Motion Picture Herald (Oct-Dec 1956)

MOTION PICTURE HERALD December 8, 1956 Unfair Critics To The Editor: Motion picture exhibiting is a new phase in my life. I have been in the business for only six years and have been reading the trade journals and letters to the editor with a great deal of interest. It seems that everyone is trying to find something that may help our present deplorable situation. May I add the thoughts which have come to me lately? Motion picture exhibitors and film companies spend a great deal of money advertising their products in the Metropolitan newspapers and national magazines, but the motion picture editors and critics employed by these big publications seem to delight in picking a picture apart and very seldom have words to give a picture a boost. This attitude apparently has caught on with the public, because some patrons seem to look for faults in the picture they see instead of going to movies for entertainment. The production of most pictures is good but never has been technically perfect and a critic or patron who is looking for something to criticize in a picture can usually find it. Why don’t critics evaluate and report the entertainment value of the picture and write a few kind words once in a while? When a picture is of poor entertainment quality no one wants to know it more then the exhibitor himself, but when almost every new picture is panned by the critics and it becomes a popular habit to pick technical faults in a picture instead of going to the movies for entertainment there is something wrong. It seems like many of the “oldies” that are being shown on elevision receive better notices than our new and much better pictures do today. My theatre is in a small town about 200 miles from the metropolitan area where the daily newspapers are published which cover this area. Recently the movie critic of one of its papers, who very seldom has a kind word to say about any picture, went with his children to see a picture the second time and reported that he enjoyed the picture. His first notice on the picture was a comment that it was too long and he had a hard time keeping awake. After seeing it a second time he admitted it was a whale of a picture. That’s the kind of critics we have in this territory, which doesn’t help business one bit. If COMPO wants a project which could help the exhibitors I don’t think it could do better than start criticizing the critics and bringing unreasonable notices to the attention of the publisher of the papers or magazines in which they appear. If film critics would become film editors and just criticize and evaluate the entertain ment qualities of a picture, I think it would give their reading public a different attitude toward pictures and would be giving us a helping hand, or is that oo much to ask? — DONALD T. DAWSON, Orpheum Theatre, Ortonville, Minn. • Service First To the Editor: An important consideration for exhibitors is the imperative need for the attainment of the highest possible standards of service in our theatres, and what is more important, to maintain these standards zealously. For there are still situations where service is apathetic, even negligible. Oddly enough, many theatre men are aware of this, yet nothing concrete is ever done to rectify it. No attitude could be more myopic than this. Too many times patrons have been cold-shouldered in theatres, brushed off even when they presented a legitimate complaint, or could not find a member of the managerial staff in attendance. If we want to rebuild our attendance, we must go after it. This is something we must do more than talk about; we must act! We must invoke a nationwide drive by circuits and independents alike, to convince our patrons and those we have lost that it is still preferable to relax in a theatre’s clean, comfortable surroundings instead of remaining home to watch television or seeking entertainment elsewhere. We must roll out the red carpet for the public and provide staffs that are attentive to their every whim. The underlying theme of courtesy and service should be drilled home to cashiers, doormen, ushers and sales attendants. Brusque employees who can’t conform to our requisites of pleasantness and courtesy should be weeded out. Managers and assistants should make it a must to greet and talk to as many patrons as possible, a vital factor in establishing goodwill for the theatre and building up a steady following. And we must provide many more patron services: check room facilities, a game or reading room where patrons can amuse themselves while waiting for a picture to end so they can see the show from the beginning. Large first run theatres might improvise facilities for a nursery or playroom, where parents could leave the kiddies under the supervision of trained attendants while they enjoy the show. Properly exploited, this baby-sitter service could well be responsible for increased attendance during matinees. — MELVIN AARONSON, New York, N. Y. Page WILLIAM HOLDEN is voted the money-making star of year 12 KENNETH MORE tops British exhibitors star poll 15 ALLIED convention outlines construc five action 16 UNIVERSAL plans release of 12 films in four months 18 BENJAMIN THAU named head of MGM studio operations 27 UNITED ARTISTS charts 1957 promo tion program 28 BRITISH film industry gets re ady for petrol rationing 30 SERVICE DEPARTMENTS Refreshment Merchandising 46-50 Film Buyers’ Rating 3rd Cover Hollywood Scene 33 Managers’ Round Table 41 The Winners' Circle 39 National Spotlight 35 In for DECEMBER Section begins opposite 50 MODERNIZATION as a Program SERVICE NEEDS of Sound Equipment REMODELING of a 30-Year-Old Theatre IN PRODUCT DIGEST SECTION REVIEWS (In Product Digest): Hollywood or Bust, Baby Doll, Four Girls in Town, The Cruel Tower, A Woman's Devotion, Ali-Baba Showmen's Reviews 177 Short Subjects 178 What the Picture Did for Me 179 The Release Chart 180 MOTION PICTURE HERALD, Martin Quigley, Editor-in-Chiel and Publisher; Martin Quigley, Jr., Editor; Charles S. Aaronson, Managing Editor; Floyd E. Stone, Photo Editor; Vincent Canby, News Editor; Ray Gallagher, Advertising Manager; Gus H. Fausel, Production Manager. Bureaus: Hollywood, Samuel D. Berns, Manager; William R. Weaver, Editor, Yucca-Vine Building, Telephone HOIlywood 7-2145; Washington, J. A. Otten, National Press Club; London, Hope Williams Burnup, Manager; Peter Burnup, Editor; William Pay, News Editor, 4 Bear St., Leicester Sq. Correspondents in principal capitals of the world. Member Audit Bureau of Circulation. Motion Picture Herald is published every Saturday by Quigley Publishing Company, Inc., Rockefeller Center, New York City 20. Telephone Circle 7-3100; Cable address: "Quigpubco, New York", Martin Quigley, President; Martin Quigley, Jr., Vice-President; Theo. J. Sullivan, Vice-President and Treasurer; Leo J. Brady, Secretary. Other Quigley Publications: Better Theatres and Bettec Refreshment Merchandising, each published thirteen times a year as a section of Motion Picture Herald; Motion Picture Daily, Television Today, Motion Picture Almanac, Television Almanac, Fame. 8 MOTION PICTURE HERALD, DECEMBER 8, 1956