Motion Picture Daily (Jan-Mar 1960)

Record Details:

Title:
Motion Picture Daily
Date:
Jan-Mar 1960
Publisher:
New York [Motion picture daily, inc.]
Volume:
Motion picture daily
Leaf #:
000371
Language:
English
Subjects:
motion pictures, Motion pictures -- Periodicals
Collection:
Hollywood Studio System
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
Library of Congress, MBRS, Moving Image Section
Sponsor:
Library of Congress, Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
A New York-based daily trade paper published by Martin Quigley. The companion to Quigley's better known weekly publication, MOTION PICTURE HERALD, and a direct competitor to THE FILM DAILY, which was also published out of New York. Established in 1930, MOTION PICTURE DAILY enjoyed a circulation of roughly 5,000 readers most years of its four decades in print (a nearly identical circulation to THE FILM DAILY, but only one third of the readership of MOTION PICTURE HERALD, which reached a wider audience of exhibitors). In the 1930s, the MOTION PICTURE DAILY's editor, Maurice Kann, called on the movie industry to shift more production back to the East Coast. Any productions that filmed in New York received ample attention. New York City never regained its production lead over Hollywood, but the major studios used the Big Apple for their corporate and distribution headquarters. As a result, MOTION PICTURE DAILY tended to focus on economic and regulatory issues confronting the film industry. -- Eric Hoyt, 2014
Date Added:
December 02, 2023
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.

WHO VOTED FOR THE STRIKE? The Screen Actors Guild polled its 14,000 members on whether it should strike theatrical film-making at the major picture studios. The issue was the guild's demand that actors be paid twice for one job. 5,899 actors voted for a strike and now thousands of studio employees are out of work. Who REALLY voted for this strike, who wanted it? According to the guild's own figures, some 22 per cent of its members do no acting work in any medium in a year. ! What could THEY lose by a strike? What stake do THEY have in the future of our industry? Are THEY the ones who voted for the strike? By the guild's figures, 61 per cent of its members do not work in THEATRICAL motion pictures in a year. What could THEY lose by a strike against THEATRICAL film producers? Are THEY the ones who voted for it? Also, by the guild's figures, 65.2 per cent of actors employed in theatrical films work only occasionally; many have other occupations and other principal means of livelihood. What could THESE persons lose by a strike? What stake do THEY have in the future of our industry? Less than 2,000 actors are in any sense regular employees of theatrical film studios; they receive most of the $35,000,000 the guild states its members earn annually from theatrical films. How many of THESE voted for the strike? Nearly 1,200 actors voted against authorizing a strike. More than 7,000 did not cast ballots at all. WHO DID VOTE FOR A STRIKE? This ad is one of a series placed as an industry service by The Association of Motion Picture Producers.