Moving Picture World (Jul-Sep 1911)

270 THE MOVING PICTURE WORLD Know in» that many of the General Film Company offices are giving service that is highly satisfactory to the exhibitor, we referred the above complaint to the main office. Before making any comment, the manager read an equally strong letter from a committee of exhibitors in the same section complaining bitterly against demands that the reel-, Ik returned after the show the same night or before a certain hour the following morning. I le said : "We are Irving to please the exhibitor to the best of our ability, but if the reels are not returned in time they cannot pass through the inspection department, neither can one exhibitor get his reels early if the man who had them the previous day brings them in late." So the one complaint answers the other, and the only solution that would answer the wishes of both complainants is that the exchanges purchase double the number of copies and work them on half time, which, of course, they could not do at the present rental prices. When an exhibitor take> the trouble to write to his trade paper setting forth bis grievances with the service he is getting, it is but reasonable to suppose that before doing so he has tried to bring the exchange to his way of thinking. Some of the complaints we have published, others we have referred to the proper persons for investigation. When these complaints are discussed with the exchanges, the invariable reply is that the "exhibitors are born kickers and do not know what they want." Such a reply is not only unjust, but it is absurd. We have had complaints from exhibitors that they cannot get what they are willing to pay for and which is available in the market. With many of them it is not a question of price. Is it any wonder then that the down-trodden worm shows a disposition to turn, and that at the Exhibitors' Convention at Cleveland they will discuss ways and means to protect their investments. At the present time the policy of the competing groups of manufacturers is the (oiling competition of quality. The exhibitor, the wise exhibitor, does not desire some 36 licensed and 48 independent releases per week, manv of which they are ashamed to show on the screen. They would be better satisfied with half that number, provided they were good productions, pictures that they could show several times, pictures that would satisfy their patrons and call for repeats. With few exceptions the manufacturer who has doubled or trebled his output has done so at the expense of quality. It has been argued that the increased program prevents duplication in congested centers, but what is to prevent the greedy exhibitor who started the daily change from changing his pictures twice a dav just to outdo his neighbor? If he is willing to pay for it there are no doubt exchanges who will be foolish enough to supply him. The popularity of a number of past productions, some of them two and three reels, has proved to the discriminating exhibitor that the success of his business depends upon quality and not on quantity. The present system of working is a-serious handicap to quality. We know of one manufacturer whose average sale per release is less than one-third of what it was when he was turning out half the number of weekly releases. Is it to be expected that this manufacturer can put into his work the same amount of money and brains that he could with the larger salese Tre exhibitors .very justly complain at the drop in quality and bewail the plethora of pointless comedy, weary drama and overdone and underdone Indian and cowbov ad nauseam: but thev are themselves largely to blame for the condition. We doubt if there is any manufacturer to-day who would not nrefer to be turning out one good reel per week of which he could sell from 150 to 200 copies, than three and foui reels of stuff which can only command a sale of from 40 to 50 copie-. Aside from the larger profit as an inducement, we bcT'evc there is not a manufacturer in the field who does not have the ambition to proceed along the lines of quality in-tead of quantity. That is evident from their repeated attempts to produce from the classics and the popular authors such as I)icken> and Hugo, but the single release 1.000foot reel and daily release system renders it impossible to do justice to subjects that would raise the motion picture above its present level. If the number of present available releases is to be kept up or increased, as the indications are. an open market is the only hope. It would at least place a premium on quality and it would benefit the progressive manufacturer. Whether or no the manufacturers as a whole desire an open market, we know of several who would welcome it. Unless we are very much mistaken all the manufacturers will have to accept the issue at no very distant date, for their commercial organizations have failed to turn the restricted market to any better use than fostering incompetency and discouraging the progress of the art. The Film Maker's Responsibilities. "How shall we plan, that all be fresh and new? "Important matter, yet attractive, too; "For 'tis my pleasure to behold them surging, "When to our booth the current sets apace, "And with the tremendous oft-repeated urging, "Onward they squeeze through the gates of grace." The first and foremost responsibility of the film maker consists in taking a just view of his public. He is in far more danger of underestimating, than overestimating the intelligence, education and taste of his audience. Let him remember that, the whole show, business has, within the last few decades, undergone changes for the better. Fly-by-night enterprises, vagrant and irresponsible circuses, disreputable dime museums, chambers of horrors, etc., common enough within the memory of most of us, have largely become things of the past. The film maker is right in thinking well of himself, but he must likewise think well of the men, women and children, whom he is privileged to amuse, entertain and instruct. The second great responsibility, therefore, should consist in eliminating everything that could by any possibility offend. Every human being has a spiritual nature, which finds expression in the varying religions of the day. Above all things this feeling should be scrupulously respected. It is not a sectarian feeling, but the universal religion of humanity. This is no idle warning, for we have but very recently seen both Independent and Licensed films, more or less grossly violating the religious sensibilities of different Christian churches. We do not for an instant assume that such offences are committed willfully, but heedlessness in such matters is in its effects at least fully as reprehensible as malice aforethought. American womanhood represents a fine type and is entitled to great respect at the hands of the film maker. American chivalry is not a surface sentiment, but is deeply rooted in the national character. If in the film story ''lovely woman stoops to folly," let it. as a rule, be a very human and natural folly, one, which is allied to virtue and goodness, rather than to vice or viciousness. Everything, at which the better nature of man revolts, should be avoided. The antics of insane people, the physical or moral deformities of men or women are not laughable, but intensely sad and distressing to every normal mind. The oddities of certain nations are a legitimate subject for film comedy, but there are limits, beyond which it is not safe to venture. Humor here degenerates too easily into ridicule and ridicule is both cruel and offensive.