Boxoffice (Oct-Dec 1963)

THE NATIONAL FILM WEEKLY Published in Nine Sectional Editions BEN SHLYEN Editor-in-Chief and Publisher DONALD M. MERSEREAU, Associate Publisher & General Manager JESSE SHLYEN ....Managing Editor HUGH FRAZE Field Editor AL STEEN Eastern Editor I. L. THATCHER Equipment Editor MORRIS SCHLOZMAN Business Mgr. Publication Offices: 825 Van Brunt Blvd. Kansas City 24. Mo. Jesse Sblyen, Managing Editor; Morris Schlozman, Business Manager; Hugh Fraze, Field Editor; I. L. Thatcher, Editor The Modern Theatre Section. Telephone Cllestnut 1-7777. Editorial Offices: 1270 SLxth Ave., Rockefeller Center, New York 20, N. Y. Donald M Mersereau. Associate Publisher & (Jereral Manager; A1 Steen. Eastern Editor. Telephone COlumbus 5-6370. &i Central Offices: Editorial — 920 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago 11, HI.. Frances B Clow, Telephone Superior 7-3972. Advertising—5811 North Lincoln, Louis Dldier and Jack Broderick, Telephone LOngbeach 1-5284. Il Western Offices: Editorial and Film Advertising— 6362 Hollywood Blvd.. Hollywood 28, Calif.. Syd Cassyd. Telephone Hollywood 5-1186. Equipment and Non-Film Advertising — New York Life Bldg., 2801 •;!; West Sixth St., Los Angeles 57. Calif. Bob Wettsteln, manager. Telephone Dun |S kirk 8-2286. London Office: Anthony (Jruner, 1 Woodberry Way, Finchley, N. 12. Telephone Hillside 6733. The MODERN THEATRE Section is included In the first issue of each month. Albany: J. S. Conners. 140 State St. Atlanta: Mary Charles Watts, 205 Walton St., N. W. „ | Baltimore: George Browning, 208 E. 25lh St. Boston: Guy Livingston, 80 Boylston, Boston, Mass. Charlotte: Blanche Carr, 301 S. Church. Cincinnati: Frances Hanford, UNiverslty 1-7180. K Cleveland: W. Ward Marsh, Plain Dealer. Columbus: Fred Oestreicher, 52% W. North Broadway. Dallas: Mable Culnan, 5927 Winton. Denver: Bruce Marshall, 2881 S. Cherry Way. Des Moines: Pat Cooney, 2727 49tb St. Detroit: II. F. lteves, 906 Fox Theatre Bldg., WOodward 2-1144. Hartford: Allen M. Wldem, Cli. 9-8211. Indianapolis: Norma Geraghty, 436 N. Illinois St. Jacksonville: Robert Cornwall, 1199 Edgewood Ave. Manchester, N. IL: Guy Langley, P.0. Box 56. Memphis: Null Adams. 707 Spring St. Miami: Martha Lummus, 622 N.E. 98 St. Milwaukee: Wm. Ntchol, 2251 S. Layton. Minneapolis: Jon Pankake, 729 8th Ave. S E New Orleans: Mrs. Jack Auslet, 2268% St. Claude Ave. Oklahoma City: Sam Brunk, 3416 N. Virginia. Omaha Irving Baker, 5108 Izard St. Philadelphia: Al Zurawskl, The Bulletin. Pittsburgh: R. F. Klingensmlth, 516 Jeanette. Wilklnsburg. 412-241-2809. Portland, Ore.: Arnold Marks, Journal. St. Louis: Joe & Joan Pollack, 7335 Shaftsbury, University City. PA 5-7181. Salt Lake City: 11. Pearson. Deseret News. Saw Francisco: Dolores Barusch, 25 Taylor St.. ORdway 3-4813: Advertising: Jerry Nowell, 417 Market St., YCkon 2-9537. Washington: Virginia R. Collier, 2308 Ashmead Place, N. W., DUpont 7-0892. In Canada Montreal: Room 314, 625 Belmont St., Jules Larochelle. St. John: 43 Waterloo, Sam Babb. Toronto: 2675 Bay view Ave., Wlllowdale, Ont. W. Gladlsb. Vansouver: 411 Lyric Theatre Bldg. 751 Granville St., Jack Droy. Winnipeg: The Tribune, Jim Peters. Member Audit Bureau of Circulations Second Class postage paid at Kansas City, Mo. Sectional Edition. $3.00 per year National Edition, $7.50. NOVEMBER 11, 1963 Vol. 84 No. 3 A MOOT QUESTION IT, DOUBTLESS, would be a revelation to thousands of movie patrons — and especially non-patrons — to have heard the Rt. Rev. Msgr. Thomas F. Little, executive secretary of the National Legion of Decency, say, as he did to delegates at the recent Theatre Owners of America convention, that “more than 80 per cent of all films reviewed during the last year were judged morally unobjectionable for some segment of the audience and, in the case of domestic films, the figure was 85.11 per cent.” Perhaps it was even a revelation to exhibitors, if one considers the criticism leveled against motion pictures on charges of indecency, not only from “professional” zealots who degrade and, therefore, would grade films by classifying them for audience suitability, but also from the lay public whose complaints the exhibitors have heard. Msgr. Little then raised the question, “Why is there widespread criticism of pictures?” To which he supplied his own answer, saying that the reason was to be found largely in the advertising. And he admonished the exhibitors “to build a bridge to universal respect in the community and to attract to your theatres the huge audiences which habitually shun you is to do something about your advertising,” the blame for which he placed upon distributors who supplied “offending advertising copy and trailers.” This would seem to be generalizing to a greater degree than is warranted, though there is much truth in the Monsignor’s observations. There is fault on both sides of the fence, and not excepting the public, too, many of whom do not practice what they preach. That’s one way of looking at it, which, perhaps, is the way some exhibitors and distributors have looked at the problem, largely because, when they did truthfully advertise the good and wholesome pictures— those suitable for the WHOLE FAMILY — the family patronage did not materialize and, actually, others were “driven away.” Still, this is not the best of business judgment. For, being so guided, it will, in the long run, have an adverse effect. It does not take into account the development of this business for the future and it loses sight of the benefits derived in the past when this business had its greatest growth on the strength of family patronage. The mores, the conventions of today are considerably different from those of other periods. But what appears to be “in keeping” can be carried too far. In fact, it may already have been carried to the point beyond which it cannot, without stepping off the brink, go further. Even though some better taste is being shown in this tendency, there still is an unnecessary dragging of raw sex into pictures, deterring, rather than attracting, patronage. True, many good and fine pictures have not received the patronage they deserved — even with some “suggestiveness” of what they do not contain, thrown into the advertising. And some that were sold for what they are, may have been undersold, with just a surface-scratching effort. And some have failed, despite vigorous campaigns. Somewhere there is a reason for this, which can be ferreted out and applied with resounding success, just as Walt Disney has demonstrated. Motion pictures, on the whole, are better than they ever have been. The treatment of mature subject matter is a mark of growing up and progress. And, by and large, good judgment has prevailed, in its handling in films. But, whether this has been the case in the advertising is a moot question. * * Well-Merited Honor The honor conferred upon Barney Balaban, president of Paramount Pictures, by the Anti-Defamation League, “for his services to the advancement of democracy and understanding,” is indeed merited. Since the very founding of the League, which has just celebrated its 50th Anniversary, on which occasion Mr. Balaban was presented with the League’s Humanitarian Award, he has played a most active role in its constant efforts to stamp out racial and religious prejudice and discrimination. Active in many other humanitarian endeavors, Mr. Balaban, in accepting the award, summed up well the ADL’s objective, to “bring this wonderful country of ours a little closer to that better, freer world our fathers wanted for us, and we want for our children.”