Harrison's Reports (1938)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

136 HARRISON'S REPORTS August 20, 1938 great, they must have an assured income and that, therefore, such practices as compulsory block booking, blind selling, guarantee and percentage contracts, designated playdates, excessive protection, regulation of admission prices and many other devices for bleeding the exhibitors white and usurping control of their theatres, were justified. We now know that costs are high due mainly to excessive star, directorial and executive salaries and wasteful production methods, and that when, due to depression, income shrinks, retrenchment is made in production values but not in the perquisites and emoluments of the "big shots." The business is speculative, certainly, for the exhibitor as well as the producer, and there is no justification for casting all the risk on the exhibitor as is done in current industry practice. These conditions are too well known to merit further discussion. They are the corruption that has induced the industry's sleeping sickness. When a man is dying, an injection of strychnine may revive him temporarily. The only purpose of such injection is to prolong life until the disease itself can be treated. Unless a cure for the disease is found and administered, the patient is done for. So with the movies. A million dollars worth of advertising, properly planned, may prolong the industry's life over a critical period. But what will happen after December 31, when the campaign ends? Unless the industry finds a way to produce and release good pictures at prices which the exhibitors and the public can afford to pay, unless it ceases to subsidize a rival form of entertainment by making available to it its most valuable stars, and unless it withdraws from exhibition, curbs its predatory practices, and restores to the exhibitors control over their own theatres, the shot in the arm will wear off and the business will be sicker than ever. What the industry needs most of all is a good dose of democracy, and it appears that the Governments, both Federal and State, are prepared to administer it. Only the short-sighted monopolists will oppose a course of treatment which, though drastic, will restore the business to its erstwhile health and vigor. Those who attempt to block the march of progress during the next few years are going to be destroyed. THOUGHTS AT RANDOM (By An Exhibitor) Hollywood, that never ending source of choice news items, again astonishes the movie world with Mr. Myron Selznick's profit sharing plan for picture creators and artists. Mr. Selznick, head of his own talent agency, is going to give those creators and artists for whom he has been extracting fabulous salaries an opportunity of proving just how much their individual and collective names on the screen mean. Already announced to proceed on a nosalary, profit-sharing basis are Ernst Lubitsch, William Powell, Carole Lombard, and Dolly Haas. Sam Goldwyn is also reported to have signed Robert Riskin on the same plan and is said to be seriously considering hiring all his key men in the same manner. There is nothing particularly original in this sudden discovery that anyone will work harder and better on any job if he is to receive a share in the results of his efforts and not be rewarded by a mere salary. Circuits long ago discovered that they could raise their grosses by having the individual managers share in the increased business. However, these plans came to naught when profit-sharing quotas were jumped and "fixed charges" suddenly became enormous. (Very good word, that word "fixed.") But back to Hollywood and its profit sharing ideas . . . wouldn't it be swell, Mr. Selznick and Mr. Goldwyn, if you could make this a 100% proposition whereby not only your creators but also the men who sell these pictures to the public and feed you your profits get a share of them ? True, selling pictures on a percentage rental is theoretically supposed to put the exhibitor on a partnership basis with the distributor. But the partnership is all one-sided. Percentages have become way out of line with the exhibitors' expenses and income. If a picture does badly at the box office, the producer has practically the entire world from which to regain his investment while the exhibitor has but a single situation. Listed in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer's current release schedule for August 26th is a picture titled "Marie Antoinette." To many exhibitors this was a distinct surprise for they were led to believe that the picture was to be road shown before being released generally. However, it was not a surprise that was hard to take for surely no exhibitor is going to squawk about getting a big picture especially while its publicity is hot. We don't know why Leo has decided not to road show "Marie Antoinette," but if this is the beginning of the end of road shows, the exhibitors should be very happy. There is absolutely no rhyme nor reason why any picture should be sold to the public at premium prices. This same public supports the run-of-the-mill pictures every day in the year and there can be no justification for putting an added tariff on them when a particularly outstanding attraction comes along. Support the "Movies Are Your Best Entertainment" campaign ! There is no need to elaborate upon the plans that have been made to bring patrons back to the movies. The daily trade papers have devoted many columns of space to a discussion of them. Harrison's Reports should impress upon every exhibitor, large or small, the necessity of getting behind the campaign in their individual situations. This great industry of ours has gone through some trying years and there are more to follow until "the lion and the lamb" can lie down together. We are being maligned on every hand, by smart-alecky radio commentators, columnists, reformers, censors, and fanatics ; by law suits, scandals, and silly interviews. All of our dirty linen is laundered by the press at the expense of our respect and patronage. Only a strong institutional campaign coupled with topflight pictures will restore our prestige and regain our former patronage. "The Movies Are Your Best Entertainment" campaign looks like the ticket. Get behind it !