Harrison's Reports (1928-1928)

92 HARRISON’S REPORTS June 9, 1928 theatre Sunday afternoon, the opening day of the fifth week of the engagement, between the hours 2 :30 and 4 :00 o’clock, and has reported to me that there were about fifty persons downstairs ; she did not observe how many there were in the balcony. When she came out of the theatre at 4 o'clock, two other persons came out with her. I have no figures of the business for this picture in other cities. As I said in the review, which I printed in the issue of October 1, 1927, on page 158, “Sunrise” is one of the most artistic pictures that have ever been produced. But it is too gruesome for the average picture-goer. Its theme is unpleasant ; it deals with a hero, who, for the sake of a prostitute, with whom he was infatuated, decides to murder his wife; but he changes his mind. It is a wonderful study of the inner workings of the human mind. But it is a picture chiefly for the intellectuals ; the masses will not, in my opinion, care for it. So 35 points should be a fair classification for this picture for the small towns. The big town exhibitors have naturally seen it and have decided what it is worth to them ; it may not hurt them to pay at a higher classification. But they are the judges. Note: As I was writing this, I received a letter from Jimmy Grainger, General Sales Manager of Fox Film Corporation, who wrote it from Chicago, challenging my statements made in last week’s article, entitled “FOX OVERSTATEMENT.” He gives me $7,854 as the average receipts of “Sunrise” in its 28th week engagement at the Times Square. He gives me also figures for Philadelphia, Newark, Detroit, and other cities, as well as names of exhibitors, to whom I might apply for correct information. The next figures that I shall accept from Jimmy Grainger or from any one else either connected or not connected with the Fox organization will be those of my accountant, Mr. H. M. Horton, former professor of Mathematics in the DeWitt Ginton High School, this city, provided they allow him to examine their books, without any restrictions. No other figures will do. In the meantime, I stand by my figures, which I have obtained from reliable sources. “MOTHER MACHREE,” Fox: This picture was opened on March 5 at the Globe, this city, and after five weeks (April 9) it was transferred to the Times Square and stayed there until May 27, when “Dawn” started its engagement. In the five weeks at the Globe, it grossed less than $5,000 a week. At the Times Square, week ending May 27, it took in $3,200. The previous week it took in $3,100. On the entire engagement at this theatre it averaged $3,200. These figures are accurate ; they have not been taken from any other paper. As I said in the review, “Mother Machree” is the best mother-love story that has ever been filmed. But it is not a two-dollar picture, as the receipts prove. At regular prices of admission it ought to draw well and satisfy them, particularly in neighborhoods where the Irish element predominates. It will require much exploiting to draw people in, but it is sure to please them. I am sure that 45 points for this picture is a fair classification. In other words, if you should happen to pay $100 for “The Street Angel,” $45 should, in my opinion, be more than a good price for “Mother Machree.” This may, however, be noted, that it is a very good small-town picture, and not a good big town, in contrast to “Sunrise,” which is, in my opinion, a better big town picture than a small town. “ABIE’S IRISH ROSE,” Paramount: In my ten-year career as a reviewer, I have not known another so-called two-dollar picture to make as complete a failure at the box office in this city as has “Abie’s Irish Rose,” which Mr. Jesse L. Lasky, one of the older producers in the business, dared call “the greatest picture Paramount has ever produced.” It was pitiful to see the slim crowds that have been going to the 44th Street Theatre, where it is playing. If you had shot a cannon ball at them, it -is doubtful if you would hit any one. In the first three weeks of the engagement, it grossed $4,545.75. Last Sunday, June 3, only $40 was taken in at the matinee. The producers plan to take it off in two weeks and try to fit it with synchronized music. In other words, they will have the characters talk whenever this will, in their opinion, strengthen the picture, and fit the remainder with photomusic. The business capacity of this house is $21,000. It has grossed this amount in the old days with Griffith pictures, in the heyday of Griffith’s popularity. The cost of running this house is tremendous : $4,500 for rent ; $3,500 for newspaper advertising ; anywhere from $1,500 to $2,000 for orchestra, and at least $2,000 for house attaches, cleaners, ushers, electricity, stage hands, not to mention billboard advertising. The total expense could not be less than $11,000. At this rate the picture has cost the producers for this engagement a fortune. It is my belief that if this money were spent in a national advertising campaign, particularly in the Saturday Evening Post and Liberty, the results would have been many times more beneficial to you than the New York showing. The trouble with this picture is the fact that there have been at least five “Abie’s Irish Rose” made in some form or other. As a result, the “edge” has been taken off on this type of pictures. The picture is not bad. On the contrary, it is very good. The fitting it with “voice” and photomusic may help it considerably. But this has to be proved first. I believe that a 35 point classification for this picture as things now stand is fair. “UNCLE TOM’S CABIN,” Universal: This picture opened November 4, 1927, at the Central Theatre. The first and second days the receipts amounted to $1,850.25. The first day most of the house was occupied by the trade and other invited guests. The receipts for the first eight weeks were as follows : 1st week $11,147.75 2nd week 10,147.75 3rd week 12,722.50 4th week 11,378.50 5th week 10,419.75 6th week 9,611.50 7th week 8,059.00 8th week 15,188.50 The average for the first eight weeks was $11,188.47. It is one of the most deeply appealing pictures that have ever been produced. Under a different title than “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” it ought to have made a record, for the reason that every one of those who have seen it has been raving about it. Yet in my opinion it is not as good a bigtown picture as “Street Angel,” for the reason that “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” has played for years in all kinds of places in stock, and has been produced on the screen two or three times, although no other version can approach this version. But it should prove an excellent picture for small towns. You are sure to please one hundred per cent, of those that you will attract. “THE MAN WHO LAUGHS,” Universal : This picture opened at the Central, this city, on April 27. These are the receipts for the five weeks that it has so far played : 1st week $14,137.00 2nd week 14,003.00 3rd week 13,654.00 4th week 13,102.00 5th week 12,264.00 The average for these five weeks is $13,432.00. As I said in the review, it is a wonderfully produced picture. Mr. Veidt does better work in it than Lon Chaney has ever “dreamed” of doing. He is a real artist. I also said that, although it is a wonderfully made picture, it is gruesome. But after all it is the public that passes judgment on a picture. And the receipts in the first five weeks show that the public goes to see it. It is manifest that Victor Hugo’s name is an attraction. “The Man Who Laughs,” however, in my opinion is a better picture for the big cities than it is for the small towns. “Street Angel” is good also for the small towns ; it should have a better appeal for the masses. For this reason I believe that, although “The Man Who Laughs” is outdrawing “The Street Angel,” still 90 points is a fair classification. In other words, if you should pay $100 for “The Street Angel,” $90 should, in my opinion, be a fair price for “The Man Who Laughs,” except in the big cities, where a bigger price than “Street Angel” might be paid. After all, my greatest care is for the small exhibitor; for the big exhibitor can protect himself by seeing the picture for himself and deciding what is a fair price for him to pay, whereas the small-town exhibitor hasn’t that advantage, and must necessarily depend on outside information. ( This article will be concluded next week.) ABOUT TALKING PICTURES Last week I announced that another article will be printed this week on talking pictures. I wish to announce, however, that this article will be delayed considerably. There is no need for you to hurry to buy an instrument. Wait. Give me a chance to study the various instruments offered for sale, to learn the advantages and disadvantages of each, the price, cost of operation, the cost of the subjects, and everything needed to present to you with facts that will enable you to determine what to do. The study of these instruments requires technical knowledge, and my early technical training should prove of value to you. But you needn’t worry for the next six months. Wait !