Harrison's Reports (1928-1928)

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 $10.00 U. S. Insular Possessions 12.00 Canada and Mexico. . 12.00 England and New Zealand 14.50 Other Foreign Countries 16.50 25c. a Copy 1440 BROADWAY New York, N. Y. A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. Published Weekly by P. S. HARRISON Editor and Publisher Established July 1, 1919 Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649 Cable Address : Harreports ( Bentley Code) A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. X SATURDAY, JUNE 30, 1928 No. 26 An Analysis of the 1927-28 Substitutions---No. 3 ( Continued from last week) First National Substitutions Part of the First National substitutions were printed in last week’s issue. “THE WHIP WOMAN,” No. 445: “Golden Calf” is supposed to be the original title. But “Golden Calf,” or Kane No. 2, was announced as an Aaron Davis story, which was published in the Liberty Magazine, whereas “The Whip Woman” has been founded on a story by Forrest Halsey and Leland Hayward. It is a substitution. “THE CHASER,” No. 426: “The Butter and Egg Man” is supposed to be the original title of this Langdon No. 1 picture. But the story is not the same, for the reason that "The Butter and Egg Man” was to have been founded on the stage success by George S. Kaufman, whereas "The Chaser” has been written by Harry Langdon himself. It is a substitution. "FLYING ROMEOS,” No. 455: This is being delivered in place of “Down Went McGinty.” But “Down Went McGinty” was to have been founded on the popular song of the same name, whereas “Flying Romeos” has been written by John McDermott. But the picture is so good that you will lose out if you do not accept it. “MAD HOUR,” No. 447: O. K. “CHINATOWN CHARLIE,” No. 461: This Johnny Hines’ picture is being delivered for “A Pair of Sixes.” But “A Pair of Sixes” was to be a “stage farce comedy by Edward H. Peple,” whereas “Chinatown Charlie” is by Owen Davis. It is a substitution, but it is a good picture and therefore you cannot afford to reject it. “VAMPING VENUS,” No. 456: Not a substitution. “THE YELLOW LILY,” No. 435: This is being delivered in place of “Once There Was a Princess.” “Once There Was a Princess,” however, is the Saturday Evening Post story by Juliet Wilbur Tompkins, whereas “The Yellow Lily” was written by Alexander Korda. It is, therefore, a substitution. But according to my information the picture is drawing so well that you cannot afford to reject it. You cannot afford to reject any picture that draws. “THE HAWK’S NEST,” No. 442: Not a substitution. “THREE RING MARRIAGE,” No. 460: The title given to No. 460 originally was “Do It Again.” But as no facts were given about “Do It Again” we cannot determine whether it is or it is not a substitution. You have to accept it. “THE WHEEL OF CHANCE,” No. 438: The original contract did not give a title for No. 438. Richard Barthelmess No. 3. Later, First National announced that “Roulette” would be the title. It has now changed it to “The Wheel of Chance.” It is not a substitution. “HAPPINESS AHEAD,” No. 429: This is the new title of “Baby Face.” But inasmuch as no facts were given with “Baby Face” we cannot tell whether it is a substitution or not. You have to accept it. The other pictures will be analyzed as they are reviewed. Warner Bros. Substitutions It is difficult for one to tell really how many of the pictures Warner Bros, are delivering are substitutes, for the reason that last year they gave no author along with the title, and very little descriptive matter to enable one to know what kind of picture he was going to get. Whether this is a good plan for you or not, you are the judge. To be fair to Warner Bros., how ever, I may say this, that for program stuff, their 192728 product has not turned out to be bad, and if you have bought it at program prices it is possible that you have not lost out; but if you have paid “Special” prices for it, I fear that you have not made a good bargain. The danger from this plan of picture-buying, however, lies in the fact the a company may make a good picture and deprive you of it, and you will have no way of forcing it to deliver it to you. We have an example by this very company: Originally they sold you “A Million Bid.” In the orgy of substitutions that prevailed in the 1926-27 season, Warner Bros., as best as I can make out, decided to deliver a different story with the same title. And so they announced in the trade papers, particularly in the Moving Picture World of January 29, February 12, 19 and 26, March 5 and 19, 1927; also in several issues of Motion Picture News in the early part of 1927. But after nearly finishing the picture they found out that it was a good one and decided to give you the original “A Million Bid.” And so they again announced the production of “A Million Bid,” as gathered from the issues of Moving Picture World of April 2 and 9, and of May 2 and of other issues of this publication. It is preferable that you should known what you are buying. If not, just buy them by the “bushel.” The only material that I have to work with in my efforts to find out how many Warner Bros, pictures are substitutes is a Work Sheet, or “Exhibitors’ Herald,” as this company calls it, which it put out last year. Comparing the promises they made in that Work Sheet with the pictures they have delivered or are delivering to you, I find the following substitutions: “SAILOR IZZY MURPHY,” No. 195: This is supposed to be the new title of “Finnegan’s Ball”: The title indicates that this would be an Irish comedy; “Sailor Izzy Murphy” is a Jewish-Irish comedy, and it is a story of lunatics aboard a yacht. No connection whatever between the two possible pictures. Any fair-minded board should, therefore, declare this a substitution, which it really is. "GINSBERG THE GREAT,” No. 196: This is supposed to be the final title of “The Broadway Kid.” But the Warner’s Work Sheet stated that “The Broadway Kid” would be the “Story of the Great White Way,” whereas “Ginsberg the Great” is about a small-town boy that goes to the city, gets in with crooks, saves some jewels from a wealthy theatrical producer, and, with the aid of this producer, becomes a featured magician. It is clearly a substitution and any fair-minded arbitration board should so declare it. “THE LITTLE SNOB,” No. 206: This is supposed to be the new title of “Rebecca O’Brien.” But “Rebecca O’Brien” was described in the Work Sheet as, “A Jewish-Irish story of humor, pathos and action,” whereas “The Little Snob” is the story of an American girl of poor parents, whose father conducts a concession at Coney Island ; he sends her to a boarding school and she comes out a snob. It is a story substitution, and arbitration boards, if not prepossessed in favor of the exchange, will so declare it. “THE CRIMSON CITY,” No. 213: This is supposed to be the new title of “O’Reilly and the 400.” But although no description of it was given in the Work Sheet, the title indicates that “O’Reilly and the 400” would be the story of an Irishman who became wealthy, entered into society and did not know how to act, until he got tired of pretense and once again came down to earth, acting as a regular human being instead of an ( Continued on last page)