Harrison's Reports (1939)

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.

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: 1270 SIXTH AVENUE Published Weekly by United States 915.00 R„nm1ft1o Harrison's Reports, Inc.. U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 KOOm lou Publisher Canada 16.50 New York, N. Y. P. S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 . , . Great Britain 15.75 Motlon Plcture Reviewing Service v«t*hU,h»a T„,v 1 mi 4 Australia, New Zealand, Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 India, Europe, Asia .... 1-3.50 iKn c p„„v Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-46£2 ooc a. copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXI SATURDAY, JANUARY 21, 1939 No. 3 NATIONAL SCREEN SERVICE DOING GREAT PATRIOTIC WORK Inspired by a speech on tolerance and patriotism made by Mr. Karl Hoblitzelle at the dinner which he and Mr. Bob O'Donnell, his associate, gave to Mr. Ned Depinet, in Dallas, early last year, Mr. Herman Robbins, of National Screen Service, suggested to Messrs. Hoblitzelle and O'Donnell, that the beautiful sentiments expressed by Mr. Hoblitzelle in that speech be translated into a trailer, to be shown at the theatres of their circuit, Interstate Circuit of Texas. Messrs. Hoblitzelle and O'Donnell liked the idea and a trailer was decided upon to be based on the National Anthem, "The Star Spangled Banner." The showing of that trailer in the theatres of the circuit proved so successful that Mr. Robbins felt that this and two other trailers, entitled "Constitution" and "The Bill of Rights," be produced and sold outright to any exhibitor who wanted them, at cost. National Screen Service has now ready for sale trailers of "The Star Spangled Banner." Its length is 118 feet, 36 feet being in technicolor. The charge for this trailer is $3.54. This cost does not include studio recording, art work, text research, film editing and distribution ; it covers only the cost of the raw stock and of printing. In view of the fact that the trailers become your property upon purchase, I suggest that you buy all three. There are many occasions on which you could show them to good advantage. "Star Spangled Banner," which is the only one ready just now, is not only inspiring, but also highly artistic. And I am sure that the other two will be as artistic as well as inspiring ; they will be ready for delivery shortly. Harrison's Reports takes great pleasure in commending National Screen Service for its forethought. THE TRUTHS MR. QUIGLEY SAID IN HIS DECEMBER 16 EDITORIAL What Mr. Quigley actually said in his December 16 editorial, the salient parts of which were reproduced in last week's issue of this publication, is this : (1) The motion picture industry will "face a variety of thoroughgoing changes this year." (2) Despite the studied indifference of the producers, the Government suit will have a great influence upon the method of doing business in the industry. (3) New "blood" in the production end of the industry is not admitted so easily now ; the penetration of the wall the present heads there have built around production so as to keep themselves in and the "outsiders out" depends, not on ability, but on good fortune and "right connections." (4) Explanations of why a theatre shows a bad picture give little satisfaction to those who pay their money to the box offices to be entertained. (5) The producers, although they have all the advantages of obtaining the best pictures available, arc not successful theatre operators. (6) Theatre operation by producer employees has become a humdrum and routine procedure — just like (hat of railroads. Their main thought is how to save money in the operation of tbe theatres, not how to get more money. In line with this thought, they are doing as little advertising as they can, whereas advertising should be done with a "vengeance." Such a step might spoil the pleasure of those who prepare tabulations of expense curtailment but it will bring in dollars. (7) Radio is not an ally of the motion picture but a competitor of formidable proportions. (8) If a stage show on Broadway fails to make good, it is "hauled to the storehouse," and there pickled ; whereas the moving picture producers have succeeded in contriving a system whereby "failures" are "perpetuated." This system has made and is making the industry "pay." (9) Under the present system, good pictures do not bring in the money they can bring, and the poor pictures, by being kept on the board, are given a chance they are not entitled to be given. This has dissatisfied the public and has caused it to look for good entertainment elsewhere. (10) The argument that unless the poor pictures are given a chance to bring in some revenue the industry will go bankrupt is not convincing. What is the difference whether the income is derived from twenty-five pictures or from thirty, as long as the full income is derived? It should be more profitable if it were derived from twentyfive, because it would save the distribution cost of the five pictures that are not worth showing. "The automatic rejection" of poor pictures "at the source . . . would confer a great benefit on the public and on the exhibitor," and would add prestige to motion pictures. But such a policy would not perhaps be acceptable to the present holders of the "monopoly," because it would give a chance to the meritorious pictures of others. (11) If the producers should insist upon continuing the present system, they merely delay the day of reckoning, but they will not be able to prevent its arrival. "There are now, and have been for some time, danger signals all along the right of way." The only question is whether the producers will be wise enough to see it or not. Wise statements, I'll say! 20th CENTURY-FOX TO DISTRIBUTE GAUMONT-BRITISH PICTURES On December 12, Twentieth Century-Fox took over the sales of Gaumont-British pictures. The exhibitors of the United States know, I am sure, that Twentieth Century-Fox has a substantial interest in the Gaumont-British company of Great Britain. By taking over the sales of this company's pictures, Twentieth Century-Fox merely accommodates a partner. Some exhibitors have expressed the fear that the Twentieth Century-Fox salesmen may attempt to compel an exhibitor to buy these pictures in addition to the pictures of their own company, but Harrison's Reports doubts whether these fears arc justified; Sidney Kent is too smart to permit them to resort to such a practice. But in view of the fact that Mr. Kent cannot be present during the negotiations of exhibitors with salesmen to prevent the salesmen from possibly employing high-pressure sales methods, Harrison's Reports suggests to the Allied members of the negotiating committee, in the event that the negotiations were resumed, to insist that in the final agreement there be included a provision dealing with foreign pictures.