The Exhibitor (Jun-Oct 1939)

14 THE EXHIBITOR WARREN STOKES HOLLYWOOD NEWSREEL • HELLO, FOLKS! This is WARREN STOKES speaking to you from Holly¬ wood over the JEP network. The push on Poland was pushed off the front pages of the local papers this weekend as the big guns of Hollywood blazed into action and directed a barrage on the studio ad¬ vertising and publicity departments. The attack is reported as a retrenchment move to cut down the overhead. Short¬ sighted movie moguls fail to realize they are destroying the main fortifications of the movie business, indirectly cutting down box office receipts, in this pincer movement to shut off the communications department — Hollywood’s propaganda bri¬ gade, which has never received the proper recognition for its distinguished service. Captains of the celluloid industry must take heed of the fact that the power of the press has been harnessed by the studio press agents to make this picture business a word of mouth commodity, con¬ tributing in no small measure to its present success. The Hollywood firing squad is shooting in the wrong direc¬ tion. Some Observations • THE WAR IN HOLLYWOOD had to come. It should have been fought a long time ago. But it has to be fought along different lines. It has been said that a winning army travels on its stomach. The same applies to the army of movie fans. They have to be well fed from Holly¬ wood’s source of supply in order to keep them marching to the nation’s theatres, even if the fodder is 90 percent baloney. None of the pictures is going to sell them¬ selves and the sooner Hollywood awakens to these facts the better. With approxi¬ mately $150,000,000 tied up in the produc¬ tion and distribution of product now scheduled for release, Hollywood is go¬ ing' to find the going pretty tough and rough with skeleton publicity, advertising departments to say nothing about the losses faced by exhibitors through this lack of sorely needed co-operation. If this industry wants to turn a firing squad loose in the right direction, it will find plenty of targets to shoot at. There is little gained through the expenditure of S20,000-$30,000 for a swank Hollywood premiere. That doesn’t sell product on the other side of the Hollywood hills. It would go a long way however to sustain the publicity and advertising payrolls through which this industry reaps the larger benefits on a national basis. As long as Hollywood is in a firing mood, it might begin by using up the duds from the production end of the business; those four and five figure explosives that have continually missed fire on the screen, even with the support of the publicity and advertising battalions. Mistakes Cost Money • HOLLYWOOD’S BIGGEST MISTAKE, prior to the one it is now making, was the great “Movie Quiz,” which we happen to know was voted thumbs down by the well seasoned publicity departments. That was the biggest dud of the lot. And while the industry is looking for ways and means to save money, why not forget all about the Golden Anniversary. Surely this is not the time to shoot off another bankroll to glorify itself in direct contrast to its own claims of depleted coffers. This amount again could be better expended to keep the wheels of exploitation working for more concrete and lasting results. Just Plain Talk • THIS IS NOT A PLEA for the public¬ ity and advertising man who has proven himself and taken it on the chin, but plain talk directed to the industry as a whole which must recognize that it is floundering in a feeble attempt to make excuses for monies wasted in other de¬ partments. Publicity and advertising is the life’s blood of this business. There is nothing to be saved from saving the newspaper space for competitive mediums. With the loss from the foreign market, it becomes necessary for this industry to do a bigger selling job in these United States. With magazine and newspaper space going to the war lords of Europe, the Hollywood publicity machine should now be working at full force to combat this situation and sustain interest in the celluloid product. The exhibitor needs this co-operation. Advertising copy must have plenty of punch and a continuous flow of good news copy is sorely needed at this particular time to draw the pub¬ lic’s interest away from the war zone and into the theatres. Hollywood has made another big mistake. Someday the big guns are going to backfire and the one time Hollywood publicity man will per¬ haps find solace in writing obituaries to the land of make believe that never be¬ lieved in him until it was too late. This is WARREN STOKES saying So Long, Folks! Advance Shots New Pictures Tersely Cited Philadelphia — Received at the home office of The Exhibitor since last week’s edition of the Blue Section was printed have been reviews of the following pic¬ tures. Complete Six-Point Reviews will be printed in the next Blue Section. Features BABES IN ARMS (Metro-GoldwynMayer)— Mickey Rooney, Judy Garland, Charles Winninger, Guy Kibbee. 97m. This is bang-up entertainment, which moves at a fast pace from start to finish. There is never a dull moment. Mickey Rooney runs away with acting honors and does the best job in his screen career. The story is an adaptation of the Rogers and Hart stage play. The whole picture is a clever assembling of gags, music, and dancing, which sends the audience home¬ ward completely satisfied. BETRAYAL (World) — Annie Vernay, Suzy Prim, Pierre-Richard Willm, Roger Karl, Abel Jacquin. 80m. Produced on a more lavish and tremendous scale than any previous Gallic motion picture, “Be¬ trayal” relates the tragic romance of Elizabeth Tarakanova (beauteous new¬ comer Annie Vernay) and Count Orloff (Pierre-Richard Willm). A cross between “Mayerling” and “Mary of Scotland,” this starts off fairly slowly and takes on dra¬ matic impetus as it rolls smoothly along to a crescendo finish. Art and foreign houses can reap a box-office harvest, and general -run houses can make friends by exhibiting the superb French import, superimposed titles are perfect. A BRIVELE DER MAMEN (A Letter to Your Mother) (Sphinx Films) — Lucy Gehrman, Alexander Stein, Max Bozyk, Chane Levin. 104m. Although there is a decided lack of prominent American Jew¬ ish players in the cast, the various ex¬ ploitable angles of this Polish-made film should more than make up for that short¬ coming in drawing Yiddish audiences into the house. DANCING CO-ED (Metro)— Lana Tur¬ ner, Richard Carlson. Artie Shaw and Or¬ chestra, Ann Rutherford, Leon Errol. 82m. This is a fast-moving collegiate drama set to the tempo of Artie Shaw’s swing music. DISPUTED PASSAGE (Paramount) — Dorothy Lamour, Akim Tamiroff, John Howard, Judith Barrett, William Collier, Sr., Victor Varconi. 91m. Taking a few liberties with Lloyd C. Douglas’ powerful novel, but not disturbing the workings of the plot, Paramount megger Frank Borzage has fashioned a photoplay which deserves high ranking on anyone’s list of “bests.” In spite of the absence of top-flight marquee names, “Disputed Pas¬ sage” should do okay by itself in the mat¬ ter of bringing in heavier grosses. ESPIONAGE AGENT (Warners)— Joel McCrea, Brenda Marshall, Jeffrey Lynn, George Bancroft, Stabley Ridges. Scoop¬ ing the entire film industry, the Warners barge through with this adventurous yarn, telling of our country’s danger from within and without, while war wages abroad. By sheer dint of its audaciousness, not pulling punches, by calling names, plus a story as hot as the headlines, with an impressive list of players, “Espionage Agent” should deal out winning cards to exhibitors. HERE I AM, A STRANGER (20th Cen¬ tury-Fox) — Richard Greene, Richard Dix, Brenda Joyce, Roland Young, Gladys George. 83m. Youth has its say in this top-flight program show that has a college background, but which does not allow itself to fall into the familiar groove of the most rah-rah stories. September 27, 1939