Movie Age (1927)

AUGUST 20, 1927. PAGE 7 “U” Short Product Mgr. Says Shorts are Selling Better than Ever Before Hal Hodes, Universal short product sales manager, who has just arrived back in New York after a seven weeks’ trip through the middle west, reports that the short subject market is wide open with more shorts than evei% being set in by theatre owners. The starting up of several new short subject production units, the addition of short subjects to the program of two more big companies and the general discussion in the trade and trade papers of short product dur¬ ing the past year has acted to increase the demand for one and two-reel pic¬ tures to a surprising degree, he states. The exhibitor is falling back on short product to build up his program, Hodes said. There is a strong agitation for less presentations and more pictures. Ex¬ hibitors are cutting out the ginger bread and lining up good short subjects for their houses. “The added competition in the short product field has improved our business rather than hurt it,” Hodes declared, “because the general talk, publicity and advertising of short product has re-es¬ tablished this form of film entertain¬ ment in the estimation of exhibitors who had turned towards vaudeville and pre¬ sentations. I find that much more short product is being bought as a result. The market is wide-open.” First “Henry & Polly” Comedy To Be Released Sept. 18 Taylor Holmes and Leah Baird are the stars of “Henry and Polly Come¬ dies,” modern versions of the famous Mr. and Mrs. Sidney Drew domestic farces, which will be released by Pathe. “Should A Mason Tell?” the first of these two-reel subjects is announced for release on September 18. This new series is being produced by Gaiety Pictures, Inc., whose president, Amedee J. Van Buren, sponsored the two-reel Drew comedies that became classics of the cinema. Montana In “Plumb Dumb” “Bull” Montana appears as the ring opponent of “Poodles” Hanford in the Educational-Mermaid Comedy, “Plumb Dumb,” in the prize fight sequence. The fistic encounter is one of the sev¬ eral hilarious spots of the comedy. Producers Deny Wilson’s Charges of Mediocrity Frank Wilson’s Statements in Regard to Present System of Production Stirs Indignation Of West Coast Executives. When Frank R. Wilson, production financier and director of Wesco, pre¬ sented his views on present day pro¬ duction in an interview with The Film Daily, he unconsciously set off a bomb¬ shell. West Coast producers immediate¬ ly came to the front with the proclama¬ tion that pictures today are not medio¬ cre as Mr. Wilson declared. Mr. Wilson returned to New York re¬ cently after having spent some time ob¬ serving conditions in the California studios, and the financier minces no words in declaring that things are not as they should be in the studios. Some of the statements that brought fire are as follows: “Mediocrity in pictures is driving peo¬ ple away from the box office and the sooner producers realize the fact the better it will be for all concerned. “The tremendous amount of money invested in theatres must be protected by quality entertainment which is not being provided. “Motion pictures are coming through a bottle and the neck is too small. “Efforts of producers to annex all available talent has built up a wall around production, with producers draw¬ ing only from within, thus shutting out and discouraging new ideas which might provide the bettermen-t in quality which now is lacking.” Quoting Mr. Wilson, by courtesy of Film Daily, we give some highlights of his interview: “Production is the sore thumb of the industry,” he declares, “made so by some of the fallacious policies now in force at the studios which have destroyed the community of interest so essential to quality production. “Producers must realize that if the industry is to prosper, motion pictures must improve and they are not doing so,” he continued. “I do not profess to know the cure. If I did, I most cer¬ tainly should apply it. “Producers have built up big studio organizations, which they feel can sup¬ ply all their needs, production has been put on an assignment basis, instead of efforts being made to secure the best creative minds to carry out the work at hand. “Because of this situation, producers are drawing only from within the pro¬ duction of pictures, thus building a wall around the studios which is shutting out and discouraging new ideas,” he con¬ tinued. “The producers feel that they have all the necessary cogs for a pro¬ duction machine. Thus, if a new idea is outlined, its sponsor is faced with the situation that the year’s budget has been drawn up, the overhead figured in detail and the production schedule set at a definite number of pictures. “To accept the new idea would mean the spreading of the overhead over 51 instead of 52 pictures, as the case might be, thus raising production costs,” he points out. “Producers figure that their machinery must work at maximum speed, otherwise the portions of it idle represent a dead loss. They also are working on the presumption that their employes, regardless of whether or not the work is creative, always deliver a caliber of work which is equal to their best work. “The ‘conference table’ system also is retarding progress. It is a case of ‘too many cooks spoiling the broth’ with producers feeling that if, for in¬ stance, one man can writ a brilliant story, the association of several other persons on the project would result in a betterment of quality in direct ratio to the number employed in its making. This idea is about as logical as the pre¬ sumption that if H. G. Wells can write a story of certain literary excellence, he could write one three times better, if three other writers collaborated on the story with him.” “Production costs have mounted out of all proportion to revenue, he declared, without betterment of quality, because the proper esprit de corps is lacking at the studios. “Perhaps independent production will help solve the problem,” continued Mr. Wilson. “Surely, independent product¬ ion offers more incentive for real ef¬ fort. There seems to be a tendency to cut down on production and turn to the independents to supply product on a bas¬ is of individual merit for release through the big distributing companies. “Remuneration for production work¬ ers ultimately must be on a basis de¬ termined by what they produce, which is a profit-sharing basis. “New ideas are needed from the out¬ side. It is time for producers to pull down the walls and invite the world in to help better pictures. Some agency must be provided to encourage independ¬ ent production, providing the ideas so necessary to protect the terrific invest¬ ments in theatres and the only way they can be protected is through quality en¬ tertainment.” The reaction to Wilson’s assertions aroused objections in Hollywood and sharp criticisms to the financier’s state¬ ments relative to mediocrity in pictures driving people away from the box office were issued by studio executives. What they say is quoted below in brief, by courtesy of Film Daily: (Continued on Page 8)