Hollywood Spectator (Apr-May 1939)

this film year — terminating in August — is forty-six pictures. 1 he Fox plant will have released fifty-two. These smaller production schedules are a good sign. Manifestly the studios have been turning out too many pictures, and smaller schedules should result in better quality in the run of releases. Forty pictures a year is still too many, though. Probably not more than thirty features of any merit could be turned out by a single studio. Still, as I say, the reduction is a good sign. Some To Be Made Abroad A small portion of these pictures will be made abroad, in England, probably half a dozen by each firm. Alarm over Big-Bad-Wolf Hitler seems to have subsided, and production chiefs are returning to the shores from which there was a summary exodus of Holly woodites a few weeks back. The reason behind this braving of the bombs is to make use of profits which, by government decree, cannot now be taken out of England. Produced pictures can be. HEARING THROUGH THE EYES HOSE who have not of late reflected on the force of the silent pictures, how strongly they played on the imagination, should take note of the huge neon sign that tops the Hollywood Recreation Center, on Vine Street across from the N.B.C. studios. It pictures a bowling ball rolling toward a line-up of pins. The ball hits, there are chaotic neon flashes, the pins fly wildly. Your imagination does the rest: it makes you hear the ball hit — yes, sir, you can hear the ball's fierce, crackling, resounding impact with the pins. Watch it, sometime. Cleveland Reader Gives Some Advice ONE of the most active women in the potent Cinema Club in Cleveland . Ohio, is Bertelle M. Lytelle. In a letter to me. Mrs. Lytelle makes some discerning remarks it would profit both producers and exhibitors to read. The letter follows. — \V. B. You and the other reviewers have given us enthusiastic accounts of Land of Liberty, the movie history of our country prepared by the industry for the two fairs, and now to be available "for every school in the country." To me it seems that such a picture belongs in the community show rather than in the regular school: it is a review of history for the adult, instead of a presentation of the subject to the child who cannot understand so much at once, or who thinks he knows it all because he has seen such a film and so is less inter ested in studying in detail the various periods. However, here n Cleveland it is impossible to show ven "free" films without an overhead cost of $35 to $50, which must be born by someone. We of the Cinema Club believe that the present limitation that many films may not be shown where an admission fee is charged, should be changed to "may not be shown for profit," thus permitting a small admission designed to cover these necessary expenses. Suggestions for Exhibitors CJYou say you have a large circulation among exhibitors. We know you have among the producers. Don't you think it well to agitate for better showmanship on the part of the theatres? Isn’t it time the old principle of offering something pleasant and something distasteful to everyone in the audience, with a prayer that enough of the pleasant comes last to cause forgetfulness of the unpleasant, be discarded at least on a few days of the week, and particularly at the week-ends when our young people attend in droves and are having formed their ideas of art, harmony, beauty as well as morals? The better films movement, now powerfully aided by the study of movie art in the schools, is undoubtedly showing results at the box-office: otherwise how would any exhibitor dare to offer On Borrowed Time and Lost Patrol on the same Saturday-Sunday program, and expect to please his patrons? We are improving the demand for fine pictures and wholesome ones, but our people have many resources and are not compelled to patronize pictures they do not desire in order to see the ones that they do. How about justice to the pictures themselves? Pleasing Double Bill CJ Of course this is a plea for single feature programs, but a double bill that stands out as a pleasing memory was Man of Aran and Unfinished Symphony. It might be possible to develop audiences for special types of pictures for special nights and thus have an easy placing for the fine art, adult picture. Again, care could be exercised to make each program harmonious as to the major feature, and then advertise each program to its proper audience. This means not to push the advertising of They Shall Have Music among the athletic clubs and labor unions, nor expect the women's clubs to trust the judgment that urges them to attend either Real Glory or Each Dawn I Die. Also the advertising of the unusual picture must not be trusted to trailer and the regular theatre promotion. The "unusual" audience never hears about the picture until too late. Another point: why must all pic ture shows follow the same pattern? I cannot recall a time when we had such a large and varied assortment of fine short subjects as at present. The best of them do not suit the double feature scheme, and are overshadowed rm a single feature. I am thinking primarily of the short dramas of M-G-M and Vitaphone, secondly of the fine travel and novelty reels, and the new symphonic subjects from Paramount. Shorts for Saturdays <1 It seems practical to me for a centrally located theatre in our large cities to co-operate with the distributors in developing a Saturday audience for a two-hour show of these fine shorts. Advertising should be a week in advance: one frame in the lobby near the street carrying the coming program for the information of all passersby, the newspaper ad of the theatre carrying the line about "short subjects on Saturday" just as some advertise their "owl shows": then a simple printed slip carrying the full program of next week's show to be distributed to this week’s audience: these slips should also be bulletined or distributed through libraries and schools. I hese films are largely documentary, and such a program, if well selected, should be a great cultural asset to any community. Why force such a program into the school houses and thus deprive it of the advantages of the theatre showing, the opportunity of reaching its greatest audience, and the inspiration for its artists of a greater recognition? Why not increase the use of these subjects? Why are the producers making them? Theatre men have told me the distributors will not co-operate in any such efforts to serve the public. Afraid to Experiment The distributors control plenty of suitable houses to make the experiments themselves, and in Cleveland, at least, they are more accustomed to working with the Cinema Club and the Public Library than are the neighborhood theatres. The industry deplores lost markets and lessening box-office, but is afraid to try experiments to have the maximum audiences for each picture, including the short subjects. Fewer pictures, but all good of their kind, and much better showmanship in program making and community service, is my suggestion for alleviating the financial difficulties of the box-office. ★ Nick Carter is to sleuth again. Metro has purchased over 1,100 of the Nick Carter stories, the entire Street 13 Smith library with the exception of twelve stories. A Wayne Morris has been signed by Warner Brothers for a fourth year. His new release is Brother Rat and a Baby. MARCH 1, 1940 PAGE FIFTEEN