and particularly the class of exhibitor for whom Mr. B. undertakes to speak. His first letter commenting on the article in question, is as follows: “I have just read with a great deal of interest your article in the July 19th issue, ‘Will Rural Communities Support Firstrate Theatres?’ As long as I have baen quoted in this article, and inasmuch as you have invited your readers to express their reactions to this item, I should like to call your attention to some points that may have been overlooked: (1) “As was recently stated by ‘Pathfinder’ under the heading, ‘Main Street Business,’ the following information was given: ‘As a citizen of a small city or town, you are the most important people in America, for the 17,000 Main Street communities like yours are the very backbone of our nation. The economy of the entire United States depends upon the folks who are located on Main Street. More than half the people of the nation shop on Main Street.' “But, you will find on thousands of these Main Streets of America, theatres, or just picture shows as they are known to us; yes, shows that may not be modern in every way, but they are at least appreciated and enjoyed by the people of these small towns, as well as by the rural folks. (2) “In many hundreds of these small communities, just about the only source of entertainment available is the local ‘pic ture show.’ If we had been required to wait for someone with ample capital to hire an experienced theatre architect, it is most doubtful that many of our small towns would have moving pictures. Weall know and appreciate the fact that it would be much better if each small town could have a modern, up-to-date theatre, even though small. But . . . isn’t it better to have just a ‘show’ in an old store building than no show at all? Possibly a custom-built theatre would be better. Possibly we should not imitate. But all Fords are pretty much alike. Maybe it would be better to have a special custom-built Packard if we had the cash; but when we cannot afford such, then we make the best of what we can afford. (3) “It seems to me that the thing that is most needed at this time by those of us who wish to erect a small theatre is that some experienced theatre architect should draw a set of plans for a modest, but inexpensive, theatre that would fit on most any of our 25xl40-foot Main Street lots. Those who wished to have a small-town show just a little different could change his front, his popcorn machine, or whatever item he wished; but the theatre proper would be constructed on proven, sound principles. (4) “My guess is that if some good, experienced theatre architect would sponsor such a program in helping thousands of our little communities secure nice, smail comfortable shows, such an architect could make such assistance most profitable to himself and, at the same time, furnish a set of plans for a reasonable fee to the hundreds of us who cannot afford to pay five to eight per cent of the cost of building for having such plans drawn. “Please do not misunderstand me. I do appreciate the information given in this article, and I think it is just fine; yes, extra fine for the towns of ten thousand or more population or for those who have ample funds. I hope there are others who will write you their reactions to this item and that we can have further helpful suggestions and information.’’ To which our editor responded appreciatively in this manner: “Thank you for your letter of July 21st and your comments on our article in the current issue. Since every problem has at least two sides, we are always glad to get opinions, negative or otherwise. “You have made several good points in your responding letter. However, your arguments do not prove the point that small towns and country people would not amply support a truly modern theatre, if they were given the opportunity to do so. “We believe that small town and suburban theatre owners, as a rule, are rather poor gamblers when it comes to offering the public a chance to see and enjoy something new. And we don’t like stock theatre plans, because of our observation that their construction saves the builder very little money, provided they are built right, and the usual result is just another picture show. “On the other hand, it has been proven time and again that the services of a good theatre architect actually saves more money on the actual construction of a theatre than his fees amount to. “However, we like to present all sides of the story, and if you don’t mind, your letter will be used as a basis for further comment on the subject.” Further Response To which Mr. Browning then promptly replied, as follows: “Your good letter of July 24th was appreciated. Naturally, I feel the odds are pretty much against me when my opinions clash with someone who has had so much more experience than I; but, should you care to use any part of my letter of July 21st, or of this letter, as a basis for further comment, it is quite agreeable with me. “In the second paragraph of your letter of July 24th, you said in part; ‘Your arguments do not prove the point that small towns and country people would not amply support a truly modern theatre, if they were given the opportunity to do so.’ (5) “True. I agree with you 100 per cent. But . . . why is it that about 80 per cent of our towns with population under three thousand have their shows in some old, remodeled store building, or in some other makeshift arrangement? Are these unsatisfactory, poorly arranged firetraps what was wanted by the public, or even by the owner? The answer is obvious. Most men who erect theatres in small towns have limited funds. If they had an unlimited amount of cash, the chances are they would have built their theatre in a larger town or city. Those of us with a limited amount of cash are, as usual, inexperienced in theatre construction. We do not know just what is needed, or what is best. Some of us have gone to those who we understood were experienced theatre architects. But, because of the uncertain ultimate cost, we could not afford lo gamble; we could not afford to take a chance; so we bought the old store building. (6) “In my humble opinion, the people in most of our small towns throughout America will have to continue to get along with these makeshift, firetrap shows until some experienced theatre architect takes the time to draw up a plan of a modern, but inexpensive, small-town theatre; or until some organization comes along with a pre-fashioned or pre-fabricated theatre that will fit the needs and the pocketbook (Continued on page 40) 38 The MODERN THEATRE Section