Exhibitors Herald and Moving Picture World (Oct-Dec 1928)

18 EXHIBITORS HERALD and MOVING PICTURE WORLD December 29, 1928 The Public and Industry Speak Comments on and suggestions offered in the Herald-World's campaign to find a suitable name for talking pictures are coming from many sources — the public, dramatic critics, producers, exhibitors, publicists, directors and all others associated with the industry. I note that you are carrying on a discussion as to the likelihood of providing what might be thought a more suitable name for the talking picture. This is interesting. I have no doubt that one will be found which will prove not only euphonious, but will appropriately designate this new art. —WILL H. HAYS, Motion Picture Producers & Distributors of America, Inc., New York City. » » » We should be grateful for a bit of information. In writing a review of Al Jolson's "The Singing Fool," Miss Florence Moran, of the St. \a\i.r Calender staff used the word "Audiopticncc," in reference to those viewing the new talking films. The word cau^-ed a lot of favorable comment so we would like to know if it has been used before. A careful search of the copies of the EXHIBITORS HERALD WORLD failed to reveal it. The nearest being "Audible Cinema." —ST. XAVIER CALENDER, Cincinnati, O. * » * Let me suggest a name for glorifying the sound pictures — a combination of photoplays and vaudeville, "Fotovil." Easy to say and after all the sound pictures are talkies of all the Vaudeville performers — bands, actors, dancers and whatnot. "Fotovil" can't lose. —JONAS PERLBERG. Chicago. * » * Sorry, but having wracked my brain in vain I must confess that I can't help you. A popular term -hape itself and cannot be invented. PROF. ROYAL HENDERSON SNOW, Ohio University, Columbus. O. I would like to see the sfx-aking motion pictures named "Oral films" instead of talking movies, which I think is a name too crude and hard to u.«e for anything as fine as "Oral films. ' —MARY C. LEINER, Chicago. • * » Heading in Thursday's Herald and Examiner of how important is the talkie aj being applied In the new film-. It is not at all an important pounding name. Common if anything. How d»< iln -trikc you for a title, "Logos." Not a mouthful, either. —ROSALIE MURRAY. Chicago. • • • Regarding a suitable u nrd to apply to talking pictures and al the same time using something In [in MF the whole thing, what would be better tluin r.lertrophontcs? Possibly it is not worth a tinker's damn, but it strikes me. WILLIAM R PATTIE. Crand theatre, Frankfort, Ky. • • • XMM of DM Hth found on in > ih-k iiflrr return from a -onion with the flu. Sorry couldn't reply in the lime you suggested. I'vr di«ru««ed the matter >ou mention with Mr. Trrndlr and he ho« no word lo suggest. He <lor«, however, utrongly object to "talkie" and imilar term* which minimize the importance and dignity of motion picture*. Mr. Trendle, for yr»r», fought ihc new. paper., on the word Ashton Stevens, noted dramatic critic on the Chicago Herald and Examiner, wrote in his column: TALKIES CRY FOR ANOTHER CHRISTENING By ASHTON STEVENS "How important is the talkie?" I asked Morris Gest yesterday when I discovered him in the Congress barber shop acquiring his semiannual haircut. (Moissi won't recognize his impresario when he comes Sunday to break this terrible dramatic silence with Tolstoy's "Redemption.") "I'll tell you how important the talkies are," said Gest. "Five hundred dollar actor who can -peak the language will be getting $5,000 a week in a season or two. Gilbert Miller says stage hands and musicians are so expensive that he has to move to London. Well, wait till the talkies really get going and he'll lose his pity for the poor underpaid actor!" * * * I strolled along the boulevard digesting the momentous thought, and strayed into "The Tavern," where I found Martin Quigley and Charles Collins discussing — yes, you have guessed it. But they were not talking actors' salaries; they were talking about the horrendous name that has been given to the talking picture. I bromidically said that if "movies" was good enough for the motion picture, "talkies" ought to be good enough for the movie that talked. Whereat Mr. Quigley, who is publisher not only of the familiar Chicagoan, but of the EXHIBITORS HERALD-WORLD, foremost of the film journals, spoke with more than a little feeling, saying that "movies" was NOT a good enough name for the motion picture, and that the leaders in that industry would cheerfully give million: — literally — to get rid of it. * • * Quigley told Collins that the EXHIBITORS HERALD-WORLD had initiated nation-wide discussion by way of preventing a recurrence of the "movie" misnomer. "Talkie," he said, would retard the development of the talkie — I mean of the talking picture. So, great minds — lay, professional and professorial — were -ending his magazine new names, any one of which was warranted to replace and better the hated "talkie." "Cinevox" had been suggested, and "phonofilm," but Quigley, while preserving a broadly impartial mind, slightly preferred "audien," having invented that word himself. Collins promptly produced from the great mind of a drama critic the sonorous Latin y mouthful "sonoma," and I not too modestly offered "audifilm." And Quigley hooked them without comment. Perhaps the reader has a better name. But don't send it to me; send it to EXIIIBITOKS HERALD-WOULD. Chicago, and perhaps some day, Will Hays will reward yon. "movie" believing it detrimental. However, "movie" stuck and he is of the opinion that the public will pick its own name for talking pictures regardless of what we can do about it. About three months ago I had a contest in the local papers, asking the public to suggest words to describe talking pictures. Got quite a response but no sensible suggestions. Enclosed is a clipping giving some of the words submitted. This Detroit contest was picked up and run in the Chicago American, too. They might have some dope for you. Personally, I don't like "audien" because I don't believe it fits into every day conversation. Wish I could be of more definite help to you. —OSCAR A. DOOB, Director Advertising & Publicity, Kunsky Theatres Corporation, Detroit, Mich. * * * I am sending you a name. I want you to analyze the same and put it into action and use it awhile. I do believe it will go over — "Se-APhonic." For instance, William Fox presents "Street Angel," it's a "Se-A-Phonic" picture. —J. DAM ORE., Adelphi theatre, Reynoldsville, Pa. I suggest the word Phonofilm for the name of the sound film in honor of Mr. DeForest. He, if I am not mistaken, patented the first sound device under the name of Phonofilm, where the sound wave was photographed on the film. The word Plionofilm is a word the general public and theatre-goers can pronounce with ease. —O. W. WARD, Columbia theatre, Columbia City, Ind. I have read with interest Ashton Stevens' article in today's "Herald and Examiner" about a proper name for moving pictures that have talking parts. It appears to me that "talkies" s-ounds cheap. The words "cinevox," "phonofilm" "sonoma," etc., are too obscure. They do not mean much to the average mind. Why not use good plain English and call them what they really are — "talking pictures" — or "talking films." These names give dignity to this great invention because of the power of simple language. —F. S. POOLER, Chicago. • • • / have carefully thought over your request in your letter of December 7th that I supply a word that may be suitable for the dialogue motion picture. In spite of all the thinking that I have been able to do, I cannot think of any word that I feel would meet your demands. 1 am afraid that the public will continue to use the word "talkie" for the dialogue production in spite of all that may be done to the contrary. The kind of people that fill the seats at the motion picture performances are the kind that prefer such ivords as "movie" and "talkie" and I do not believe that they would accept "a serviceable word which is both correct in derivation and proper in dignity." I wish lo assure you that I shall keep your request in mind, and if in a reasonable time anything worth while occurs to me, I shall be glad to inform you of it. —PROF. WILL T. HALE, Indiana university, Bloomingion, Ind.