Harrison's Reports (1946)

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 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS Published Weekly by United States $15.00 (Formerly Sixth Avenue) Harrison's Reports, Inc., U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 . . . Publisher Canada 16.50 New York 20> «. Y. p g HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 A Motion Picture Reviewing Service Australia taNew Zealand' Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 India, Europe, Asia 17.50 jtg Editoria] p0iicy: jsjo Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-4622 d5c a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXVIII SATURDAY, JANUARY 12, 1946 No. 2 TINGING THE VARIETY CLUBS OF AMERICA WITH COMMERCIALISM Under date of December 18, Robert J. O'Donnell, National Chief Barker of the Variety Clubs of Amer' ica, has sent a circular letter the purpose of which is to boost the Silver Anniversary of Columbia Pk' tures. "Columbia Pictures," says the circular addressed to all the Variety Club Tents in the United States, "celebrates its Silver Anniversary in 1946— and they have desired a plan whereby the eyes of the industry — and the attention of your local civic leaders may be focused on YOUR Variety Club "This is, we believe, an excellent opportunity for us, through the Columbia Anniversary, to secure some GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS. "The suggested procedure is : Each Variety Club in an Exchange Center will sponsor a very important dignified dinner. Local dignitaries — civic leaders and city councilmen will be invited. . . . "At this dinner, the Industry's war record will be cited, special tribute will be paid to the role of the exhibitor in the war — the civic activities of the Variety Club — will all be brought to the attention of those present. Briefly, tribute will be paid to the Industry as symbolized by Columbia Pictures 25 th Anniversary. "This is a splendid opportunity to bring the Story of Variety — and the Industry — to those outside our Industry — for representatives , from all phases of business, schools, and clubs will be present. "If you would like for your Variety Club to participate and sponsor such an event — please let us know ... we will forward you plans in greater detail. "I, personally, feel this is a splendid opportunity for Variety to establish an important niche for itself in the Community . . . and believe that much prestige will be the result of this event — which will be handled with great dignity." The founding of the Variety Clubs was an inspiration on the part of a handful of Pittsburgh men engaged in the show business. They had found a baby abandoned in the foyer of one of the theatres in that city and they decided to rear that baby. Beginning with this compassionable gesture, the idea soon spread and today there is a Variety Tent in twentysix exchange centers in the country. The charitable spirit of the Variety Clubs has been maintained unsullied until December 18, when Bob O'Donnell undertook to lend its beautiful name to commercialism — to advertise a film company. Who sold Bob O'Donnell a bill of goods? Did he think of what he started when he opened the doors of this charitable organization to sordid commercial' ism? Let's look into the matter : Other film companies will be celebrating, in one form or another, some sort of anniversary. Is Mr. O'Donnell going to offer the name of Variety Clubs to advertise these companies? He cannot deny it to them, unless he wants to show partiality. And if he should offer the facilities of the Variety Tents to every film company, what becomes of the charitable spirit of this institution? And why should Columbia, or any other film com' pany for that matter, be permitted to cash in on the industry's overall war effort — an effort that is representative of every branch in the industry? The other distributors, the producers, the exhibitors, the actors, the writers, the technicians, and every other com' ponent part of the motion picture industry spent many hours and much money to help win the war, and any attempt to arrange a tribute to their efforts "as symbolized by Columbia Pictures 25 th Anniver' sary" would be a flagrant depredation of the credit that is due to each of these groups. This paper ventures to say that Bob O'Donnell will find great opposition to his idea among the Variety Tents he heads. There are members who are guarding the spirit of this institution as they are guarding the pupils of their eyes — they do not want and will not permit this charitable institution to degenerate into an advertising agency. The writer, being a member of the Variety Clubs, resents the prostitution of the spirit of this institution and protests against the use of it in the manner that Mr. O'Donnell proposes. THE DEFENDANTS FILE THEIR BRIEFS On Monday of this week, the defendant distributors in the New York anti-trust suit filed their final briefs with the Court. There remains now the hearing of oral arguments, which is scheduled to take place before the threejudge statutory court on January 15. In addition to filing individual briefs, the five theatre-owning companies filed also a joint brief. Of the "Little Three," Universal and United Artists filed a joint brief, while Columbia submitted a separate brief. The joint brief of the "Big Five" concerns itself mostly with arguments of law, through which it is asserted that the Government has failed to prove its (Continued on last page)