Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1956)

The Case Against ARE THE ATTACKS JUSTIFIED? WHAT IS FILMDOM'S DEFENSE? Movie Advertising A rather strongly worded, if weakly documented, case against motion picture advertising is being compounded in certain quarters. Omitted from this particular reference are the declamations of some religious publications, which quite understandably follow a formal and rather austere pattern in their discussions of movies and movie advertising. Neither do we here allude to the Catholic Bishops' Committee on Motion Pictures, which recently reported that it found "moral retrogression" in film advertising. This viewpoint is concerned solely with the growing force of Madison Avenue spokesmen who have trained rancorous guns upon their brethren in filmdom's advertising ranks, berating their promotional efforts in terms that boldly brand film ads as dirty and dishonest, seducing the public with phony enticements and leading it down iniquitous paths. In one recent issue (November 12) of Advertising Age, the trade publication, appeared two rather shocking articles attacking film advertising. We carry them below in full because they represent, in our judgment, a composite of many of the anti-movie ad arguments which are ranging generally. One of the articles is accompanied by a reproduction of one of the ads on the 20th Century-Fox film, "The King and I". Aside from the credits and a quotation from a newspaper review, there is no copy in the ad. The illustration of a bare-chested Yul Brynner and an amply attired Deborah Kerr in an embrace, which does not occur in the film, prompted the writer, Clyde Bedell, billed by Advertising Age as a "consultant in creative advertising", to launch into this nasty and ridiculous castigation of movie ads : "Movie advertising is the slippery eel and corner-cutter of top rank in advertising. Absinthe & Crayons "I have never seen movie ads created. But I think, mostly, it goes something like this: "They shut an ad writer (?) up in a cubicle of some kind with a bottle of absinthe and a bag of colored crayons and a stack of 'feelthy pictures' from Paris. He has of course seen the movie he is about to advertise. "The ad (?) creator drinks absinthe and looks at the feelthy pictures, until he becomes emotionally upset and unstable. "He then seizes some colored pencils and begins to sketch suggestive pictures, somewhat akin to something in the movie — but hopped up. It apparently wouldn't occur to him to be just plain honest. If his nails have not been clipped recently by some restraining corrective outfit, maybe he writes a few suggestive words, too. "When the absinthe has worn off and emotional exhaustion overcomes the creative colored pencil genius, he emerges from the cubicle and a 'finish' artist takes over. Result? Something like you see here. "Having enjoyed 'The King and I* on the stage, and having seen Bangkok in reality, I was eager to see 'The King and I' — movie version. I kept this ad I saw before the movie, feeling sure Yul Brynner and Deborah Kerr would never even approximate the illustration shown in the ad. "They didn't. "Brynner showed as much as the ad shows. "Deborah didn't. "The picture was good without it, as I expected it to be. "Wouldn't it be wonderful if movie ads started telling, constructively and intelligently, something about the movie advertised?" The other assault was plucked from the newsletter of Lynn Baker, Inc., one of New York's less important advertising agencies. The contents of the newsletter is aptly described as having been written in "odd" moments by members of Baker's staff. This tirade against movie advertising, bearing the illtempered title, "A Disgrace To Advertising" was given feature space (Continued on Page 22) Film BULLETIN November 26, 1956 Page 9