Film Spectator (1927-1928)

July 23, 1927 THE FILM SPECTATOR Page Three THE FILM SPECTATOR EVERY OTHER SATURDAY Published by FILM SPECTATOR, INCORPORATED Welford Beaton, President and Editor 7213 Sunset Boulevard Hollywood, California HEmpstead 2801 ADVERTISING RATES Three dollars per inch, per insertion, 13-em column. The Editor’s comments are in 20-em columns, one and one-half times the width of our advertising columns, hence the 20-em rate is four and one-half dollars per inch. Subscription price, $3.50 per year; foreign, $4.50. Single copy, 15 cents. The only publication conducted solely for those who THINK about motion pictures. HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA, JULY 23, 1927 OFFER TO PRODUCERS {Copy of a letter mailed on Monday, July 11, to Fred W. Beetson, of the Motion Pictures Producers and Distributors of America, Incorporated.) 'Dear Mr. Beetson: It has occurred to me that the producers of motion pictures are at a disadantage in not having a medium through which they can present their side of the difference in opinion existing at present between them and their employees. The Spectator reaches everyone in the industry, but presents only views antagonistic to those held by the producers. I wish you would inform your organization that I will be glad to give it space in The Spectator in which it may take issue with me. I will give it any number of pages that it can use legitimately in replying to arguments that I have advanced, or in presenting new arguments to support its view of the matters now at issue. I want no pay or thanks for the space thus used. The readers of The Spectator are entitled to both sides of the case, and as I can see only one side I have to call on the producers to present the other one. Yours very truly, WELFORD BEATON. Up to the time the forms for this issue of The Spectator closed the producers had not replied to the above letter. They did not even acknowledge its receipt. * * * Writers and Actors Should Be Organized Movements undertaken recently to weld screen actors and screen writers into strong organizations to force producers to conduct the motion picture business in a manner consistent with its importance are steps in the right direction. Producers have had things their own way quite long enough. Through the media of inequitable contracts and by the practice of every form of unfairness that monetary minds could conceive they have forfeited the trust of those upon whose brains they must rely for the purely intellectual ingredients of their output. It is almost unbelievable that the employees of such a tremendous industry must fight for what employees of any other industry gain by right of employment: ordinarily honest treatment. Producers have brought about the present situation. I must admit that to one like myself, sitting on the sidelines and with no material interests at stake, the whole affair is so amusing that it is difficult to discuss it with so much gravity that the chuckles will not show through. The Spectator is dedicated to the cause of better pictures and can view with complacency the present turmoil, for all the little fellows running around Hollywood to-day can not come any nearer preventing screen art achieving its destiny than an ant can be instrumental in diverting an elephant from its course. I do not believe in unions, but I do believe in waging a fight with the most potent weapon. Only an organized movement will set matters right; consequently I am glad to see both the actors and writers organizing to present a united front. But I do not approve of everything they have done thus far. I think it was Rabelais who wrote: “The Devil was sick, — the Devil a monk would be; the Devil was well, — the devil a monk was he!” The producers are sick and with monkish piety they ask the Actors’ Equity and Screen Writers’ Guild to suggest a remedy for their ills. The only thing more ridiculous than the request was Equity’s and the Guild’s compliance with it. Very gravely these organizations outline treatments which never will be read by the producers, who know that they are valueless, for they are but general remedies for specific ills. “Give us an honest cost sheet, if there be such a thing in the industry, and we will point out to you specifically where you squandered the money of your stockholders,” should have been the counter-request of the actors and writers. The actors display a belligerent spirit at a meeting and agree to unite Have Patience! For pictures — oh, well, you know, sometimes of course They’re worthy of the press books’ ballyhoo. And then again — perhaps they might be worse — If worse they could be! Say, how do you React when hope floods high, and then recedes And Darkness spreads o’er all its pall of woe ? Are you content to drink the bitter leeds. Or do you damn the motion picture show? For life is all too chary with those finer tones That bring to hearts their meed of joy or love; And lacking chance, perhaps, or charm to win our own. We hailed the screen as manna from above. Ah, hope deferred, how poignant is thy pain! How dark the night without one beam to cheer! The noblest art that circumstance e’er gave Must bear the load of ignorance and fear. Can genius soar when burdened by the dross That vulgar minds than life esteem more dear? How reach the stars when dread of earthly loss Condemns the soul, in grief, to linger here? Ah, no! ’Tis written large within the book of Fate That worth transcends the base-born’s low desire; And souls possessed of fortitude to wait Will yet be warmed by Art’s celestial fire. —GEORGE F. MAGOFFIN.