Year book of motion pictures (1925)

Among the national organizations, the ones who run their business on really business lines, who do not put unlimited money in mediocre productions and who give the same thought to their business as is done in any other line of effort, will survive. The ones who exploit poor product which costs many times what it is worth will be swallowed up, this has been going on for years and it will continue to go on — there is a constant influx of new producers, new releasing organizations and if the poor ones were not eliminated, tin business would be in a very bad way indeed. I i there is any change in the outlook this year from other years it is in the outlook for a better average number of quality in pictures. Last year saw a number of very large successful "Specials," nut the average quality was not as high as it should have been — this year I believe will see a more healthy tone in this respect. LESS PICTURES WANTED What is the outlook for 1925? What are the prospects for next year? The same questions are asked at the end of each year and the same degree of accuracy in predicting what the future will bring forth seems to be an annual event. Should the question rather not be — what has been done this year that we should not do next? WhereJoe Brandt in have we erred and what measure of correction are we going to adopt to correct prevalent evils in the industry? The thought was broadcasted last year, direct from the public "make fewer and better pictures" and some producers were honest in their endeavor to do this as is evidenced by the number of big specials that were made and were intended for long runs. But the same policy of "grind 'em out" defeated the intentions of those who knew and wished to do better. Not a few of the big pictures that should have enjoyed and would have stood up for longer runs were forced out of first run houses because the producers had refused to work in unison on the idea of fewer and better pictures. Again this season it is not a question of how good the program companies should make their pictures but how many in order to keep down their overhead — an overhead created by a desire to keep from their competitors stars and directors and writers. Instead of prophesying as to what the new season will bring forth, why not put the picture industry on a basis where the supply does not exceed the demands. Why not call a "Peace Conference" of the producers and try to regulate production and the acquisition of stars and directors so that the mounting costs will be brought down to a commercial basis and the output worthy of the effort and the financial expenditure involved? Who cannot look back upon the events which have transpired during the past year and say that the desire exists even if not yet accomplished, to merge into two or perhaps three organizations, the strength of the entire industry from a producing standpoint? Who will deny that a few companies are working out their destinies so that they will strangle those companies which cannot fortify themselves with sufficient financial backing to compete with the octopus of money-power that is pouring money into the pockets of individual stars and directors. The concentration of a demand on the part of exhibitors for the use of a certain few stars whose names the exhibitors have made household words in the homes of the American public can result in only one thing — the milking of the exhibitor unlil he has only one course left : either to work for the producer or the star or sell out his interests to the company that has the most money and retire from the industry. Compare the prices that are being asked for certain stars today as against a few years ago. True their drawing power may be greater than it was then but have your profits increased m proportion to the income of the stars whom you are demanding. Two or three years ago you may have been charging a few cents less for ad mission than you are today. Perhaps you have a bigger seating capacity than you had then but can you conscientiously say that the demand you have created by publicizing and advertising these stars entitles a star who was earning a few hundred dollars a week to make enough out of youi efforts to pav to the government a tax on an income anywhere frome one hundred thousand to three-quarters of a million profit per picture. The vital question is not what are the prospects for the coming year, but what are you going to do to demand "new faces," sane production costs and an open market. The independents, and I mean by independents, those who are not maintaining a national distribution organization, but are doing their utmost to bring new faces to the screen. To take from the rank and file of the actors and actresses, people of ability and give them a chance to portray parts in accordance with the thoughts and ideas of the writers of good stories. The independents have been trying to cultivate new writers, new directors, but to what end? As soon as an Independent has launched a star or a writer or a director, the seed of discontent is spread by the money powered organizations and soon that same person's name is blazoned forth in electric lights and fortunes spent to advertise and in the end you again pay the tariff and are placed in the same position. Do not ask what the prospects are — but knuckle down to correct the wasteful practices and the wrong conditions that are sapping the life of the average exhibitor and rigorously maintain a policy of open booking and let the best man win. Jesse L. Lasky NEW FACES, NEW IDEAS, COMING Aside from a natural improvement in motion pictures which 1925 will bring us, I look to the new year to develop new personalities, new faces, new ideas in picture production. In our company we have already embarked on a policy of recruiting new blood, both among players, directors and authors. We shall continue to develop this policy during the coming year. If producers are to solve many of the problems of casting which now beset them, they must adopt this plan of bringing new people into the studios. There has been no diminution in the number of feature pictures produced from year to year. On the other hand, there has been no great increase in the number of available players and directors. Consequently, week after week the studios have been faced with the tremendous difficulty of obtaining the proper people for the important supporting roles. Productions have had to wait upon the availability of individual players; sometimes productions have had to be made when a wider choice of playing material would have enabled the producer immeasurably to strengthen his cast. Not only have producers been hampered by this paucity of playing material; the players themselves) have suffered. The leading character players have been forced onto the screen too frequently for their own good. No doubt this condition brought them greater immediate prosperity ; but it has been an unhealthy condition and has lessened the length of the player's screen career, and has not made for the best work. 369