Exhibitors Herald (Dec 1924-Mar 1925)

February 28, 1925 EXHIBITORS HERALD 73 SHORT SUBJECTS Gives Short Even Break An advertisement by Leo Garner, Columbia theatre, Bristol, Tenn., reproduced in “The Theatre” this week in illustration of a letter, merits your attention. In the ad, “Columbus,” one of Bathe’s “Chronicles of America” series, is given exactly the same space and prominence accorded the feature picture on the same program. This is very unusual short subject advertising, by a very unusual exhibitor advertiser. Perhaps Mr. Garner’s record, set down in frequent contributions to this paper, is the best index to its merit. Burlesques Have Their Troubles Burlesques continue to puzzle the trade, apparently without reason. It requires no more than a cursory inspection of the record to reveal the fact that they are knockouts where the burlesqued subject has been seen and abject flops where it has not. What’s mysterious about that? The real puzzle is that film companies continue to sell short subject burlesques into theatres which have not shown the feature subject burlesqued, and that exhibitors continue to buy them that way. There are two or three possible reasons why this continues, but logic and sincere desire to please the public are not among them. Money in Titles There’s money in good short subject titles. A really promising title, like “Flickering Youth” for instance, not only gets them in but gets itself advertised by the exhibitor. You really can’t blame exhibitors for not advertising some of the titles that are passed to them. Title writing is not easy. There are few who can turn out really catchy titles and Mack Sennett seems to have most of them working for him. Yet good titles are worth whatever expense or effort is involved in getting them. A little more attention to this phase of comedy manufacture is in order. First Come — First Served Each year we print this great idea and some year somebody’s going to see how great it is and try to buy it or steal it. As it is not copyrighted, we fear the latter, but if anybody’s honest enough to do the other we will not refuse a modest fraction of the fabulous returns assured. This is the idea: Make up a short subject reproducing the newspaper cartoons! (If you can’t figure out the rest of it, there’s no use telling it to you.) LeFs Have Split Reels Reports on cartoon comics run a lower rate of kicks than those on any other product. No comedian reads as few complaints on his work as Paul Terry. It may be because Terry does his stuff with a pen, but it’s possible that his wisdom in keeping down the footage also has a lot to do with it. The fact that there are practically no complaints about scenics and other minor length product seems to substantiate this. It’s ancient history that it’s harder to tell two funny jokes than one. The second one has to be much funner. The third has to be better still, and so it goes. Comedians can’t let down. It’s easier to be funny in two reels than five, as the experience of several comedians attests, and it ought to be easier to be funny in one real than two, though few have mastered the technique of the single reeler. Then, shouldn’t it be easier to be funny in five hundred feet than in 1,000? Here’s the plot, which no doubt will be as popular as usual : Why not make split-reels? Wouldn’t feet made up of two comedians in equal parts of 500 feet each be a better risk than 1,000 of one comedian? At least there’d be a chance of a 50-50 break, a practical certainty of it, and not many comedians are getting that break these days. If temperament or whatever it is makes this plan impractical, why not give half the reel to a comedian and the other half to a travelogue or some other interesting subject? Half a reel of good comedy is enough for one show, and under this plan there’d be no reason why the two half reels couldn’t be separated in the program. There is no sense in rejecting this plan on the ground that it is a throwback to the shooting gallery era. No one despises trick photography on that account. There is a good deal of reason for trying it out. For instance, there is the complete selling campaign outlined above. And we do not ask the agency commission. Pathe Goes After Family Business Bathe seeks to focus the attention of 11,0(X),000 newspaper readers upon “Idaho,” the new serial, through printing in newspapers claiming that many readers the details of a campaign soliciting photos of the “Typical American Family.” For photos received a total of $1,500 will be paid. Any photo showing a father and mother with two or more of their own children is acceptable. There is also a letter to be written. It is explained that the purpose is to reach the family public and interest that fundamental unit in the serial. The serial is to be issued March 1 and the photos are receivable until July 1. Any movement having as its purpose the tightening of the bonds linking the family unit to the picture show is a good movement. The family unit needs the picture show and the theatre needs the family unit. Motion pictures teach fidelity to family, reverence of parents, care of children. The family teaches picture makers how to make better pictures, by affording them the reactions of the ideal audience.