Harrison's Reports (1945)

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 $15.00 Ronm 1 R1 2 Harrison's Reports, Inc., U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 iwum 1014 Publisher Canada 16.50 New York 20, N. Y. P. S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico Cuba, Spain 16.50 A Motjon picture Reviewing Service oreat Britain ............ 10.1a Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 Australia, New Zealand, India, Europe, Asia 17.50 Ug Editoriaj p0ijcy. No problem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-4622 35c a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXVII SATURDAY, JANUARY 13, 1945 No. 2 MUST THE AMERICAN EXHIBITOR SUBSIDIZE FOREIGN PRODUCTION? The idea of commerce among the nations of the world without the restrictions of burdensome duties, as advocated by Cordell Hull, former Secretary of State, is a fine one. Mr. Hull went under the theory that people who do business do not fight, unless it be, of course, that some nations, like individuals, want to live on the toil of others, unwilling to contribute anything themselves to the general welfare. But it seems as if some of the very nations we have been helping do their share in saving themselves and in contributing to the efforts of other Allied nations to save the world from slavery are paying us back by placing restrictions upon our commerce. They are placing upon the American motion pictures restrk' tions that are contrary to the theory of Mr. Hull and of the general American policy. They are so envious of the progress that the American motion pictures have made through the ingenuity of the American producers that they are trying to shackle it by means of restrictions by quotas and other methods, such as compelling the American producers to dub films in the country to which they are exported. I am referring particularly to France and Spain, not to mention Argentina and even Great Britain. France wants to make the American exhibitors support the French film industry by means of reciprocity; that is, the French Government is willing to permit the importation into France of a given number of American films provided the American producers import a given number of French films to be played in American theatres. Spain has imposed upon the American distributors the obligation of dubbing the Spanish language in Spain, where the facilities are limited, instead of in the United States, where the work can be done most efficiently. Great Britain has increased the quota; that is, Britain allows American films to enter Great Britain only if the American distributors import into the United States a given number of British pictures. And this quota will increase as time goes on. Even little Switzerland has imposed a quota upon the American distributors, if the dispatches in the newspapers are correct. According to a dispatch in the New York Herald Tribune of December 2 1 , Major Henry Adams Proctor, in a House of Commons debate regarding American films, stated the following : "We have been for many years in this country getting a very raw deal from American producers, and the whole of the American film industry has dealt very harshly with products made in this country. This is due to the fact that financiers in the industry, and especially American controllers, see to it that the English film will not be a competition with American production. We are equal to the Americans in direction, script, writers and actors, and we have the peculiar quality of voice that makes English sound like a flute against the American tin whistle." It is difficult to make the English understand that, so far as the American exhibitors are concerned, there is no prejudice against the motion pictures of any nation, and least of all against British films, which use the same language, so long as these pictures draw at the box-office. The trouble with the British producers, however, is that they have been whining all these years but have done nothing about the very thing that would make the English pictures popular among American audiences. Have they ever spent a dollar in this country to advertise the British stars? Have they tried to obtain publicity in the American newspapers and other informative media to apprise the American public that a given English novel, which may have had a great circulation in the United States, was in the process of production in England so as to arouse a desire among the American public to see it when it was released in the United States? No! They did nothing so elementary to help their pictures or their stars attract the American picturegoing public to the box-offices of theatres. Why should the American exhibitor book English pictures when he knows in advance that they will not attract the public? Why should he pay his money to buy an English picture he cannot sell to the American public? The Honorable Major Henry Adams Proctor must put forward a better reason than the one he has thus far advanced if he wishes to support his contention that the American film industry has dealt harshly with the pictures made in his country. As for his boast that the English voice "makes English sound like a flute against the American tin whistle," Harrison's Reports forgives him, for the Honorable member of the British Parliament has never heard the English of the British films in America with American ears. If he had, in most instances he would not understand it. And now about the French. According to the London Bureau of the Motion Picture Herald, the French Embassy in London stated to the London representative of that paper that the French Government is determined to maintain the French film industry by demanding of other nations that they show French pictures just as French theatres are showing the pictures of other nations. In other words, the French Government expects the American exhibitors to book (Continued on last page)