The screen writer (June 1947-Mar 1948)

REPORT ON QUESTIONNAIRE Here are a few comments from readers outside the Guild: "Give us more factual articles on what's wrong with Hollywood." "For my money the only publication that deals adequately with the creative aspects of motion pictures." "As a director, I have liked it very much to date. . . . The very clever article on De Mille and another similar one left me wondering if this personalized attack is fair — no matter how pleasant to read." "Magazine is well-balanced as it now stands, except it is too much of a house organ." "Broaden the title and content to include radio. The two fields are akin." "The most vital and interesting publication of its nature I have ever read. Print what YOU like, think, believe, want, etc., and let your readers take it or leave it. If it's good they'll take it — and they certainly have." "I appreciate the part the screen writers play in shaping events. I am a veteran of this war, and one who would like to think that the entertainment film industry can help people all over the world understand each other a little better, so that my generation may be the last veterans." "A lively and interesting journal which fills a special need." "The Screen Writer has been the best craft publication I ever encountered. Exceedingly valuable, not only to writers for the screen, but to other craftsmen of the medium." "The magazine should de-emphasize the pervasive war-like attitude slightly. That is, confine the writers' battle to one or two articles per issue and not have it spill over into other departments." "Your magazine is valuable, but your political and economic problems of interest only to your Guild should be published outside the magazine. Why not mimeograph them for members only, and keep the magazine clear for its creative and worthwhile job of providing us with a better understanding of the motion picture industry and the contribution of the writer to it." "Give more attention to world film problems, world production, world responsibilities of our industry and our writers." "The magazine is a disappointment in that it contains too much complaining and cynicism. It should be professionally helpful, not flippant or sour. You are conscious of the problem, as shown by the questionnaire. But I enjoy the magazine, good or bad. It has many virtues. I hope to be a permanent subscriber." "The only lack I have felt in The Screen Writer is the absence of material by actors or writers dealing with the problems they face working with each other in the industry." {From Ireland) "Found your S.W.G. Film Forum in April one of the best and most important contributions I have seen. American films in Europe lack taste. I hate to see an American film attempting an English story. Congratulations and thanks for the high standard of your magazine." Following are a few comments from questionnaires returned by many of the nation's leading drama and motion picture critics: "Please continue to be uniquely 'inside' and critical of the industry. That's your value, and it is a much greater value than has been adequately exploited in your circulation." "Keep it sound and beneficial — the Harpers of the industry, not the True Story." "So much fetid publicity tripe and fan treacle comes across this desk that when The Screen Writer arrives each month it's like a current of clean, cool air coming into a hot room. Keep it coming. A lot of us have learned a lot and gained new perspectives from it." "The Screen Writer is a monthly treat. I know of no publication that does its job so expertly." "I think that if the level of films is ever to be raised it must be done by closer relationship and more mutual understanding between critics and screen writers." "Circulation and prestige of your magazine should be nationally increased. Make it less of a house organ." "Your Guild magazine is one of the high spots of my reading program because it deals with the writing end of a business whose other angles are highly publicized." "Your magazine has given me a better understanding of my job as a film reviewer, and has sharpened my sense of values in judging pictures." In the foregoing the Editorial Committee has tried to present a fair sampling of questionnaire comments. It regrets space is not available for hundreds of other pertinent and interesting comments. It will try to present in succeeding issues some of the longer opinions and suggestions. In the meantime the Committee wishes to thank for their cooperation all readers who sent in questionnaire replies, and to assure them their intelligent response will be of great help in editing THE SCREEN WRITER. GORDON KAHN, Editor, for the Screen Writer Editorial Committee. 33