Exhibitors Herald (Jul-Sep 1922)

September 30, 1922 EXHIBITORS HERALD 45 Short Subjects and Long Lines By WALTER F. EBERHARDT Exploitation Division, Associated First National Pictures Walter E. Eberhardt, of the Associated First National division of exploitation, speaks specifically of that company's products and generally of short subject exploitation in the following special article, especially interesting at this time. If you found interest in the series, "Short Subjects Mean Money," you should not fail to read Mr. Eberhardt's opinions in the matter, opinions gained from the viewpoint of the professional student of exploitation. One of the biggest fallacies of the exhibiting business is that the man who has posted his paper, sent in his newspaper advertising and, perhaps, conducted a little exploitation campaign on his feature picture has done all that is necessary to put his show across. It is — if he hasn't anything else worth advertising. It is — if he is satisfied with not getting every penny he should out of his offering. The problem naturally reverts to the question of : If an exhibitor has a product that he does not consider worth while telling his patrons about why has he booked it? He advertises Norma Talmadge in "Smilin' Through" because he knows that this star has perhaps the strongest following of any motion picture luminary. He knows that her name over his theatre means coins in the boxoffice. * * * How about some of the others? Doesn't the rule apply equally to Buster Keaton? Let's say that the exhibitor has sent in reports on so-called "Short Subjects" to the "What the Picture Did for Me" section of Exhibitors Herald, pronouncing them very good. It is logical to assume that the majority of his patrons agreed with him. And having agreed, it is natural to suppose that they are anxious to see more of them. Going a step further it is probable that they would find their way to his theatre more easily if he would let them know when such pictures are coming again. Comedians like Charlie Chaplin, whose recent releases have fallen into the class of so-called short subjects, and the frozen faced Buster Keaton, have not increased constantly in popularity without meaning increased revenue to the exhibitor if he will only let his patrons know about them. And the more he lets know, the bigger his boxoffice receipts will be. Unless he does let them know he is letting ready cash slip through his hands. * * * The comparison is not so apt as regards Chaplin because the king comedian has been so long established in popularity and has usually been regarded as a feature comedian, that his name automatically goes up in electric lights when one of his pictures is run. In the case of Buster Keaton the comparison is more apt. Keaton is and has always been a short subject comedian. But the fact remains that he is a drawing card that, as numerous instances have proven, surpasses the feature picture. Despite his admitted popularity, however, the fact remains that because of a seeming prejudice against exploiting short subjects which still exists in a large percentage of cases, exhibitors have failed to reap the profit accruing from this popularity. Keaton is cited as a typical example, but the situation is used as an example only. There are countless short subjects which should be exploited. In many cases, it is true, they should not be exploited over the feature production, but if they have any boxoffice value they also have a corresponding drawing power through exploitation. * ♦ $ The mere fact that it is a short subject should not hinder a showman from getting what advantage he can out of it. The average father prefers his first offspring to be a boy ; but he'll crow even if it is a girl. First National is taking the stand that its so-called short subjects ought to be exploited for whatever drawing power they have to exhibitors. Chap Illustrations for accompanying article in order of their discussion by Mr. Eberhardt.