The Exhibitor (Jun-Nov 1944)

EDITORIAL f I f R#g. U. S. Pat. Offic« Vol. 32, No. 22 October 11, 1944 Published Since 1918 A Jav Emanuel Publication. Published weekly by J<fy Emanuel Publications, Incorporated. Publish¬ ing office: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia, 7, Pennsylvania. New York office: 1600 Broadway, New York 19. Coast Representative: Samuel Llndenstein, 425 South Cochran Avenue, Los Angeles 36, California. Jay Emanuel, publisher; Paul J. Greenhalgh, business manager; Herbert M. Miller, managing editor; James A. Dalton, production manager; George F. Nonamaker, associate editor. Rates: Each edition, one year, $2; three years, $5. Address communications to publishing offices: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia 7, Pennsylvania. Please notify the circulation department of any change in address. While every effort is being made to handle changes as fast as possible, subscribers should allow at least five weeks. Please give both old and new address. If a zone number is used, it should likewise be Included. 3n Dliii A AMie SECTION ONE Advance Shots 23 Editorial Page 3 Hints on Newspaper Advertising 26 Late News Highlights 5, 6 National Legion of Decency List 23 National Mirror 11, 12, 16, 24 National Release Date Guide. . . Inside Back Cover Picture Page . 17 Production 25 Television 25 Trade Screenings 18 SECTION TWO THE CHECK-UP (The Exhibitor’s Yellow Section) SS-l-SS-8 Material contained in the Late Newt Highlights section often represents newest developments in stories found on other pages of this issue. The Late News Highlights section of THE EXHIBITOR goes to press last, with all the latest news as available. Eliminate the Waste Our good friend, Pete Harrison, currently on the coast trying to forget “The Deerslayer,” has been paying attention of late in his Harrison’s Reports to Wanton Waste In Production! He quotes unidentified studio executives to prove that $100,000,000 is wasted annually on the coast. This $100,000,000, he infers, is either thrown into excessive long pictures, or left on the cutting room floor. Much of the blame, according to Harrison’s argument, rests in the fact that the preparation isn’t completed, and that most scripts are overwritten. It would be far easier, he declares, to do the editing in the script rather than in the completed footage, which, when thrown on the cutting room floor represents a waste of time and money. There are many significant paragraphs in Harrison’s articles, and one which we think is best worth remembering is one quot¬ ing a production executive as follows: “Abnormal grosses make it possible for us to absorb the waste, but the lush times may not be with us long, and it behooves every studio to begin educating its directors and others respon¬ sible for the waste that unless we eliminate it, the industry runs the danger of cracking under the load.” Harrison hits the nail on the head, for this has been apparent to a lot of people. Pictures which ordinarily wouldn’t get to first base have been turning in big records at the box offices. Unfor¬ tunately, in many cases, the producers begin to believe that they have turned out polished gems, whereas the reverse is true. If these same producers think that when the post-war recession comes the same methods they use now will be as productive of success and profit they are in for a sad lesson. Inflationary conditions have allowed sub-standard pictures to become potent grossers in many areas. The producers should recognize this, and do what Harrison says, prepare for the times when lush days disappear. Harrison goes on to infer that the fault seems to be more Hollywood’s than anyone else’s. It has been pointed out that some of the pictures' have been made intentionally longer to offset doubling of “A” features in many parts of the country. Here again, Harrison declares the producers make another mis¬ take. While “A” pictures should not be twin billed, still the way to stop this practice is not through excessively long shows. The solution lies in a little more intelligence and com¬ mon sense in Hollywood. turn.