The Exhibitor (Nov 1938-May 1939)

EDITORIAL THE NATIONAL Trade-mark Reg. U. S. Pat. Off. Vol. 17, No. 16 March 1, 1939 A Jay Emanuel Publication. Circulating in Maryland, District of Columbia, Delaware, Virginia, Eastern West Virginia. Covering the film territory served out of Washington, D. C. Published weekly by Jay Emanuel Publications, Incorporated. Publishing office: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia. New York City office: 1600 Broadway. West Coast office: 1119 Poinsettia Drive, Hollywood, California. Jay Emanuel, publisher; Paul J. Grcenhalgh, advertising manager; Herbert M. Miller, managing editor. Subscription rates: $2 for one year; $5 for three years. Member of the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Publisher also of The Philadelphia Exhibitor and The New York State Exhibitor. Address all communications to the Philadelphia office. JUST IN PASSING HI YO— WESTERNS This publication, which has always been rather proud of the fact that its 100 percent coverage of features, shorts included every western, would like to point out there is still nothing like a good western. Witness "Stagecoach,” "Jesse James,” "The Bad Man of Brimstone” (last season). Every one is a moneymaker. Even the Warner crop this year is based on action, and that studio is doing mighty well, too. So the boys of the wide open spaces still have what it takes, even though generally their accomplishments (except in the case of this publication) go unrecognized. VITTORIO SPEAKS HIS PIECE For one fleeting moment, some folks on this side of the pond might have endorsed Vittorio Mussolini’s plan for helping Italian movies by prohibiting daily newspapers from reviewing Italian films and leaving that job to bi-weekly periodicals of the film industry. Vittorio doesn’t want to abolish criticism altogether. However, we are definitely against the idea. To deprive newspaper readers of some of the alleged reviewing abilities of some of the critics would be to throw the entire burden of raising laughs on the comic section. Keep the movie reviewers by all means. The worst ones are their own worst enemies. It’s a saving grace. ALL HAIL COLUMBIA That intra-industry revolution, which is seen in the passing of accepted ideas, can not totally be blamed on the Supreme Court or developments in Washington, but whatever the reason Hollywood, too, is becoming affected by new trends. In no studio is this rebirth more evident than in Columbia, where the powers that be have decided that any production program backed by important director-producers and name values must have what the exhibitor wants. Witness, then, the signing of such men as Wesley Ruggles, Howard Hawks, Frank Lloyd, Mitchel Leisen, Rouben Mamoulian, to supplement Frank Capra, as producer-directors. Acquiring the above mentioned satellites does not mean the addition of mere megaphone handlers, but rather director-producers who assume charge of production under Jack Cohn on an arrangement that makes it well worth their while. Witness, too, the lining up of such talent as Cary Grant, Irene Dunne, Jean Arthur, Loretta Young, Joan Blondell, as brilliant a group of marquee adorners as ever this industry has seen in a long, long time. Witness, also, some valuable properties acquired by the company, such as "The Tree of Liberty.” Columbia is spending plenty of money along these lines, too. All this is healthy, not because it will result in box-office pictures, but rather because it means that the creative abilities of the men who direct Columbia are geared along showmanship lines. You have heard it before from this department and you will hear it again: those much quoted phrases "There is nothing in this business which good pictures will not cure” and "The more competition the better.” There is no wonder, then, that the trade has reason to be jubilant when it notes the tendencies on the Columbia lot! Granting that changes in production ideas are not restricted to a single company, we have singled out Columbia because the Cohns have long been known as boys who are willing to take chances — and they generally succeed. "Lost Horizon” was as good an example of that as anything — and when the company slapped down $22 5,000 for "You Can’t Take It With You” the trade held its breath, too. After all, Columbia has no theatres. What is discussed above may also be a gamble to some but not to us. The gentlemen know very well what they are doing. The grosses will prove it. The winning of Academy Awards for the best feature ("You Can’t Take It with You” and for direction (by Frank Capra, in the Number One picture) cannot but add to Columbia’s determination to fabricate motion pictures which shall not only be box-office attractions but shall, as well, be worthy of coveted "Oscars.” NAT