Motion Picture News (Jan-Feb 1922)

February 18, 1922 1107 S t 1 U iiimmiliiiiiuiiiiim imnuiimmfiii The Reader Has His Say fliiiiiiniiiiiiiitiMiiMi 1 iiiniiiiiiiniirMiiMMimmiiiiiiiiimiiMiiiiiiiMiiiiiiiimiii 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 mmiiimiiiniMiiriimii m 1 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 “ The Little Black Hen ” Motion Picture News, New York, N. Y. r(j;' Gentlemen: I am attaching hereto a jj clipping from our local paper that I think will apply to the present condition of the film industry, from the producer down to the exhibitor. I am sure that “ the worms ■are still here,” but, as the little black hen ' , said, “ you must dig like hell to get them,” J and I am doing some digging and getting ‘ | some worms, and I think that all “ The Little Black Hens ” in the film business are finding worms, but it’s “ the Red 1 Roosters ” that are complaining about the , dry times. 1 The booking guide is a big help these ( days, and I am very glad indeed that I r have a complete file of the News for three ,:i‘ years back. Steve M. Farrar, Colonial Amusement Co., Harrisburg, 111. ? 1 The clipping referred to by Mr. Farrar follows : THE LITTLE BLACK HEN ? . Said the little red rooster, “ Gosh all hemlock! Things j j are tough, . Seems that worms are getting scarcer, and I cannot I ! find enough, 1 Whatls become of all those fat ones is a mystery to me ; ' There were thousands through that rainy spell — but now '{ . where can they be?” II ! The old black hen who heard him didn’t grumble or complain, ‘ She had gone through lots of dry spells, she had lived j. through floods of rain, So she flew up on the grindstone, and she gave her claws a whet, As she said, “ I’ve never seen the time there weren’t worms to get.” She picked a new and undug spot ; the earth was hard and firm, The little rooster jeered, “New ground! That’s no place for a worm.” The old black hen just spread her feet, she dug both fast and free, “I must go to the worms,” she said; “the worms won’t come to me.” The rooster vainly spent his day, through habit, by the ways. Where fat round worms had passed in squads back in the rainy days, When nightfall found him supperless, he growled in accents rough, “ I’m hungry as a fowl can be. Conditions sure are tough.” He turned then to the old black hen and said, “ It’s worse with you, For you’re not only hungry but you must be tired, too. I rested while I watched for worms, so I feel fairly perk ; But how are you? Without worms, too? And after all that work? ” The old black hen hopped to her perch and dropped her eyes to sleep, And murmured in a drowsy tone, “ Young man, hear this and weep, I’m full of worms and happy, for I’ve dined both long and well, The worms are there as always — but I had to dig like hell! ” Oh, here and there red roosters still are holding sales positions, They cannot do much business now because of poor conditions, But soon as things get right again they’ll sell a hundred firms — Meanwhile the old black hens are out and gobbling up the worms. What of the Other 13 fA? It is seldom that the writer ever feels called upon to answer any of the editorial comment appearing in the various trade papers that comes to his desk, but attention has been called to a “Go to Work” essay that should not go unanswered. For the basic figures in this discussion we are going to take the work of Wm. A. Johnson of the Motion Picture News, who, in commenting on whether or not business is bad and whether or not exhibitors have a reason for feeling pessimistic, C[uotes government tax reports. In part, he says : “From June 1 to December 1, 1921, the distributors in this business, all of them, took in $58,674,010.80, and in the same period in 1920 $59,205,708.20, and we find that the income of the distributors is less than one per cent under the income for a similar period of a year ago.” And here is the rest : “Remembering that the theatre tax is based on all forms of amusement — legitimate, vaudeville, cabarets, etc., as well as pictures — theatre admissions for six months in 1921 were $385,899,799.70, and for 1920 $449,336,657.30.” And using the Editor’s own words, “The theatre business, in other words, has been off about 14E2 per cent since June 1 last. Which don’t agree very well with some of the rash and unsupported statements we have recently heard.” We pause to ask what of the other 13/4 per cent? Has Editor Johnson failed to note that while the producers and distributors have been getting practically as much rentals out of their product as they ever did, the exhibitor has been compelled to watch his profits decrease and decrease from 13J4 up ? Isn’t it about time that one. per cent and 14E2 per cent get within speaking distance ? 13E2 Per cent loss. That means the passing of deserved dividends, an eating up of deserved profits, the necessity in many cases of borrowing money and paying from 8 to 10 per cent, which, added to the other loss, brings the total up to an appalling figure of 23 per cent. Has the exhibitor reason to feel pessimistic? And all of the time the producer, who is much better financed than the small exhibitor, who is wondering where in hell that 13 per cent is coming from, can sit back and smoke big black cigars and see a rosy dawn of better business, for he is standing only a loss of less than one per cent, according to Editor Johnson. And up comes the question : Where is the exhibitor going to get the fatal 13/4 ? Here is the prescription given by Dr. Johnson : “Perhaps the theatres ought to lower their admissions. Perhaps they should do other things.” And here is the gem of the whole article : “These exhibitors must work out their own individual problems.” To the credit of the Editor of the News, he does say that they need rental adjustments, but for what reason? He says, using his words: “For the distributor’s own sake. He wants them to keep open.” Let us add, so they can make up that one per cent. He also prescribes percentage playing a “right and reasonable system” ; and certainly it would be enlightening to hear Mr. Johnson’s idea of “right and reasonable.” It might enlighten some of the exhibitors who spent as much on advertising a certain picture which they booked on the “right and reasonable” basis of 70 — 30 and one of the gibbest pictures of the century, and then made ordinary money. It will be interesting to every exhibitor to note what his solution of the problem is. Look ! “Many theatres must cut house expense.” Yes, be the janitors of their own places, trying to dig out the fatal 13J4, while the corpulent one, which resembles a Big I, are enjoying the steam heat. Would it not be fair that some producers also eliminate considerable unnecessary overhead, such as fabulous salaries, luxuriant offices and the general waste that is freely admitted by all. “Rentals must be adjusted, here and there, where the exhibitor is helpless (no, not against high rentals, but) against industrial depression.” Again old general depression is the sole cause. “A lot of other overpaid people (besides stars) must get down to hard earth.” Most exhibitors have been there for some time. And then the comments irrelatively on over-production and ends with the admonition, “ Go to Work ! ” For the information of' Editor Johnson it can be said that 99 and 44-100 percentage of exhibitors went to work when they opened their houses. . They had a little vacation a few years ago, when business was abnormal, and for the past year and a half have been making up for it. It is eminently unfair to assume that the industrial situation is altogether to blame for the deplorable condition that exists in the exhibitor circles to-day. I heartily agree with Editor Johnson that individual blindness and greed should be laid aside. Yes, indeed, the war is over; but Who regulates the price that can be paid for productions? The motion picture going public. If the public has had wages reduced so that it is necessary for exhibitors to reduce admissions, then it is high time that there be much more than a one per cent difference in the incoming revenue of producers and distributors. Film rentals must come down. How? As Editor Johnson has said to the exhibitor, it can now be said to the producer — that’s your problem. Possibly Editor Johnson does not know that a large percentage of exhibitors are to-day working for less money a week than they pay their operators. I do not believe that Editor Johnson wants to be unfair, and I think that he will agree that it is high time that the producer not expect rentals equal to those of the war period, when the exhibitor is going through the famine. It’s time that iqj4 per cent and one per cent be a little more evenly divided. H. M. Richey, Gen. Manager, M. P. T. O. of Michigan.