The Film Index (Jul-Dec 1910)

ft THE FILM INDEX. The ilm Index Published by THE FILMS PUBLISHING CO. (Incorporated) No. 1 Madison Avenue, New York City Rooms 6007-6008 Tel. Gramercy 5538 JAMES L. HOFF, Managing Editor CHICAGO OFFICE: 401 Ashland Block 'Phone. Central 2651 JAMES S. McQUADE, Representative SUBSCRIPTION RATES-One year, $2.00; six months, $100 three months' trial, 50c. ; single copies, 5c. Postage prepaid to all countries in Postal Union. FOREIGN SUBSCRIPTIONS-$2.50 per annum. / 4.11 subscriptions payable in advance. INFORMATION FOR ADVERTISERS ADVERTISING RATES ™e Page .. ■:::;;:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;^Z One-Third" '.'.'.'. 20.00 Quarter '.' : x?-$ One inch, single column *■*« Discounts on Time Contracts-5 per e?nt. on three months; 10 percent, on six months; 20 per cent, on one year CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING. "For Sale," "Help Wanted," etc., 3c. per word; minimum, $1.00 one time. "Situations Wanted," not to exceed 1 lines, 25c one time. Cash must accompany all orders for classified advertising. SPECIAL NOTICE Copy and instructions for advertising must reach the publication office not later than Wednesday, to insure nsertion the same week. REMITTANCES should be made by express or postal order, check, or registered letter. Cash sent otherwise is at the risk of the sender. JULY 2, 1910 THE VAUDEVILLE QUESTION. IN another column is printed a letter from Mr. Lew F. Cullins of The Dalles.. Oreg., who protests against the condemnation of vaudeville in connection with pictures. He states that he has had a very different experience from that of another correspondent whose letter was printed in The Index recently. Mr. Cullins is probably right from his point of view. It is possible that he caters. to a patronage which will stand for cheap vaudeville; it is possible that he is playing a class of vaudeville that is better than that usually offered in picture theatres. Then there is the possibility that the better class of vaudeville does not play in The Dalles, which leaves Mr. Cullins' offerings the best the town will stand and consequently draws to his house those who like vaudeville. His case may be an exception and there may be others similarly situated in the small towns where the best vaudeville never appears. Our opinions are based upon our own preferences and experience in part, and upon the testimony of others. With mighty few exceptions what vaudeville we have seen in picture theatres was stupid when it was not disgusting and aroused only derision. We must give Mr. Cullins credit for being able to discriminate, and we feel sure that he would never stand for the majority 0f acts usually seen in picture theatres. Just as there are some so-called picture thetres that are poorly ventilated, dark and uninviting, but still money-makers, there are those which run vaudeville profitably. Such places ar<* simply operated down to the level of their pujiic. The fact that that class of houses is profitable does not alter the fact that the vaudeville offered by them is "cheap" and offensive to a large class of patrons of the picture theatre— the class which goes to see the pictures. Neither does it alter the fact that there are many people who would go to the picture theatre if they did not have to listen to the cheap vaudeville. Pictures these days are so good and of such great variety that there is no necessity to vary the monotony with something infinitely worse. A wise manager who knows how to make the most of pictures will never have to go to extra expense to vary his program with questionably vaudeville. THE BAITING OF LAEMMLE From the awful squeal that went up from the camp of the Little Giant of Kenosho it is evident that the rapier thrust delivered by George Kleine found a crevice in the tin armour of the valiant knight of the "independents" and let loose the hot air in a copious malodorous blast. It was a "dare-devil"-ish thing to do, for there is none so vulnerable as the bombastuous "Lemmel Man," and a serious puncture might result in an annihilating explosion. How it must have hurt the "Lemmel" crowd to behold their patron saint so neatly spitted and then done to a turn over the fire of Klein's keen wit. In vain do they resort to ancient history; 'tis but an evasion, an attempt to "buffalo" the populace in hopes of making a safe getaway. "President" of this, "president" of that and the other, it is still "the little, shrinking, fearsome man, who lingers in the marble hall" and watches the more fortunate ones roll by in the sumptuous band wagon and, "slowly, with a faltering voice, a voice unsteady as the sea, remarks: 'O, Lemmel? Why, that's me.' " VALUE OF PICTURES TO CHILDREN The Chicago evening "American," of June 16, had the following editorial on the value of pictures— moving pictures especially — to children, as they convey ideas to the mind directly, and by the easiest road: Ruskin, who had painfully tried with his pencil and pen to reproduce the beauties of architecture and of nature, rejoiced in the discovery of photography. He realized that with photography a man might live and die in his own village and yet be a great traveler. For the photograph brings everything that is worth while in the world before the eyes of the stay-athome. When the MIND travels the body need not travel. Have you ever thought how much the photograph has taught you? You know the leaning tower of Pisa, or the great Pyramids of Egypt, or the Palace of St. Mark's In Venice, or the Falls of Niagara— hundreds of the world's wonders. They are clear in your mind, although you may never have actually seen any ONE of those things. Through the photograph we travel in our imagination, and by the photograph we are tempted to travel physically. The moving picture— lending a semblance of life, multiplies infinitely the value of photography as a force in education. And because the moving picture has such power — especially upon the immature minds of children — ALL MOVING PICTURE EXHIBITIONS SHOULD BE RIGIDLY SCRUTINIZED; every picture put in motion before the eyes of children should pass a severe censorship and be officially licensed before its presentation. No man for profit should be permitted to exhibit any picture that a good father or mother would refuse to put before a gathering of children in the home. Any picture that would not be exhibited in a well managed school should under no circumstances be open to the inspection of children — and of this rule there should be the strictest possible enforcement. Moving pictures, teaching attractively the facts of history, industry, travel and nature, ought to be AND WILL be part of public education in every school. But there should be the severest punishment for those that exhibit harmful pictures. Unfortunately, of such pictures there are many. This is a valuable article on the moving picture, in showing its power for good or evil. It would be difficult today to find a single manufacturer in the licensed ranks who is not anxious for the highly moral character of every film turned out by his factory. Every true friend of the moving picture is in favor of having every moving picture exhibition rigidly scrutinized, and of having every picture subjected to a severe censorship before presentation. The surveillance of theatres lies with the police, and such surveillance is not necessary where licensed films are run, for the latter have been subjected to a rigid censorship before being officially licensed for exhibition. The swift exposure of, and "the severest punishment for, those that exhibit that harmful picture" are devoutly to be wished; but in these days of rigorous censorship of films, before which censorship no film can be exhibited without a heavy fine or probable cancellation of the offender's theatre license, it is misleading to state that there are many "harmful pictures" exhibited in this country. If there be any theatres in this country where harmful pictures are exhibited, it. is the duty of every supporter and lover of the moving picture to have them closed up. And the guilty maker of such films should have his product barred from exhibition indefinitely. The moving picture is a great educational force for good, and it must not be perverted to evil. MR. H. A. BROWNE AGAIN A few weeks ago The Film Index reprinted from the London Kinematograph an interview given that excellent journal by Mr. H. A. Browne on the subject of trade conditions in America. We pointed out the fact that Mr. Browne was in error in many of his conclusions and intimated that the worthy gentleman had mistaken a small disorganized faction in the trade as representative of the whole and thus drew the disparaging conclusion that the American trade was in a state of chaos. When the reply of The Film Index reached England a representative of The Kinematograph Weekly called Mr. Browne's attention to ' it. This is what he said: "You will better understand," said he, "the reason for such an attitude when you remember that the Film Index is the organ of the licensed companies. Their views are consequently prejudiced in favor of the Patents Company as against the Independents. I admit that I was looking at it from the point of view of the Independents, and that is what interests us over here. I still maintain that picture shows and pictures in England are far superior to those in America, and one of the reasons for that is that the film market is limited by its high tariff, while the English market is open to all the world. Another reason is that the Patents Company practically boycott English films. That company is a close corporation. If the renters over there who hold a license from the Patents Motion Picture Company venture to buy from other companies their supplies are immediately cut off by the Patents Company. Quality for quality, the English made film is as good as, if not better than, those of the majority of American makers, and the reasons why 'English pictures are seldom seen in America' are those I've given you. "As to the Independents being a small disorganized faction, however much the Patents Company may belittle them, they are to-day a very strong body, and a fighting force to be reckoned with. I would ask the Patents Company one question: 'Is your house in order?' "With reference to non-flam film, when I was in New York in April there was, as I said, very little in use. It is only quite recently that it has been adopted in New York." In conclusion, Mr. Browne said: "I went to America to find a market for English and European films. I found the only business I could do was with the Independents, and naturally I discussed the matter from their point of view." Really, you know, we ought to be satisfied with that. It is an admission in toto that what The Film Index said was, and still is, true, for conditions among the so-called "independents" are in greater chaos to-day than they were at the time of Mr. Browne's visit. The great trouble with Mr. Browne, and others occupying a similar position in the world's picture trade, is that they cannot, or will not, look over their own back yard fences. If Mr. Browne was a far-sighted business man he would appreciate the fact that, even though English pictures have been eliminated from the program of the Motion Picture Patents Company that organization in supplying 80 per cent, of