Motion Picture Herald (Jan-Mar 1954)

I err? Ramsa^c S«it« THESE lines fall on paper in the afterglow of a New Year's fireside in a mood of retrospect across vistas including four decades of the motion picture. And now it appears we have come, as one of the details of a mad world scene, into a period of confusions and ordeal far beyond any precedent in the strenuous years that have gone across the screen. Largely external developments in the Electronic Revolution for a half a dozen years have forced upon the industry an amazing complex of technological adventures. They in turn have created disturbing problems for both the art and the merchandising thereof. This maelstrom of frenetic efforts at readjustment in the nature of things has had to be as public as the screen itself. But now atop all that has come a most disturbing thrust at the status of the Production Code, the principal public relations instrument of the motion picture. Putting aside for the moment the stated issues, this addition to the confusions of the day and impairment of relations with a public already far from sure that the screen knows what it is about, appears to have been most unnecessarily superimposed on the scene at this time. This has come from inside, initiated with an explosion of publicity in the lay press. No necessity for this eruption has been apparent. It can do the sweating, striving motion picture no good. Further, there is no crisis involved. There can be no defense that this has been inescapable. The organized industry has often demonstrated its capacity of taking action on important ryiatters in camera. For instance, there was a secret settlement of a suit by an independent who in the early period menaced the Code application. There was that hushed decision to remove the penalty of a $25,000 fine on an affiliated theatre which should venture to run a picture without the Code seal. When a year later that fact became known the stated reason was that such a ruling by the organized industry could be, it was feared, interpreted as a violation of anti-trust laws. Then there was that star chamber decision to let down the Code prohibition of screen presentation of subjects pertaining to the drug habit or its traffic. A picture was made, no hit. Almost as quietly the indulgent ruling was rescinded. It now appears to be the contention of the current movement ■‘■hat the public and the audiences have in the last twenty years arrived at a "far greater maturity," on all age levels. That obviously is not correct. Much depends on what one considers "maturity." Also much depends on where one takes the audience samples. There is considerable scientific and expert opinion that research indicates that the traits of adolescence, undisciplined adolescence, persist for the many for a lifetime. In sequel utterances much is made of the contention that there is of course no intent of impairing the basic moral order implied by the Code, just a matter of interpretation and application, one is given to understand. It may be pointed out that it has been obvious in the administration of the Code these many years that there has been a rule of reason and elasticity. Also it is the opinion of this observer that there has indeed been, despite all Code precautions, an increase in the daring innuendo and leering of the screen. This has appeared in imposing, pretentious productions amid a flying flurry of color, glamour and music. One familiar with the camera and the art of film montage and cutting inevitably discerns it. In the main it has been unimportant, but represents the continuous edging-up. The industry adopted and finally instrumented the Code as a course of refuge from the consequences of a flow of undiscipled production, resented by its public. That resentment can be incurred again — unless the public should cease to care very much about the pictures. W'*' DEFENSE ECONOMY — Sensationally, we discover that in its motion picture laboratory operations each year: "The United States Navy recovers 10,000 dollars in silver and 15,000 dollars in reusable fixer." The process takes out the silver by an electrolytic or plating process on cathodes, and then the fixing solution, mainly hyposulphite of sodium, is slightly refortified. Twenty-five thousand dollars saving a year is not to be scorned by the taxpayers who daily read of billions spent and spending. That darkroom policy might be expanded. The item comes from that amazing monthly abstract bulletitn issued by Kodak Research Laboratories which seems to record the essence of most everything that it printed about photography, a service little known in this industry. II Films Hue From II KO in Early 1954 RKO Radio announced this week that it will release 11 major productions, three of which are in 3-D and all but two of which are in color, during the first part of 1954. James R. Grainger, president, said Monday the schedule will be supplemented by nine reissues and that of the 11 new films, three are now before the cameras and the others are completed or in the editing stage. First to go into release will be “Killers from Space,” science-fiction drama, January 23. This will be followed by “The French Line," 3-D and Technicolor, starring Jane Russell, February 8; “She Couldn’t Say No,” with Robert Mitchum and Jean Simmons, February 15; and “Rob Roy,” Walt Disney live action drama in color by Technicolor, February 27. “Dangerous Mission,” in 3-D and Technicolor, starring Piper Laurie and Victor Mature, goes into release March 6 ; “Carnival Story,” in color with Anne Baxter and Steve Cochran, March 27 ; “Son of Sinbad,” 3-D and Technicolor, with Dale Robertson and Sally Forrest, April 3; “The Saint’s Girl Friday,” with Louis Hayward, April 17, and “Susan Slept Here,” Technicolor, with Dick Powell and Debbie Reynolds, May 8. The latter is now before the cameras. Also currently shooting are “Desperate Men,” Technicolor, starring John Payne, set for mid-May release, and “The Big Rainbow,” Technicolor, with Jane Russell, set as the company’s big June release. February reissues include “Rachel and the Stranger” and “Valley of the Sun.” These will be followed in March by “Tall in the Saddle” and “The Enchanted Cottage”; April, “Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House” and “They Won’t Believe Me”; May, “Spanish Main” and “Badman’s Territory”; June, “The Thing”; July, “Gunga Din” and “The Lost Patrol.” Republic Regional Meetings For Its Jubilee Year Regional sales meetings are being held by Republic Pictures in connection with its high budget product to be released during the first months of its Jubilee Year. Tuesday and Wednesday, metropolitan division manager James V. O’Gara met in Washington with managers and salesmen. Tuesday, eastern division sales manager John P. Curtin held a meeting in Boston, and Thursday another in Detroit. This week also, midwest division sales manager Paul Webster met with his staffs in St. Louis and Chicago. C. Bruce Newberv. director of sales, is visiting with staffs in Charlotte, Atlanta, and Dallas. He is to join Herbert J. Yates, company president, in New Orleans January 14 for the premiere of “Jubilee Trail” and then join western division manager Francis Bateman for coast meetings. 22 MOTION PICTURE HERALD, JANUARY 9, 1954