Harrison's Reports (1946)

.Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 2, 1879. Harrison's Reports Nearly 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. 16.60 M v L ">n IM V Publisher Canada 16.50 wew 1 orK 1 • P. S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 A Motion Picture Reviewing Service Great Britain 15.75 Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 Australia, New Zealand, India, Europe, Asia .... 17.50 Jtg Editorial Poiicy: 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. XXVIII SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1946 No. 51 ADOLPH ZUKOR'S SOUND ADVICE TO THE BRITISH Speaking at an industry press luncheon this week, which marked his return from a recent European trip, Adolph Zukor, Paramount's founder and chairman of the board, lashed out at the British critics of the American motion pic ture industry. In a forthright statement in which he pulled no punches, Mr. Zukor fired verbal barbs at, what he termed, "parasites" who, to cover up their own inefficiency, seek to impose import restrictions on American films and attack Hollywood with charges of "draining the British Treasury." He pointed out that the revenue American pictures receive from the British market is but "small change" in comparison to the revenue Great Britain realizes from this country's im' portation of broadcloth and woolens alone. Mr. Zukor charged that American films have not only kept British theatres operating but they have also been in' strumental in the building of more theatres, thus giving the British producers a greater number of outlets for their products. As to complaints that the American exhibitors are not giving British pictures playing time in accordance with a picture's merits, Mr. Zukor countered with the charge that the British producers have not yet learned to make pictures with world-wide appeal, such as is made by the American producers, who have made a close study of the wants of foreign markets. "So long as the British producers continue to conceive their pictures for local consumption," said Mr. Zukor, "they cannot expect world-wide reception of their products." "To the American exhibitor," added Mr. Zukor, "whether affiliated or independent, it does not matter if a picture is produced in Turkey or Yugoslavia. We have no restrictive laws here, and if a picture is good and has popular appeal, the American exhibitor will play it." Mr. Zukor pointed out also that the American exhibitor is glad to encourage British production, for it is to his interest to create an additional source of product in order to better his trading position. It has been stated frequently in these columns that, despite the feeling that exists among many British film people that the American film industry is trying to stifle competition, the American exhibitors have no prejudices against the pictures of any nation. Their one aim is to exhibit pictures that will entertain and draw at the box-office. Any British picture that will meet this test will be welcomed by the American exhibitor. He cannot, however, be expected to give playing time to a picture he cannot sell to his patrons. Mr. Zukor is right when he says that the British producers do not conceive their pictures with an eye towards satisfying the entertainment desires of people outside their own country. Instead of being envious of the progress the American pictures have made through the ingenuity of the American producers, and instead of trying to shackle American pictures by means of quotas and other restrictions, the British film people would do well to concentrate their efforts on ways and means to meet American competition effectively, not only in this country, but also in their own country. And the most effective way to meet competition, either at home or abroad, is to make better pictures, the sort that will appeal to the many instead of the few. The trouble with most British pictures sent to this country is that they have an "arty" approach to the subject matter, with the result that their appeal is generally limited to high class audiences. The British producers fail to realize that, to the average picture-goer, at least in this country, that which is difficult to grasp is, by its very nature, not entertaining. To the American exhibitors, as a matter of fact exhibitors all over the world, motion pictures are not an art but a business. They are interested in an adequate supply of salable popular entertainment, the sort that will be readily understood by the lowest as well as the highest intelligence in the audience. In other words, the vast majority of exhibitors are not interested in catering to the esthetes and intellectuals. Neither restrictive measures against American films, nor constant attacks on Hollywood, will help the British film industry to improve its position in the world's markets. The solution, pure and simple, lies in their solving the secret of how to make pictures with world-wide appeal. MORE ON "ABIE'S IRISH ROSE" According to a news report in a recent issue of the N.eu> Yor\ Times, Bennie Berger, president of North Central Allied Independent Theatre Owners, issued a statement to the effect that Bing Crosby's "Abie's Irish Rose" may result in Minnesota legislation establishing film censorship unless the picture is revised to eliminate material construed as offensive to racial and religious groups. In a letter to Gradwell L. Sears, vice-president in charge of distribution for United Artists, which is distributing the film, Berger stated that "there is a great deal of hostility and dissatisfaction in this territory concerning your forthcoming release of 'Abie's Irish Rose.' ... A number of exhibitors have even suggested that we put through a censorship bill in this state which could easily be done and to which I am opposed. . . ." Answering the Minneapolis theatre group headed by Berger, Sears had this to say: "While I have not had the opportunity to read Mr. Berger's complaints except in the public press they strike me in general as being unfounded, reckless and ill advised. "In the first place, such minor objections as have been made by competent authorities have been rectified by the producer, A. Edward Sutherland. Certain lines have been eliminated; certain scenes changed, but the picture, its entertainment, and its message of tolerance remain basically unchanged. "More important and more dangerous in my opinion is Mr. Berger's threat of seeking local censorship in behalf of any group, or organization. Wilful talk of this type is completely contrary to the American principle and, in the hands of irresponsible people, can constitute a threat to free speech and a free screen." Harrison's Reports extends to its subscribers and readers Greetings of the Season