Motion Picture Herald (Mar-Apr 1947)

MOTION PICTURE HERALD MARTIN QL'IGLEY, Editor-in-Gbief and Publisher TERRY RAMSAYE, Editor Vol. 166, No. 12 OP LET CUSTOMERS DECIDE THE air is becoming burdened with expert opinions and advice on the selection of pictures which the American industry may with discretion export to foreign markets. It would seem that the proper and ultimately only effective control must be by the exercise of reasonable business judgment and by showmen's experience. Something, one might consider, should be left to the judgment of the patrons, abroad as well as at home. It should be clear that a picture deemed worthy of general distribution in these United States, with their great array of ethnic components and diversities of taste and opinion, is fit enough for any other audiences which will pay to see it. There is an undemocratic peril in any process of prejudgment which decides pictures for Americans are not for others. Within the limits of common decency no one essays to decide what we may see on the screen. The customers decide what they want to see, what they like most. They rule production. That is liberty for the common man and his theatre here, and around the world. ■ ■ ■ ON STAGE COSTS THE current economic period has brought into the vernacular of business, many businesses, the phrase: "Priced out of the market". It has been discovered in some lines that there is a point at which the customers' sense of propriety in costs and profits brings them to a sit-down with their purses in their hip pockets. Of relevant interest are some remarks by Mr. Brooks Atkinson, eminent dramatic observer for The New York Titnes, in an outgiving proclaiming the innocence of critics concerning the commercial career of the stage. Says he: "The fundamental trouble with the theatre is economic. Tickets cost two or three times too much because the costs of producing have become insanely high . . . due to the fact that real estate and the craft unions take too great a share of the income in proportion to the service they contribute. . . . The theatre is no longer a popular institution and the great bulk of the public can never decide whether or not it likes a play because it cannot afford to go to the theatre. "What the theatre needs is ... a sharp deflation in the cost of tickets and a drastic improvement in the quality of plays." ■ IB ABOUT AN ACTOR WITHOUT intent to detract in any degree from the glories of the stars of Hollywood and their recognition in the annual awards by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, one may lift an eyebrow at the decision which rates Mr. Harold Russell as giving "the best performance by an actor in a supporting role". Regardless of the official billing and the sequences of the production credit sheet, an argument may be sustained for an opinion March 22, 1947 that Mr. Russell has proved the de facto star of "The Best Years of Our Lives". Minus the performance and extraordinary skill of Mr. Russell in this most special of roles, it would have been a very different picture, perhaps a very good one, but without the gripping poignancy of his plight and his competent but restrained portrayal of the psychological consequences of it. It is keynote and essence. . Clearly enough, the direction of Mr. Russell, completely the novice, was indeed a signal performance by Mr. ^^illiam Wyler, awarded honors for "the best achievement in directing". ■ ■ ■ MR. O'BRIEN SAYS THE American industry, as well as the British, may well be interested in the speech of Mr. Thomas James O'Brien, M.P., General Secretary of the National Association of Theatrical and Kine Employees, before the House of Commons, reported in this week's news pages. He urged especially that it would be "a cardinal error" to reduce the flow of American pictures to British theatres, observing that British films supply about a quarter of their needs and the rest comes from the United States. He made the interesting statement that 33,000,000 people in Britain pay for admission to the cinemas every week and that more than 3,000,000 persons have been standing in queues in the towns and cities every night through the bitter ordeals of British weather. "The cinema," said Mr. O'Brien, "is the only kindly light amid the encircling gloom." Also, the speaker made emphatic observations opposing the radical wing of cinema trade unionism which has addressed itself at winning a 40-hour week. "No industry in Great Britain has yet achieved a 40-hour week," he noted. "The British film industry must be regarded as a vital national industry, not as an easy-going, irresponsible, experimenting ground for policies and ideas which cannot be adopted outside of it." ■ ■ I THE JUNGLE LIFE THE film enjoys the friendly attention of many diligent clubwomen, among them Mrs. Arthur Goldsmith, chairman of the Motion Picture Preview Study Group of Philadelphia. Her wide and comprehensive correspondence brought in a letter the other day from an army officer stationed way up at Pachmarki, Central Province in India, Captain J. W. Hughes. He reports from afar, thus: "Went to the local cinema last night to see Irene Dunne and Charles Boyer in 'Together Again'. But I was the only person in the theatre, so I asked them to cancel the shoiv. Jan. Hth: J had to interrupt my letter of yesterday because three Bengal tigers were on the loose and headed our way. Life is unbelievably quiet here, but there are compensations — bananas, oranges and grapefruit are to be had for the picking." — Terr^y Rcimsayc