Harrison's Reports (1929)

Entered ae sewnd-cjaiw matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3. 18T9. Harrison’S Reports Yearly Subscription Rates : 1440 BROADWAY ?“''‘s%rrR!soN United States $16.00 V I M V * „ , , „ New I Ork. N. Y. Editor and Publisher U. S. Insular Possessions . . 16.00 iacw a ui la, a. Canada, Alaska 16.00 ^ Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor Established July 1, 1919 Mexico, Spam, Cuba 16.00 Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649 Great Britain, New Zealand 16.00 Cabl Address' Other Foreign Countries. . 17.50 jj-g Editorial Policy; No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Harreports 35c a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. (Bentley Code) A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XI SATURDAY. MAY 11, 1929 No. 19 Copyright, 1929, by P. S. Harrison Driving Picture-Goers Away from Picture Theatres At the Trade Practice Conference, which was held, as you remember, in October, 1927, the producers and distributors passed a resolution promising to avoid certain story material. The following was the resolution : “Resolved that those things which are included in the following list shall not appear in pictures produced by the members of this Association, irrespective of the manner in which they are treated.’’ A list of 11 promises followed. Promise No. 1 read as follows : “Pointed profanity-— by either title or liji — this includes the words God, Lord, Jesus Qiirst (unless they be used reverently in connection with projier religious ceremonies), Hell, Damn, Gawd, and every other profane and vulgar expression however it may be spelled.” On April 14, Fox scheduled for release a picture titled “Woman from Hell.” The use of the word “Hell” is in direct violation of the solemn pledges Fox, along with the other producer-distributors, made to the United States Government, represented by the Federal Trade Commission, and to the representatives of the theatre owners. Mr. Hays is spending quite a little time, and money, in assuring the churches and the welfare organizations of the country that the members of his organization are trying everything possible to make pictures that do not offend the sentiments of the people of the United States. Here is a case that belies his statement ; he has done nothing to stop the use of this word in pictures. You have the right to refuse to play this picture, arbitration board, or no arbitration board, for it is as said, in direct violation of promises made to the United States Goveniment, and to your representatives, unless the title is changed. Aside from the fact that the use of this word makes Fox a violator of the promises made by an organization of which he is a member in good standing, it is also unwise ; for it antagonizes many picture-goers, most of whom are regular picture theatre customers. The word “Hell,” included in titles, is not the only thing that must be condemned ; wdiole titles, too, are offensive. First National, for example, had “Seven Footprints to Satan.” Now, everylxxly knows that the word “Satan” is offensive to religious persons. And nine chances out of ten are that at least twenty-five per cent, of religious picture customers kept away from the theatres that have shown this picture. Then we had “Manhattan Cocktail,” offensive to the honestly drys, most of whom are regular picture-goers. But the Fox Film Corporation has been the worst offender as to the choice of offensive titles : “Dry Martini,” “Me, Gangster,” “Red Wine,” “Speakeasy,” and “Woman from Hell.” The secret of the success of a business is to give the public what they want. But the producers are in many cases giving them what they don’t want. They have not yet learned that for a picture to be successful it must appeal to the greatest number of people. And titles such as these estrange anywhere from twenty-five to seventy-five per cent of the regular picture patrons. THE RADIOTONE CORPORATION’S OFFER I have been asked by several exhibitors to express an opionion as to the merits of the offer made to them by the Radiotone Pictures Corporation for the free use of their talking picture instrument. The off er is as follows : An exhibitor contracts for their six talking shorts weekly, the contract to be for a minimum of one year. The prices are : $100 a week for theatres seating 600 or fewer ; $125, for theatres seating more than 600 and fewer than 1000 ; and $150, for theatres that seat more than 1000. He is to put up a sum equal to the last ten weeks’ service as a guarantee for the performance of the contract. I asked one of the executives what would happen if the exhibitors, after showing their pictures for a certain length of time, found that they arq not suitable for his clientele, and I was told by them that he could cancel the contract at any time by paying the difference between his deposit and the price of the instrument, which is set at $2,000. In other words, if the exhibitor should put up one thousand dollars as a deposit, he will be required to put up one thousand dollars more to purchase the instrument so as to be relieved from the contract. The value of this offer, then, depends on whether the quality of the pictures they will produce is good or bad. If the quality should happen to be bad, you will be forced to pay $2,000 for an instrument that is not, in my opinion, worth such a price when I compare it to other instruments that I have been watching lately, which sell for less. You should not reject the offer, but before tying yourself with a contract you had better wait until they release a supply of pictures for at least five or six weeks. You will then be in a position to know what you will be buying.