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.
CLOSE UP
Slush, the cheat, losing men their bankers' backing. Slush, the revenue boomerang, missing the box office by the whole of a public's contempt.
Turn back to your Cinema.
Though, (it states) there have been wholesale claims from the studios that the making of talking films is less costly than that of the old silent product, this is now proved to be an illusion, mainly by reason of the hurried methods of the executives in the race for big names . . . .... the balance has been heavily weighted by the high prices paid to stage stars, big name directors, boosted writers and famous orchestras. The eleven top-line producing concerns have recently enlarged their contract players by almost 100 per cent., most of these demanding and getting colossal salaries. Paramount, Fox and MG-M have swelled the total of directors by 100 per cent. These, too, are augmented by a great number of song wTiters, score composers and lyricists, a's well as star musician's.
Elsewhere 'in the 'same article we read that the general cost of talking pictures has increased by 30 to 35 per cent.
How funny it is !
High-priced stars w^U be told where to get off at." This was what was being written when talkies began. When every company was more or less on the verge of bankruptcy, W'hen every resolution was a cutting down of needless expense and inflated salaries. The talkies were going to accomplish everything. Capturing world markets was only part of the idea. Getting back to normal costs was going to be the first big change. What were talking films not going to do ?
170