Motion Picture Reviews (1934)

Record Details:

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.

Four Motion Picture Reviews can feel the pulse of his community and know what actually is “offensive” to his patrons and box office receipts are the only index by which he may surely judge public taste. Double billing is the final blow to any immediate hope for family programs. As long as this objectionable trade practice is legal it is impossible to arrange satisfactory bookings for any but the least discriminating audiences. And the independent exhibitors, many of whom claim to be on the verge of bankruptcy, cannot compete with any neighborhood theatre which wishes to book two feature films. A large part of the public, still looking for bargains, rush for two for the price of one, and who can blame showmen for thinking that double billing is still acceptable to the general public? A year ago Southern California theatre owners voluntarily attempted to do away with the practice. Poor business tempted a few to break the agreement and immediately doublebilling became general again. Today the independent exhibitors are trying to revive the agreement. It must be voluntary because we understand that no penalty can be enforced legally. Organized women’s groups feel that such a gentleman’s agreement if successfully carried out, would do much toward bringing about an adjustment of this social problem. Recently the California Motion Picture Council, which includes representatives of the National Previewing groups, (General Federation of Women’s Club, Daughters of the American Revolution, National Society of New England Women, Los Angeles Branch, American Association of University Women, National Council Jewish Women, International Federation of Catholic Alumnae) met with the heads of the exhibitors of Southern California, both chain theatres and independent owners. They requested that family programs be made a policy in every theatre. Under the business conditions this was mutually decided to be impossible. The Council then presented the following request — i.e. that no theatre manager attract children into his theatre by any advertising or special inducement. In other words, since exhibitors announce that it is impossible to provide weekly programs suitable for youthful audiences, the council requests that they agree to omit from their policy — 1. Birthday clubs — or giving of free tickets to children as prizes or gifts. 2. Candy or other door prizes. 3. Stage attractions, try-outs, or other programs planned and advertised for children. 4. All serials: chapter films running ten or twelve weeks bought to attract children. As the complementing program is not consistently suitable the Council requests they be discontinued. 5. All advertising on screen, marquee or posters which suggest an appeal for children’s attendance, unless the entire program is suitable on that particular date. The theatres are taking the request under advisement — a procedure which takes times in reaching all managers. Some immediate policy must be outlined by exhibitors and producers and also by individuals to correct the present situation. We suggest that exhibitors adopt that of not exploiting children (as outlined above). Next when the single billing is possible, that they show one family program regularly each week. In the meantime we trust that the producers heed the call of the public and exhibitors and sincerely apply the plan of renewed efforts of adequate self-regulation which they have announced. The Catholic Bishops Committee while encouraging the hope that this regulation will be effective still adheres to its purpose of supporting only wholesome films “so that the producers may be constantly aware of the demand for clean entertainment.” We believe this an admirable decision and urge that everyone make a like pledge to himself to avoid all doubtful films; to know positively the type to which he pays admission; and to realize constantly his responsibility to assist in every possible way in outlining a plan to protect children from unsuitable films. We are in the process of outlining a plan for community cooperation in children’s entertainment which we hope may be helpful.