Harrison's Reports (1951)

IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879. Harrison’s Reports Yearly Subscription Rates: United States $15.00 U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 Canada 16.50 Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 Great Britain 17.50 Australia, New Zealand, India, Europe, Asia .... 17.50 35c a Copy 1270 SIXTH AVENUE New York 20, N. Y. Published Weekly by Harrison’s Reports, Inc., Publisher A Motion Picture Reviewing Service Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors P. S. HARRISON, Editor Established July 1, 1919 Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. Circle 7-4622 A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXXIII SATURDAY, JULY 7, 1951 No. 27 HERE AND THERE ON THURSDAY OF THIS WEEK, MGM’s “The Great Caruso” entered its ninth week at the Radio City Music Hall in New York. Well over one million people have seen the picture at this world' famous showcase, and from the crowds that continue to line up at the box'oflice it appears that the pic' ture will go into a tenth and possibly eleventh week. The picture is doing exceptional business in other parts of the country, too, with record-breaking grosses and extended runs the general rule. In these days of declining grosses, the outstanding business enjoyed by “The Great Caruso” serves as further proof that a good picture, particularly one that is cheerful and appeals to the heart, knows no box-office recession. Nicholas Schenck’s oft-repeated remark that there is nothing wrong with our business that good pictures cant cure is as true today as when he said it years previously. * * * WHILE ON THE SUBJECT of cheerful pictures, the producers would do well to keep in mind that such pictures are desireable in these troubled times, for laughter is an antidote for depression, war clouds, and for political unrest. Far too many depressing pictures have been produced in recent years, and these have been one of the chief reasons for the decline in theatre attendance. The percentage of crime, sex, psychological and other pictures of this kind has been and still is much too high. It is true that many people find pleasure in themes that are morbid, gruesome and harrowing, but these make up a very small part of the movie-going public, and motion picture theatres cannot be operated profitably by catering mainly to their tastes. The producers should realize that, in producing a large number of pictures that tend to depress those who go to see them, they injure their own interests as much as they do the interests of the exhibitors. As this paper has frequently pointed out in these columns, people go to the movies to relax and be entertained. In these days of unsettled world conditions and the high cost of living, most people find enough grief in life without adding to it by going to see pictures with depressing themes. They will, of course, enjoy a good drama, no matter how sad, but as a general rule they prefer to avoid cheerless pictures. What is needed is more cheerful pictures, particularly comedies, so as to put the public in a happy frame of mind. Such pictures will not only provide the public with a fine depression antidote but will also leave them with the feeling that their local movie theatre is the one place where they can relax and forget their everyday troubles for a few hours. * * * IN THE COLUMBIA picture “Never Trust a Gambler,” a review of which will appear in next week's issue, the heroine, while shopping, goes to purchase a bottle of whiskey in the shopping centre’s liquor department. The clerk serving her says: “I can give you a good buy on Schenley!” In addition to that blatant advertising plug by dialogue, there is a counter display that features the Schenley brand of liquor prominently. Moreover, the bottle of Schenley liquor purchased by the heroine becomes an important murder clue, thus it comes within close range of the camera several times during the action. Harrison’s Reports is not in a position to know if Columbia was compensated for this advertising plug. It does know, however, that its inclusion was improper and unethical, not only because it had no bearing on the story, but also because it is an imposition on both the public and the exhibitor. The movie patron pays an admission price to be entertained, and when an advertisement is“slipped” over on him he resents it, and rightfully so. The exhibitor is taken advantage of by fact that the producer, in “concealing” an advertising plug in a picture sold as pure entertainment, appropriates the exhibitor’s screen without paying for the privilege. Moreover, the concealed advertising incurs the ill will of the exhibitor’s patrons. One reason why many people prefer to get their entertainment at a motion picture theatre rather than in front of a television set is that their enjoyment of a program is not interrupted by constant advertising plugs for different products every few minutes. Imagine, then, how these people feel when they pay an admission price for the privilege of not seeing and listening to advertising plugs only to have one “put over” on them. This practice was harmful to the business in the past. It is much more harmful at this time, when the industry as a whole is seeking ways and means to educate the public to the fact that a visit to their local movie house will provide them with pure entertainment, which is unavailable on television. This unethical step by Columbia calls for a united protest on the part of the exhibitors in no uncertain terms.