Harrison's Reports (1948)

IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE Entered a* «econd-cl«8S 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 N v t, on ltf V Publisher Canada 16.50 Wew 1 ork *«»«•»• P. g. 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 Itg Editorial Policy . 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. XXX SATURDAY, MAY 22, 1948 No. 21 ALLIED'S JUSTIFIED CONDEMNATION OF COERCIVE ADVERTISING Recently Paramount resorted in a few situations to the practice of mailing heralds and posting twenty-four sheets to advertise its pictures to residents in towns where it had not made a deal with the local exhibitor. One of the towns in which it resorted to this practice was Faribault, Minnesota, and Bill Glaser, the local exhibitor, with whom Paramount was unable to come to terms, appealed for help to his organization, Northwest Allied, of which Bennie Berger is president. Berger, in an effort to stop the practice on the ground that it was unfair, not only protested to Paramount, but also brought it to the attention of National Allied. National Allied condemned the practice as coercive advertising to force exhibitors to play pictures on terms that were unacceptable to them. At first glance, Paramount's tactics appeared to this paper to be, not a coercion but only an effort to advertise its pictures in the same manner that it would insert an advertisement in a national magazine to boost its product. Paramount's position would have been unassailable if it had followed a similar practice in towns where its product had been sold. But in no case had it done this. Consequently, this paper has come to the conclusion that Paramount's act is nothing short of coercion. This is not the first time that Paramount has resorted to such a practice. If old subscribers to Harrison's Reports will search their files they will find an account of this practice as early as 1920. The first town in which this method was adopted was Mattoon, Illinois, where Paramount distributed handbills reading something like this: "Mattoon is a good town; but — why the but? It has its good schools, its civic centers, its railroads, its fine parks (etc.), but it has no Paramount Pictures . . .** The present method is not as vicious; nevertheless, the spirit behind it is. Harrison's Reports hopes that Charlie Reagan will put an end to this practice. His complaint may be that he has no other way by which he could induce an exhibitor to buy Paramount pictures. But he must remember that a smalltown exhibitor has only a given number of play-dates available— not enough to take care of the products of all distributors. He must leave some of them out. If such an exhibitor hooks Paramount pictures to the exclusion of the pictures of another major distributor, then that distributor, too, would have the right to resort to the Paramount practice. If the Paramount branch office in Minneapolis cannot induce the Faribault exhibitor to book its pictures, then there is something wrong somewhere, and it is up to Charlie Reagan to find out why. Certainly, no exhibitor will refuse to buy pictures that will make him money, if he can obtain them at terms that will leave him a profit. A WELL-DESERVED TRIBUTE Morris M. Finkel. president of the Allied Motion Picture Theatre Owners of Western Pennsylvania, has forwarded to this office a copy of a resolution that was passed unanimously by his membership at a recent meeting expressing their gratitude and appreciation to Jack Kirsch for his efforts in behalf of all independent exhibitors during the two years of service he just completed as president of National Allied. Jack Kirsch is indeed deserving of this tribute, for under his aggressive but fair leadership National Allied's growth and its forceful influence in the industry were nothing short of phenomenal. Harrison's Reports is happy to join with the MPTO of Western Pennsylvania in hailing Jack for a job well done. ABOUT "THE MIRACLE OF THE BELLS" In a recent bulletin of the Allied Theatre Owners of Iowa and Nebraska, Mr. Charles Niles, chairman of the organization's Caravan Committee, quoted from a letter sent to him by a Nebraska member, relative to "The Miracle of the Bells." This member stated that he had seen the picture after reading the bad notice it had received from the 7<lew Yor\ Daily Hews, and that he is in complete disagreement with the opinion of that paper's reviewer. "I am not working for the exchange by a hell of a ways," said this member, "but when they build a picture like 'Miracle of the Bells," and then some dummy in New York calls it mushy sentimentality and the Caravan prints it, I think, and I may be wrong, that there are a lot of little fellows that haven't seen the picture (who) will get an idea that it's no good and I think it is truly a great picture. I'd like to have one like it each week for 52 weeks that will get as much praise from the folks who pay to go to my theatre. I'm speaking nationally and if I'm wrong I'll apologize. Let me know what you thought of the picture." Mr. Niles admitted in his bulletin that information he had received about the picture from the Des Moines area backed up the Nebraska member's opinion. The following is part of what the review in Harrison's Reports said (page 39, this year's volume) : "Excellent mass entertainment. ... A powerful human interest drama, of a quality rarely achieved in motion picture production . . . From the opening to the closing scenes, one's attention is gripped so strongly that the more than two hours running time pass by unnoticed." Those who undertake to advise exhibitors through organization bulletins about the quality of pictures should be careful to impart to them correct information. Taking the word of any reviewer's opinion is wrong, unless that reviewer's opinions had been followed for a long time and proved accurate. Insofar as the New York City newspaper critics are concerned, their opinions, particularly with regard to a picture such as "The Miracle of the Bells," do not as a general rule reflect the opinions of the rank-and-file moviegoers. What is emotionally stirring to the average picturegoer frequently fails to move the big-city critics because of their "arty" tastes. Consequently, one who undertakes to advise exhibitors about a picture's commercial possibilities is rarely on solid ground if he bases his opinion on what is said of the picture by these critics. Reviewing pictures from the exhibitor's point of view is a profession that requires, not only accurate judgment, but also experience as well as training. A wrong opinion on a picture does harm, not only to the producer, but also to the exhibitor, who may refrain from either buying the picture or putting behind it all his efforts.