Moving Picture Age (Jan-Dec 1921)

EDITORIALS Return Films and Slides Promptly A FEW" months ago an editorial on the subject of, "Why You Did Not Get Your Film," received favorable comment not only from professional distributors of non-theatrical film, but also from several universities and others distributing film. One university desired to reprint this entirely and distribute it to each school and church on their list to receive films. This is a subject which cannot be emphasized too greatly. The Iowa State College distributes film to about 175 communities each week. Some of these communities are on regular circuits, while others receive film at special dates. To keep these supplied when they want film or slides requires careful scheduling and the correct knowledge of the time required to deliver a film as well as the length of time necessary to either forward it on to its next stop or ship it back to the university again before the film can be scheduled for its next stop. However, if through carelessness one user holds a film an extra day or so it may mean that the next party to receive the film would have an evening's entertainment or a day's school use scheduled and have no film to show. Because films are not paid for or if the rental is low does not decrease the necessity for regular returns of film. This is as necessary in community work as in regular theatrical work, although the theatrical distributors provide a penalty which makes it worth while for a renter to return the film promptly. It might not be a bad plan for universities to charge double rates for films held over and not supply any more film until these rates were paid. The urgency for prompt attention to this is so great that practically any penalty attached to the nonreturn of film would be too small. Getting More Good Film ONE student of the non-theatrical use of motion pictures estimates that before the end of 1921 about 4,000 churches will have installed projection machines and be exhibiting motion pictures. Probably an equal number of schools will have added projectors, and at least some of these will be used in community work. The actual number of people reached and influenced by these 8,000 machines and the carefully selected films they project would be difficult to estimate. What will be the result of this newly created demand for good pictures? The effect of those machines already installed has been pronounced enough to be acknowledged and in some quarters combated. The non-theatrical film producers are getting ready to supply the film necessary to take care of the newly created demand. But the effect has been felt even outside the nontheatrical field by the producers and exhibitors of theatrical films. When the people began to see that good, wholesome pictures could be produced and were entertaining, a reaction set in against the unwholesome pictures which were crowding good pictures off the screen. This culminated in the myriad of censorship statutes and ordinances which were under consideration during the past winter. Producers of theatrical film have now agreed to clean up their own productions if given the opportunity and if censorship restrictions are not placed on films. They saw the change in sentiment through a decreased pulling power of these films, and realized also that the increasing millions of church members, many of whom are not "movie" patrons, will be added to their attendance if films are supplied which will meet with their approval. However, the theatrical film producers cannot be blamed wholly for not producing more films of this kind. The public did not endorse the good films produced sufficiently to make them financial successes, and any business, unless philanthropically sustained, must consider the financial returns. George Beban, in his personal appearance throughout the country in connection with the showing of his film, "One Man in a Million," tells of this lack of good film and of an agreement of ten film producers each to get out two clean films. Of the eighteen produced to date only two have returned even the cost of production. This would indicate the need of better support of the good films. The list of approved films printed each month in Moving Picture Age deserves your support. These films have been reviewed and approved by the National Motion Picture League and deserve the support of those interested in getting better pictures. ' If you go to the theater, glance over this list and watch for the films given here. If choosing films for a church, school or community showing the suggestions from this list may be relied upon. Up to this writing Moving Picture Age has never received any comments against any of the films recommended in this list. The way to get more good films is to boost and support those that are good. With the increasing demand from churches, schools and communities, more good film will be necessary. He Who Never Blunders — YOU know how tradition explains the man who makes no mistakes — that he has never done anything. When we published "1001 Films" we felt that such a volume would satisfy the urge for a source book of reliable films for non-theatrical use ; and our correspondence indicates that this book is highly prized and constantly used by the average subscriber. But in accomplishing this definite service we, like the usual person who attempts a new thing, have made our share of mistakes. For instance, we have just discovered that "Heart of the Hills," "The Kingdom of Dreams," and "Daddy Long Legs" were erroneously credited to Famous Players-Lasky, when credit should have been given to Associated First National Pictures, Inc. There are unquestionably many other mistakes of this character, errors either in the original information or in our preparation of the copy. Will you who use this book co-operate with us to the extent of telling us of the errors of fact you have uncovered? We will immediately print the correction, and also include the change when "1001 Films" is revised ; and this co-operation of yours will assist us in rendering better service to every subscriber.