Harrison's Reports (1932)

16 HARRISON^S REPORTS January 23, 1932 LET THE SLOGAN BE “MORE AND BETTER PICTURES”! For the last ten years I have been hearing nothing but advice to the producers to make fewer pictures as the only way for them to make the pictures better. Fewer than one-half the pictures are made today than were made a few years ago, and yet the quality has not been poorer at any time in the history of the business. And at no time were the number of good pictures greater than in 1917, when the number of pictures produced was about the highest. Instead of fewer pictures the producers should plan to make more, for with the number greater their chances of making more good pictures will be more favorable. If there are to be any slogans connected with the production of pictures, let one slogan be : “More and Better Pictures !” LOOK OUT FOR SCHEMERS From time to time this paper receives information from exhibitors to the effect that this, that, or another person or group of persons have put over in their towns some fake advertising scheme, fleecing the merchant of considerable money; they suggest that the facts be published so as to warn other exhibitors lest they, or the merchants of their towns, too, become victims. I shall not call your attention to the danger of printing such matters before a full investigation of the facts is made, but will say that it is not conceivable that an exhibitor with even a fair amount of intelligence will give support to persons he knows nothing about, before making a complete investigation as to their reliability. Let each exhibitor demand bank and other reliable references before endorsing their plans. Exhibitors in small towns should be very careful ; because of the depression, there will be many a get-rich-quick scheme proposed to him. It is necessary for him, therefore, to investigate each plan thoroughly before taking any action. BRINGING CHILDREN “IN” TO SHOCK THEM Since sound came, the child custom has fallen off considerably. One of the causes given is the inability of children to give to their emotions full play on account of the talk. But the greatest cause has been, in my opinion, the low tone of the pictures produced ; the filthy stories and the dirty talk forced many parents to keep their children away from pictures. Whatever the cause, however, the loss of child custom has been felt at the box office and the producers decided sometime ago to make an effort to bring it back by the production of pictures that have the greatest appeal to children. Paramount has been the prime mover in this movement. Encouraged by the box office success of “Tom Sawyer,’’ it made “Huckleberry Finn,’’ “Tom Sawyer, Detective,’’ “Skippy,” and “Sooky.” Some of the other producers make child pictures, too, but not as many as Paramount. “Sooky,” shown at the Rivoli for several weeks recently, attracted much child trade, not only because the story appeals to children, but also because of the popularity of Jackie Cooper. During the showing of this picture, there was flashed on the screen a trailer advertising “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.” The scenes were selected from among the most horrid, horrid enough to give children as many nightmares as would be given to them by the entire picture. And yet not a single person from among Sam Katz’s forces had sense enough to realize that it was wrong to shock children drawn to the theatre by means of a picture made specially for them. I know of at least one case where a child had had nightmares for several nights after seeing the trailer. I have been preaching right along that circuit management of theatres is inefficient in that it lacks individuality of management. No better evidence could be adduced to prove the truth of such an assertion. How could it be different ? The producer-exhibitors have driven from the, business at least two thousand experienced brains and tried to let three or four men in New York City do the thinking of all these men. They have driven away such men as E. V. Richards, S. Barrett McCormick, Mike Comerford. J. J. McCarthy and many more of similar caliber, with creative ability, sacrificing them to the alter of cn'otism, vanity, and selfishness. There is a pay day for every wrong. Some af the perpetrators of this wrong have already paid. And they will keep on paying until they restore theatre management to individuals. Unless this is done, we shall always have examples of stupidity such as shown at the Rivoli Theatre, where children were attracted to be entertained by a pleasing picture to be shocked by an atrocious trailer. IF LIBELLING OF THE NEWSPAPER PEOPLE WERE TO CONTINUE! “A considerable share of the libellous characterization of newspapers in the movies,” writes Marlen Pew, of Editor & Publisher The Pourth Estate, “is easily traceable to a spite motive. I have in mind the authors of two such pictures, known to me as newspaper haters. Both had their day of opportunity in metropolitan newspaper work. Both failed, one as wretchedly as any man I know, for this collapse was both professional and moral. It is with ill concealed delight that he pictures his old trade, and his former colleagues, as degenerate racketeers, and conscienceless exploiters of everything that is decent. These authors no doubt get a thrill out of such misrepresentation, a low and mean emotion, but please consider the ease with which slanders have been unloaded on Hollywood. Dear old Hollywood that has been made, root and branch by favorable newspaper publicity ! If Mr. Will H. Hays is Czar of the movies, he must give tacit approval of these offenses against newspapers that have certainly been good to him. He possesses power to curb movie abuses, and sometimes has exercised it, but not in behalf of newspapermen, judging from the continuing flood of ‘spite’ pictures giving the American movie-audience a totally false conception of editorial methods and reportorial ethics. I can advise Mr. Hays that no editor in the land would publish a false and scandalous characterization of the movies written by some actor, manager or director who had failed to make good in the movies and now seeks to vent his spleen and capitalize his plight at the expense of former employers and associates. That sort of lose and unprincipled conduct is left for Mr. Hays’ outfit in Hollywood. Newspaper men are fed up. And the public also is not wholly deceived. Editors are receiving protests from outraged readers. .~. .” ■ It is not difficult to understand and appreciate the bitterness and resentment Mr. Pew expresses in his article. Regardless of how many producers may feel inwardly, the newspaper people have been extremely kind to the moving picture industry. It is natural for him, as representing the sentiment of his fellow-newspapermen, then, to resent the moving picture industry’s ingratitude. The newspaper people have been very tolerant toward the moving picture industry, but this should not embolden the producers to keep their tactics unchanged. Two weeks ago I saw a picture in which a newspaper cameraman was shown aboard a ship ready to photograph important personages arriving from abroad ; he had his camera in his hands and a bottle of booze in his overcoat pocket. The booze bottle added nothing to the picture ; and yet it was there. (It is not there now; I pointed out to one of the ■executives how wise it would be for him to have it removed and he proceeded to have it removed forthwith.) If the producers of moving pictures would show as much respect for the newspaper folk as they show for the humble citizens of a neighboring republic, I am sure that they would have the good will of the newspapers. It is not known probably to the new'spaper profession but it is a fact that no moving picture can show a Mexican as a villain ; the Mexican Government took care of that ; it protested to Mr. Hays several years ago and Mr. Hays pointed out to the members of his organization the necessity of complying' with the Mexican Government’s request. Is he going to show the same courtesy to those who have been his friends and the friends of the moving picture industry? “Hot News,” the novel by Emil Gavreau, which MGM has bought and announced for production in the 1932-33 season, should be the answer. METRO THEATRE Clarendon, Ark. January 8, 1932. H.\rrison’s Reports, New York. Gentlemen : ' " ‘ Kindly forward a sample copy of your publication and rates of subscription. An exchange manager told me yesterday he did not see how. any exhibitor could possibly do without your publication on the matter of substitution advice alone. Yours truly, J. \V. Crabtree.