The Exhibitor (Nov 1938-May 1939)

26 SPECIAL FEATURES Number 17 of a Series: SAM F. ROTH VALLEY ENTERPRISES, INC., operators of six Virginia theatres. "THE NATIONAL EXHIBITOR is a decided asset to anyone connected in any way with theatre operation. "The publication is so planned and arranged that by utilizing its helpful information and suggestions, everyone from the janitor to the executive can be greatly benefited. "Best wishes for continued success.” Nearly every Exhibitor reads THE EXHIBITOR! AN INVITATION Throughout 1 93 9, expressions of praise, comment, criticism or suggestion from our many Exhibitor Friends will be carried in similar form in every issue. W.e welcome the expression of every reader and will use them in the order in which they are received. "Boy Meets Girl ” As for the boy-meets-girl film. Perhaps the difference between an exclusive and a popular work may be expressed with this question. Is the problem of the artist like that of the mathematician; is he supposed to merely state a problem or also to solve it? While I like it best when he merely states it, the strange fact persists that most popular authors in fiction or in films seem to attempt a solution. The boy does get the girl. Now there must be more to the coincidence of the amazing persistence of love, in most narrative. Does love conquer all? Perhaps it does. Perhaps underlying the problems of life and work that are brought to bear in the films is the love motif. Perhaps all acquisitiveness, social upheavals are incidents to the demand of a better sentimental life. Yet it is not necessarily conclusive that the bringing of the boy and girl together demands that the audience consider the problem as solved. In the theatre there is on Broadway an exceptional play called, "The White Steed,” by Paul Vincent Carroll. This play poses the problem of "spiritual book-keeping” as an impossible estimate of the true human position in the church. Mr. Carroll’s problem is not solved except for the comfort of the conclusion wherein the boy does seemingly get the girl. I know that the argument that Mr. Carroll has presented goes on and on. While it has come into the open more clearly in the last few years, it has always been there. Actually reverting to the films, one must bear in mind that if the audience knows beforehand that the boy is going to get the girl, the problem of the film dramatist is made much greater. He has lost this one essential element of suspense and the technique of working within this prescribed limitation cannot be ignored as a part of the art of the film. And if the audience is bored with the method used for the boy to get the girl then the film will be rejected as an undesirable work. Crime Pictures With regard to the crime problem. The movies do not deal with the crime problem, they deal with crime, itself. A boy robs a bank, the shadow of darkness falls upon other virtuous characters, the criminal is ultimately caught; he pays his penance and we are ready for the fade out. Now in actual life, the judge on the bench does not find out about slum conditions that give rise to the boy’s robbery. He must ascertain whether he did or did not rob the bank. If he robbed the bank, he gets a punishment under the law. If he did not rob the bank, he goes free. Now a responsible school of thought contends that this is a fallacy of the law. But if it is, I think we should first correct the fictions in the law before we fight the fictions in the film. Indeed most of the social criticisms against the movie run onto rocks because of this fact. The critic, having been used to the play and the book, the concert and art exhibit, regards the film similarly as a critic of social habits. He looks at the films as if it is apart from society when he should look at it as if it is a part of society. The film indeed represents a sort of shadow world and it has built up its own equities, almost its own social system which must not be confused too often with other domains. The platonic world of the public has almost succeeded in making the author little more than a ghost writer for the public, itself. Thus we find on the part of many a demand for a social revolution in the shadow world even before they ask for one in the real world. Glorifying War As to the charge that films glorify war. I do not think it is the intention of the producers to glorify war, in fact quite the opposite. A strange psychological result comes from watching the film that is even most anti-war. If the hero goes through the ordeal of war, we say what a marvelous hero he is to survive all this ordeal. If the villain gets injured or perhaps killed by the war, we say what a wonderful thing happened. Having watched numberless films dealing with war that were not documentary, but were works of suspense, I find this curious phenomena to prevail. So naturally the producer is on the horns of a dilemma. If this can be true about "The Big Parade” and "All Quiet on the Western Front,” perhaps the only anti-war films must be written without showing soldiers in battle or on parade. Perhaps the intrigues behind the lines or before the war would make the real true anti-war film. With regard to other charges. The movies have been accused of boycotting thought of contemporary events. Critics have pointed to the difficulties encountered by the film, "Blockade.” Regardless of the issues, the facts remain that a movie producer did make "Blockade” and it was not the film producers who interfered with it. Criticism of this kind should be directly solely against those who are responsible, not against Hollywood. Yet the position of the film with regard to broad topical questions must be examined carefully. First, the industry is an international one. But more important than that is the fact that the lack of opportunity for selecting its audience makes the theatre a transient forum where trouble often follows with controversy on the screen. I, myself, like topicality. The serial story that I must enjoy means waiting for tomorrow’s newspaper. It is the news, itself. Yet the film cannot quite cope with this. If a Newspaper Did It To make an analogy, let us suppose that the newspaper were like the theatre. Let us assume that the New York Times instead of being delivered individually to each of its readers, instead were read from a platform each day. 750,000 readers of the Times are asked to gather in Central Park to hear someone with a good microphone voice read the paper to them. Now no one would call the Times a highly controversial paper. Yet when the speaker read the dispatches from Spain by Mr. Carney, a mild disturbance might be created on the part of those who were pro-Loyalist and similarly when the speaker read the opinion of the news from Spain by Mr. Mathews, it is possible the Pro-Francoites would have something to say. It is possible also that the speaker would have something thrown at him. Each of you has the right to select his dream speaker to play this part. We know that in the films we have had most bitter experiences. A film, "The Callahans and the Murphys” was stopped from exhibition because it created disturbances and yet the message of this film was little more than the contention that sometimes some Irishmen might like to drink and occasionally an Irishman might like to fight. However, as events get into perspective, the film makes use of them on the screen. The best war film was not "The Kaiser and the Beast of Berlin,” released during the heat of the struggle but was either "All Quiet on the Western Front” or "The Big Parade,” both made almost ten years after the war. The improvement of the foreign films has inspired statements that foreign films are better than Hollywood’s films. Some time ago I had this controversy in print with Frank Nugent and I have never been satisfactorily answered in my contention that the comparison was made with a very few best foreign films and merely the average Hollywood product. The best of the foreign films are exceptionally good but when one considers that the United States makes 400 films and the rest of the world almost 2000, the number of good foreign films that we get is ridiculously small. We are also captivated by the charm of different atmosphere, different approach which is most observed by those who have been surfeited with our own domestic brand. Yet again Hollywood films entertained 73 per cent of the audiences abroad and many of our films are regarded with this attitude of seeing something different in those countries where there is a prevalence of domestic manufacture enforced by gov ( Continued on page 3 5) February 22, 19i9