Exhibitors Herald (1926)

EXHIBITORS HERALD Although I am no editorial writer I am glad to try my hand at it, for Martin Quigley, while he is on his vacation. I hope that Mr. Quigley will have a most enjoyable holiday abroad and that he will come back refreshed to run the same sort of admirable journal of the motion picture industry that he always has turned out. It is a pleasure to be a part of an industry that has within it such forward looking persons as Mr. Quigley. As I look over the industry today it seems to me that the most remarkable feature about it is the speed with which it goes ahead. Each six months appears to me to be a decade in motion pictures. Improvement in picture making and selling is so fast that it takes one's breath away. And that is no mere figure of speech. No one may tell now what may be done next year. A year ago, I think, few, if any, persons would have believed there could have been two such unusual screen pictures as “Ben Hur” and “The Big Parade,” simultaneously making picture history in Broadway — and in “legitimate” theatres throughout the country. And that is not mentioning many other remarkable films. I have been working with motion pictures since their beginning, and my life has been, and is, wrapped up in them. I believe in them. They are the greatest source of wholesome enjoyment for the greatest number of persons. I believe in the stability of motion pictures as a universal entertainment and, therefore, as an investment; and I know absolutely in my own mind that they have only begun to show what they can do. Many men now working at making pictures never have worked in any other form of expression. They have not been novelists or dramatists. They have begun their lives in the world of the film, and they are living their lives in it. IT has been said that motion pictures may not be an art because too much of mechanics necessarily must go into their making. But these new workers in pictures use mechanics and big sets and tens of thousands of persons, if necessary, just as an artist uses the different pigments to slap on his canvas. What difference does it make whether a man is wielding ten thousand men and fifty lights, or a paint brush, or a pen, as long as he is getting effects in the medium in which he is working? Personally, I don’t think it makes any difference. However, I am not ^v^iting this editorial for Mr. Quigley’s journal while he is having a rest to make a Editorial by Marcus Loew point of the art of motion pictures. It is their efficiency that is most important here, it seems to me. The time is past when there can be any hit-or-miss policy in picture making. To put it baldly, now that I have touched upon the “art” side of the situation, producing companies have come to the point where they are putting out a sure-fire product up to a standard of true quality. The Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Company, for instance, this year had in one week on Broadway in the Times Square district seven different successful cinemas showing at one time. Four of these were playing to two dollars top. I trust that Mr. Quigley will forgive me for mentioning our own company, but I believe he must have expected that. I know that Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer is confident of even greater accomplishments next year than this — the most successful year, I think, that any motion picture making organization ever had. « * * IT is easy to write or speak the words “bigger,” “better,” “greatest,” and their like. So, to my mind, they don’t mean much. But when I say that Metro-GoldwynMayer is not only on a sound basis, but on a progressively sound basis, I mean just that. Sotmdness, dependability and progress. Those are the three words that I know are proved by the past performances and guaranteed by the future program of the company. General knowledge is had of the unusual achievements of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer during the past year — “The Midshipman,” “Ibanez’ Torrent,” “Mike,” “The Unholy Three,” “The Merry Widow” — to mention only a few of the pictures and to omit mention of our pictures playing as legitimate attractions; the development of John Gilbert and Norma Shearer into outstanding stars; the acquirements of players, directors and story material throughout the world. Any one might be proud to stand on the record. And I am content to do that. Motion pictures are stabilized, but they always will furnish new thrills. When Mr. Quigley returns from his recess I am sure we will have a new thrill for him — -and for every one else who goes to the cinema. It might be Benjamin Christianson’s “The Devil’s Circus,” starring Norma Shearer. It might be any one of the unusual pictures that we are making in our CiJver City studio. However, I will say in closing that there is a certain comfort in thrills when one knows that they are based on solid rock foundation of business organization, business achievement, and business service. (During the absence of Martin J. Quigley who is abroad a series of articles for this page is being written by a group of leaders in various branches of the motion picture industry,) V