Canadian Film Digest (Nov 1971)

Page scan 0002 from Canadian Film Digest

Record Details:

Title:
Canadian Film Digest
Date:
Nov 1971
Volume:
Canadian Film Digest (Nov 1971)
Leaf #:
0002
Language:
English
Subjects:
Motion Pictures, Film Industry Trade Magazine",Canad
Collection:
Global Cinema, Canada, and Hollywood Studio System
Format:
periodicals
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library, Greig Dymond in memory of David Dymond, Paul Moore and Jessica Whitehead
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:

Canadian Film Digest

Editors: Dan Krendel (1971-72), Garth Drabinsky (1972-76)

Canadian Film Digest (1971-76) was owned and published by Nat Taylor’s Film Publications of Canada, Ltd., and initially edited by Dan Krendel, who had edited What’s New? (1942-74) and originated Ballyhoo (1952-61) for nationally-dominant chain, Famous Players Canada, Ltd., also Taylor’s exhibition partner. Despite these ties to a Paramount-controlled theatre chain, the magazine nonetheless aimed to provide news and features about all aspects of the industry across Canada, exhibition, distribution and production. The Digest began when an attempted 1970 renewal of Canadian Film Weekly (1942-70) was short-lived. Taylor decided to relaunch under an entirely new title with a more contemporary, colour layout. Taylor later hired young Garth Drabinsky to edit, impressed by his initiative publishing Impact (1972), a lobby give-away for moviegoers. Drabinksy’s interest turned to film producing in 1977, letting the Digest come to an end, although he and Taylor continued to collaborate in building the original 18-screen Cineplex at Toronto’s Eaton Centre. Canadian Film Digest also published an annual directory Canadian Film Digest Yearbook (1971-86), which similarly continued Canadian Film Weekly Year Book (1951-70), and subsequently became Film Canada Yearbook (1986-2007). Because Canadian Film Digest originated in the Canadian Film Weekly, which had incorporated Canadian Moving Picture Digest (1917-57), which in turn had merged with Canadian Universal Bulletin (1915-18), the magazine dated its roots back to 1915, a single thread of ownership publishing these main periodicals and annuals of English Canada’s film press.

– Paul Moore, March 2024

Date Added:
August 01, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

pee IN THIS ISSUE Production Scene Special Section Toronto International Film Studios C.P.P. Award Presentation Canadian Production ‘Mahoney’s Estate’, and "The Rowdyman’ EDITOR DAN KRENDEL Asst. Editor HARRIET BERNSTEIN Published Monthly by Film Publications of Canada Ltd. 175 Bloor St. E. Toronto 285, Ont. Telephone 924-3701 Second Class Mail Registration No. 2587 Postage Paid in Oshawa CANADIAN FILM DIGEST A MONTHLY COMMENTARY ON THE CANADIAN MOTION PICTURE SCENE Encompassing the CANADIAN MOVING PICTURE DIGEST, founded in 1915, and the CANADIAN FILM WEEKLY founded in 1941. LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY There was a time when managing a theatre was a serious, full-time job, and the local theatre manager was not only aShowman by nature and experience, but a man of considerable stature in his community. He walked in dignity and rubbed shoulders with the great and near-great, both in his work and in his leisure time—such as it was. An honestly dedicated manager was wedded to his theatre and spent the major portion of his daily 24 hours ‘On the Job’, and the great majority found it a satisfactory and exhilarating experience. And, the theatre owners derived maximum benefits from this dedication. But time took its toll, and being only mortals, managers grew older, some died, others were retired to make way for new blood. The manpower situation became so critical that theatres were turned over to young kids in their teens, with no background and no experience, and certainly no desire to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors. Many became simply ‘key carriers’—opening the theatre sometimes on schedule, and locking up. Some didn’t even go that far, but delegated those duties to a doorman, cashier, candy girl, or even alone usher so they could attend to their own pleasures and show up in time to collect their pay and sometimes sign the reports. ‘Showmanship’ had died an inglorious death, and the box-office began to suffer, and nobody seemed to care. The new breed of manager wasn’t around long enough to get to know anybody .. . politicians, news media, merchants or even their own customers. Some openly admitted that they were just using the job as a stepping-stone, and were ready to quit the moment something better turned up. Still, nobody cared. In retrospect it seems that the ‘Golden Age’ of the movies suffered a relapse not only because of the worsening product situation, but the equally serious lack of experienced, knowledgeable theatre managers qualified to properly sell such product as was available. It is still not too late to plug the management ‘Generation Gap’, and force a re-birth of Showmanship as we knew it, if we'll only swallow our pride and concede that good executives as good wine, improve with age. fou | EDITOR