/ 773 7 / £> 5 / 3 f
V ,-iC
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Bates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 11.00
Canada and Mexico.. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HABBISON
Editor and Publisher
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors.
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Established July 1, 1919
TeL : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address:
Harreports
Tl( (Bentley Coda)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. IX
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1927 No. 45
DON’T BE A SUCKER!
Part of a letter from Crockett Brown, of Grand
Theatre, Nashwauk, Minnesota, published in
“Exhibitors Herald,” of October 8, reads as fol-
lows :
“The trade papers announced that M-G-M
would release ‘The Big Parade’ to small town
theatres in September. I should have known
better but I didn’t so I asked our good natured
M-G-M exchange manager to quote me the jjViee
for Nashwauk which is a very small town (N. B.
2,922 population). He said I must play it four
days, the admission must be fifty cents, the rental
is based on two full houses per day, meaning it
would cost me $400 per day or $1,600 for four
days.”
The Aldine Theatre, a Loew house, in Pitts-
burgh, showed “The Big Parade” at 25 cents mini-
mum up to one o’clock, and 35 cents the remainder
of the day. The Lincoln Theatre, at Washington,
D. C., showed the picture at 25 cents and 35 cents
during the day, and at 15 cents to children at
10 :30, Saturday morning. Yet they ask you to
charge 50 cents minimum.
Insist that you show this picture at the same
prices they are charging in their own theatres.
Don’t let them ruin your reputation among the
public by making them believe that you are tak-
ing advantage of them. And do not agree to a
guarantee; if it is to be a gamble, as percentage
surely is, let it be a gamble on both sides. Do not
accept the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer sales plan on
“The Big Parade” or “Ben Hur” ; if the Nash-
wauk exhibitor had accepted it, he would have lost
$393 even if every man, woman, or child, babies
and old men as well as old women included v had
attended the performances. Tell the salesman
that according to their statement they have spent
hundreds of thousands of dollars to exploit “The
Big Parade.” If so, it should draw irrespective of
whether you do any additional advertising or not.
Why, then, the guarantee? Their excuse for de-
manding a minimum guarantee has been their de-
sire to make you work hard to exploit it. But since
the picture is already exploited, is a guarantee now
necessary?
Don’t be a sucker !
GIVE THE SMALLER FELLOWS A
CHANCE!
When Theatre Owners’ Chamber of Commerce
held that memorable meeting at the Hotel Astor
on July 14, and assigned to me the task of analyz-
ing the programs of the various producer-distribu-
tors with a view to telling the exhibitors how much
each producer-distributor’s product was worth this
year, and also to suggest to the exhibitors to go on
a buyer’s strike so as to bring the film prices down,
the thought the New York exhibitors had in mind
was to bring down the film prices the big com-
panies charged, and to help the smaller of the
national distributors and the regional exchanges
sell more film, enabling them to make better pic-
tuiles this year ; we all realized that feeding the
big iellows was a dangerous thing, not only for
•* .-W.tfrer- distr ibu.'-^rs but also for the
exhibitors themselves, for what really kept prices
from going still higher was not the good-hearted-
ness of the big fellows, but the ability of the
smaller fellows to make good pictures. Without
the small fellows, it is unlikely that many exhibi-
tors would have survived the greed of the big pro-
ducer-distributors.
It seems, however, that the thing did not work
according to the original intention ; I have been in-
formed that the exhibitors will buy the program
of one of the biggest producers at the big produc-
er’s own prices, and, fortified with pictures for
half of their play-dates, offer the smaller producer-
distributors low rentals and tell him : “Take it or
leave it.” The original intention was to induce
the exhibitors to buy the program of one of the
smaller national distributors or of a regional ex-
change, and, thus fortified, to tell the big fellows to
go to blazes with their high price notions.
Unless the exhibitors change their attitude, next
season there will be no abatement in the high film
prices. Let the exhibitors go on a buyers’ strike
if they will ; it will prove of no avail, if they will
continue fighting for the pictures of those that
have brought the prices to the present level, and
paying for them anything these producer-distribu-
tors want, and blackjacking the little fellows.
Give the smaller fellows a chance ! They have
good stuff this year ; why not help them, enabling
them to help you ?
THE C. & M. AMUSEMENT CO.
Marietta, Ohio
Oct. 25, 1927.
P. S. Harrison,
New York City.
Dear Sir:
Referring to your issue of Oct. 22nd, covering
what the Trade Practices Conference has accom-
plished, we think that you have covered this situ-
ation more thoroughly than any other report we
have read. W e appreciate what has been done and
think it eventually will be a great help to the ex-
hibitors.
Yours very truly,
THE C. & M. AMUSEMENT CO.
C
\
November 5, 1927
178
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Harvester” — with a Special Cast
(F. B. O., Nov. 23; 7,044 ft.; 81 to 100 min.)
Plots taken from Gene Straton Porter’s novels are
different plots taken from the novels of other authors.
And there is a tenderness in the nature of this author’s
characters that is not usually found in the characters of
other authors’ stories. The characters in “The Harvester,”
like those in “Keeper of the Bees,” “Laddie,” and “The
Magic Garden,” portray tenderness that is appealing to the
average picture-goer. There are -a number of situations
where the spectator is made to lo\p the hero for the good-
ness of his heart. When he finds out that his wife had
promised to marry another man, because she felt she was
under a moral obligation to him for having cared for her
mother during her fatal illness, he is heart-broken, well
enough, but he is willing to grant her freedom for the
sake of her happiness. This situation has been handled
very well. The meetings of hero and heroine in the
woods, leading to their marriage, are tenderly and whole-
somely sentimental. In fact, almost every foot of this
film arouses tender sentiment in the spectator. Mr.
Leo J. Meehan has directed this picture with the same
skill he has directed his other pictures that were taken
from this author’s noVels. Orville Caldwell makes a good
hero, and Natalie Kingston a good heroine. Will R.
Walling, Jay Hunt, Lola Todd, Edward Hearn, and
Fanny Midgley are in the supporting cast; they do good
work. The characterization of Edward Hearn as Dr.
Harmon, is not very successful ; one cannot form a cor-
rect opinion as to what he is. In the flash-back that shows
his treating the heroine’s mother, the heroine is shown
promising to go to him if he would continue caring for
her ill mother. But it is not made plain whether the
Doctor was in love with her or merely wanted her as his
mistress. This obscurity in characterization is found also
later on. While this defect is not bad enough to affect
the appealing qualities of the picture, if it were corrected,
the picture would be improved much.
The story deals with a hero that made a living by col-
lecting herbs and selling them. In the woods he meets
the heroine, the girl he once dreamed about. One day he
learns that her uncle mistreated her. His sympathy hav-
ing turned into love, he asks her to marry him. Even-
tually she accepts his proposal and marries him. One
day she takes ill and, thinking she would die, confesses to
the husband that she made a mistake in marrying him, for
she had been worshipping a doctor, who had treated her
mother when ill, and had helped her financially. The
hero is heart-broken ; he goes for the doctor and asks him
to cure her of her illness. Medicine does her no good.
So the hero, with the help of a friend, an elderly woman,
tries to cure her by thoughts of love and kindness. He
succeeds in saving her life. In the end, the heroine learns
to love the hero, driving the doctor away from her
thoughts.
“The Fourflusher” — with Marian Nixon,
George Lewis, Churchill Ross and
Eddie Phillips
{Universal- Jewel, February 19, 1928)
The value of this picture lies chiefly in the youthfulness
of the principal characters. The story is not bad, but it
is not so strong ; it depicts a young man making success in
life, both in the world of business and in the world of
love. There is some comedy here and there, and one’s
interest is held fairly tight all the w'ay through. The love
affair between George Lewis and Marian Nixon is charm-
ing. The plot has been founded on the story by Caesar
Dunn; it has been directed by Wesley Ruggles well. All
the players act well : —
The hero, a young clerk in a shoe store, while in com-
pany with other young men, sees an attractive young
woman (heroine) and in a spirit of fun tells his friends
that he knows her. His friends laugh at him. In order
to “show” them, he approaches the heroine and opens up
a conversation with her. The heroine, noticing the young
hero’s attractiveness, invites him into her car. In order
to carry on his pretense, he asks her to drop him at a
bank where he made her think he worked. A day or
so afterwards she enters a shoe store and is surprised to
find the hero there. The two young folk soon fall in love
with each other. The hero is discharged from the shoe
store. A chum of his quits his job, too, and goes with
the hero. The chum advises the hero to seek a loan at
the bank to go in business, but the bank refuses him the
loan. Shortly afterwards an uncle of the hero comes to
town, visits the banker, and places a large sum of money
with the bank, with instructions to lend it to the hero,
whom he had never seen, without telling him anything
about it. The hero is sent for, and receives the loan he
had asked for. With the money of his uncle, the hero
makes a success, both as a business man and as a lover.
Young folk should be pleased to see a young man make
a success in life ; they should be inspired to exert hard
efforts, too.
“A Dog of the Regiment” —
with Rin-Tin-Tin
(Warner Bros., Oct. 29; 58 to 71 min.)
Like the other Rin-Tin-Tin melodramas, “A Dog of
the Regiment,” too, should please those who like pic-
tures in which a dog is the outstanding player. The story
is supposed to be the life of Rin-Tin-Tin himself, from
the time he was a puppy to the time when he fell into the
h^ands of an American, fighting in France. There are
scjvrjral thrills in the picture, and no little suspense. Most
of tne thrills are in the situations that show the American
hero, an aviator, who had been downed inside the Ger-
man lines, escaping by stealing a German aeroplane and
reaching the allied lines. The scenes that show Rin-Tin-
Tin stealing the German General’s food and taking it to
the hero are comical. The plot has been founded on a
story by Albert S. Howson; it has been directed well by
Ross Lederman, from a scenario by Charles R. Condon.
Tom Gallery, Dorothy Gulliver, and John Peters are in
the supporting cast.
“Dress Parade” — with William Boyd and
Bessie Love
( Pathe-DeMille , Oct. 30; 6,599 ft.; 76 to 94 min. )
Entertaining. It is a comedy-romance, with plentiful
light comedy. The action unfolds at the West Point
Academy, the scenes having been photographed on the
spot. The comedy is caused by the forwardness of the
hero, “the biggest noise in Bergen County,” who had,
through political pull, been sent to West Point, just to
get “even” with a young cadet, because he had told him
that he was “out of place” in those grounds, when he
happened to visit the Academy and found himself face to
face with the heroine, an attractive girl, whom the young
cadet hoped to marry. There was much opportunity for
good comedy in this story, and director Donald Crisp
fully availed himself of it. There are some thrills to-
ward the end, too ; those are caused by the fact that the
lives of the hero and of his rival for the hand of the
heroine had been placed into jeopardy: The Commander
of a sham battle ordered the ground cleared of all cadets
for the battle, so that no life might be lost by the
target shooting*. But the hero, who was brooding over
the fact that he thought he had lost the love of the
heroine, did not get out of the grounds in time. The
rival, who had been made responsible for the lives of
the cadets of his company, rides on horseback to tell the
hero to get out of the way. But the shooting starts
before they have time to get out. The rival is wounded
but the hero risks his own life to save his. It is during
the shooting that one feels apprehensive lest the hero
and his rival be killed.
The plot has been founded on the story by Major
Robert Glassburn, Major Alexander Chilton, and Her-
bert David Walter; it has been directed by Mr. Crisp
with great skill, from a screen play by Douglass Z. Doty.
Mr. Boyd and Miss Love fit their parts perfectly. Hugh
Maurice Ryan, Louis Natheaux and Clarence Gendert
Allan, as the rival, is very good. Walter Tennyson,
do good work in the supporting cast.
The picture has been produced with the co-operation
of the West Point Military authorities. While it conveys
a great deal of propaganda, such propaganda is not con-
veyed offensively and it is not unpleasant to the average
picture-goer. The showing of character building among
the cadets cannot prove offensive to anybody.
The fine bearing of the West Point cadets makes the
picture pretty fascinating.
N ovember 5,1 927
HARRISON’S REPORTS
179
“No Place to Go”— with Mary Astor and
Lloyd Hughes
( First Nat., Oct. 30; 6,403 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
Not much to it. Nothing that the principal characters
do arouses the spectators’ interest tensely. It is the story
of a wealthy heroine, a girl of an incurable romantic dis-
position, and of a hero, a young bank clerk, who loves
her. But she will not marry him unless he is willing to
marry her in the great outdoor altar. While in a yacht,
cruising in the South Seas, the two elope. Their absence,
which is soon discovered, is the cause of great worry.
The yacht party searches the island. On the island the
lives of the hero and the heroine are placed in danger,
when they are attacked by the savages. But they succeed
in escaping. Soon they are rescued. When they return
home they marry, but only with the understanding that
an imaginary line should divide his apartment from hers.
Causes for jealousy arise, resulting in some tiffs. But
the heroine realizes how much she needs the hero’s pro-
tection when she, frightened by the image of a savage,
which was reflected in the mirror of her room from an
electric sign, screams and falls into the arms of the hero,
who had rushed to her rescue.
The plot has been founded on the story “Isles of
Romance.’’ Evidently the original story had the hero
and the heroine become united as man and wife on the
island, solemnizing their marriage by a priest, minister
or judge when they reached civilization; biit >n the pic-
ture this has been glossed over.
“The Angel of Broadway” — with Leatrice
Joy and Victor Varconi
(Pathe-DeMille, Oct. 2; 6,555 ft.; 76 to 93 min.)
There are sobs in several situations ; in some, the in-
terest lags. But on the whole, “The Angel of Broadway”
should prove an appealing entertainment. There is some
comedy here and there, but not enough of it to be remem-
bered ; its chief reliance is drama. The theme is “tick-
lish,” but Miss Lois Webber, the only woman that has
made permanent success as a director, has directed it
well.
The plot deals with a cabaret dancer that burlesques
the Salvation Army and makes money with it. But, as
the end justifies the means, it is improbable that any one
will take offense at this mockery, for the heroine is toward
the end shown turning into a real Salvation Army lass ;
the garb had “taken hold” of her soul.
The honors for the best acting go to Victor Varconi,
the hero of the piece. Leatrice Joy is so-so. May Robson,
Alice Lake, Elise Bartlett and others are in the support-
ing cast. The plot has been founded on a story by
Lenore J. Coffee: —
The heroine, a cabaret dancer, chances to pass by a
Salvation Army street meeting and, in fun, joins the meet-
ing. She is invited to their headquarters. There she
pretends that she, too, had been saved and tells publicly
of her past sins. The hero, a former sinner, helping the
Salvation Army in little things, is attracted by the new
soul that had been saved. He asks her to come again.
She calls often. He falls in love with her. She con-
ceives the idea that if she were to put on a “Salvation
Army” act at the cabaret she would make a hit. She
puts the act on and it proves a success. The hero finds
out what she really is. He is shocked, upbraids her,
and tells her that he would go back to his old girl, be-
cause, although that girl had been making her living by
selling her body, he said that she was at least honest
about it. He calls on the girl and finds her dying, having
taken poison out of despair. The heroine, depressed by
her fight with the hero, leaves the cabaret in her Sal-
vation Army dress. The dying girl begs for some one
to pray for her during her last moments. The hero sends
a neighbor out to find a member of the Salvation Army
to pray for her. The neighbor comes upon the heroine
and, thinking her a Salvation Army girl, pulls her into
the dying woman’s room. The dying woman’s entreaties
so move her that she kneels and prays for her soul. After
the death of the woman, hero and heroine make up and
marry.
There is no mistake as to what the heroine is; it is
plainly implied that she is not a virtuous woman. There
is considerable drinking and jazzing in the scenes depict-
ing the Night Club in New York. And the bare legs of
the cabaret dancers are shown no little.
“The Forbidden Woman” — with Jetta
Goudal, Victor Varconi and
Joseph Schildkraut
(Pathe-DeMille, Nov. 6; 6,568 ft.; 76 to 93 min.)
Very well produced. It is a drama, the action of which
unfolds in Paris and in Africa, in a French possession; it
shows that a young Arab woman marries an officer of
high rank, so that she might be able to obtain military
secrets of value and transmit them to her people; and
that she had at the same time fallen in love with the
hero’s young brother, whom she had accidentally met on
board the ship she was traveling to Paris with, without
knowing who the young man was. In Paris, the young
man calls on his brother. While the elder brother is ab-
sent from the house, the heroine tries to force her at-
tentions on the young man. The elder brother returns and,
finding them locked in his brother’s room, thinks that his
young brother was trying to steel the affections of his
wife ; he did not know that it was his wife that had locked
the room and had thrown the key out of the window. The
angered brother forces the young man to enlist in the
Foreign Legion. In Africa he subjects him to hardships.
The young brother (under an assumed name) bears every-
thing stoically, because he loved his brother. Some mili-
tary secrets leak out and the young brother is suspected.
He is tried and convicted of treason. He is about to be
shot when the heroine is detected as the spy. She is
shot in place of the young man.
While the picture has, as said, been produced with
skill, it is unlikely that it will appeal to the small town
picture-goers ; it is hardly likely that these will be pleased
by the sight of the shooting of a woman, or of the pit-
ting of a brother against a brother. But it should prove
suitable for big towns. Whether, however, it will draw
or not, that is a question, unless Jetta Goudal is popular
in a particular locality. There is a great deal of sug-
gestive love-making in some scenes, which make the pic-
ture of questionable value to the small towns.
“Tea for Three” — with Lew Cody, Aileen
Pringle and Owen Moore
( Metro-Goldwyn , Dec. 10; 6,273 ft.; 73 to 89 min.)
A fair farce-comedy of a high order. The first three-
quarters of it is slow; only here and there there is a
laugh. It is the last two reels that cause several laughs.
Garlic is the cause of all troubles in it. The heroine visits
her husband at his office to ascertain whether he told her
the truth or not when he said that he was at a director’s
meeting. There the heroine meets her husband’s friend
that had acted as a best man at their wedding. The
friend invites the heroine to lunch. They eat food con-
taining a plentiful supply of garlic. When the heroine re-
turns home she refuses to allow her husband to kiss her
on the ground that she and a “woman-friend from Bos-
ton” had eaten food with too much garlic in it. Knowing
that the friend his wife mentioned as being out to lunch
with was not in New York, and seeing his friend chew
breath-sweetening tablets, the husband becomes sus-
picious. His suspicions eventually lead them both into
trouble. The play at cards, the stake being suicide for
the loser. The friend loses.
As said, most of the comedy occurs in the last two
reels. The cause of it is the appearance of the friend at
a yacht party of the husband’s. The husband thought
that the hero was making ready for his funeral, and was
greatly surprised to see him there. The heroine and the
friend conspire to cure the husband’s jealousy. This, too,
lends itself to comedy-making.
The most comical situations of them all, however, are
those that show the hero throwing a bundle into the sea,
yelling, “Man overboard,” and then hiding in a trunk.
The husband and the other yacht party guests thought
that the hero surely had jumped overboard. The husband
returns to his room. The friend soon returns to the room,
too, and the husband, thinking that he had seen his
friend’s ghost, runs. out of the room and falls into the
water. The friend jumps into the water and rescues him.
The last scenes show the husband cured of his jealous
temperament, and the three sitting around a table, drink-
ing tea.
It should give moderate satisfaction to high-class spec-
tators.
180
HARRISON’S REPORTS
THE OTHER HALF OF THE TRUTH
A United Artists’ advertisement appeared in the
trade papers early this month ; it read as follows :
“ ‘Chicago Theatre ran away from the field with
$63,950 for week,’ reports Variety in Sept. 28th
issue. The Attraction Was — The Internationally
Famous Duncan Sisters in the screamingly funny
Motion Picture ‘Topsy and Eva . . .’ ”
Let us now see what Variety said on that date:
“Chicago, Sept. 27. Getting $14,000 over the
previous good week and only $5,000 under the ex-
isting house record, which also stands as the city’s
record, the Chicago celebrated its final week as a
‘nice’ house appropriately. The Duncan girls and
their celluloid reproduction, ‘Topsy and Eva,’ were
the drag.
“An atmosphere combining popularity and no-
toriety always encircles the sisters in Chicago,
stamping them as naturals for the town. This is
their setup, the papers are free and easy when the
Duncans are mentioned, and no one has forgotten
that Cicero socking. An exception in their par-
ticular case, Chicago is no authority on how the
will fare points east . . .”
So wrhat made the Chicago theatre run away
from the field with $63,950 for the week was not
the film itself, as the advertisement seemed to
have implied, but the popularity of the Duncan
sisters, who appeared in person during the engage-
ment.
It is a good thing for you always to know the
other half of the truth.
INCONSISTENCY!
The producers have been telling you all along
that the exhibitors do not trust one another. How
about the producers and distributors? When the
exhibitors introduced a resolution on the question
of theatre building, the producers objected to it
and offered a substitute. The exhibitors accepted
it. When Harry Suchman, Chairman of the ex-
hibitor resolutions committee, read it so that the
three bodies might have an opportunity to vote on
it, Mr. Gabriel Hess, attorney for the Hays or-
ganization, objected to it.
Commissioner Myers asked of Hess the reason.
Hess replied that the producers and distributors
had not had time to consider it.
“That’s funny,” the Commissioner replied. “One
of your own lawyers, Mr. Swain, drafted it !”
Hess replied that that was true but that the
other producers would like to go over it.
NOT AN OCCULT BUSINESS!
For several years the Hays organization has
been trying to make you believe that the arbitra-
tors must be exchangemen and exhibitors, because
the business is too complicated for outsiders to
understand it.
That is what Mr. Kent tried to say to Commis-
sioner Myers at the Conference; in trying to de-
fend star, story and director substitutions, he at-
tempted to make the Commissioner believe that
this was a business difficult for an outsider to un-
derstand. He did not get very far, however, for
the Commissioner promptly replied to him :
“One is told that this is an ‘occult’ or mysterious
business ; that the layman cannot understand it.
I cannot see it that way, and it seems to me that
when the exhibitors buy something they are en-
titled to what they paid for.”
November 5, 1927
As a sidelight of this substitution farce, Mr.
Harry Suchman, a New York exhibitor, Chairman
of the exhibitor resolutions committee, asked Mr.
Hess if he would consider a substitution when an
exhibitor bought a college story, as was the case
with “White Flannels,” and received a picture re-
volving around the coal mines of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Hess agreed that such a case would be a sub-
stitution. Commissioner Myers had a good laugh
when Mr. Suchman put the question to Mr. Hess.
One could not help laughing when one remembers
the raw substitutions the producers have been
making for several years.
Harrison’s Reports feels proud that in the mat-
ter of substitutions it has rendered a real service
to the exhibitors. It has saved them millions of
dollars. But for its disclosures in the last two
years, there would have been no substitution ques-
tion at the Trade Practices Conference, and the
producer-distributors would continue selling one
thing and delivering another. In fact, they would
become more emboldened ; they would sell one
thing and when they would find that the thing they
sold turned out to be a good picture, they would
change its title and sell it to him the following sea-
son for more money, as is the case with “Old San
Francisco.” But they would deliver that thing if
it turned out to be a poor picture.
Next time the Hays organization tells you that
none but exchangemen and exhibitors can be ar-
bitrators because outsiders would not understand
the intricacies of this business, tell them that any
intelligent human beings could understand it, as
Commissioner Myers proved at the Conference.
ARBITRATING PICTURES THAT
OFFEND RACE OR RELIGION
At the Trade Practices Conference, before the
producers introduced a resolution through Mr.
Robert Rubin, of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, agree-
ing to submit to arbitration any pictures that of-
fend race, creed or religion on a complaint from
an exhibitor, holder of a contract for such a pic-
ture, Mr. Sydney R. Kent took the floor and said:
“Mr. Commissioner, when the producers are
wrong they are willing to be penalized. An ex-
hibitor will not have to run any picture that of-
fends race, creed or religion, provided same is sub-
mitted to a fair board of arbitration.”
In order to make sure what Mr. Kent meant, I
went to him afterward and asked him if, in speak-
ing about arbitrating pictures that offend race or
religion, he was speaking for his company alone
or for all distributors. Mr. Kent replied to me
that he was speaking for all distributors. So if
you have paid for “The Callahans and the Mur-
phys” but have not been able to play the picture
because of your desire to refrain from offending
some of your customers, bring the matter before
the board of arbitration, demanding a refund of
your money; and if for any reason you fail to
get it so inform this office.
Those of you who have bought “The Garden of
Allah” may not be able to show it because of the
stand against it the Catholics have taken on the
grounds that it offends their religion. If so, you
have a chance to bring a complaint before the joint
arbitration board asking that you be relieved of it.
I am sure that no board can refuse to relieve you
of this picture, particularly if a priest or the re-
presentative of a Catholic organization has asked
you not to show it.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York. New York, under the act of March 3, 1M9.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Bates :
United States . .$10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions ............ 11.00
Canada and Mexico.. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors.
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published W eekly by
F. S. HABBISOX
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1. 1919
TeL : Pennsylvania T649
Cable Address:
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. IX
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1927
No. 46
Pictures Now Only ‘'Chasers’’ in Broadway Houses
When a film salesman tries to induce you to
pay big prices for his pictures by showing you
the big figures of receipts for his films in a New
York Broadway theatre, just ask him what part
of the program his features filled.
At the Paramount, Capitol, Strand and Roxy,
the picture no longer means anything. It is used
merely as a “chaser,'' just as a demi-tasse is used
at the end of a big hearty dinner. One of the ex-
hibitor delegates at the recent Trade Practice Con-
ference remarked: ‘‘If they have time at those
big first-run houses they put on a film !” It seems
as if the picture today means as little as it did
in the old vaudeville days, when they used to put
it on just to give the audience a chance to empty
the house.
There is a battle between the first-run houses
in this city; each tries to outdo the other in big
acts that will draw. Salary is no object; they
will pay anything. The musical and vaudeville
bills in some of them cost anywhere from fifteen
to thirty thousand dollars a week. To give you
an idea that money means nothing to them, I
quote a few of the saalries paid :
Paul Whiteman : S12,000 a week.
A1 Jolson: $25,000 (offered).
Pat Rooney : $5,000 for one week.
John McCormack was offered $25,000 for one
week.
John Phillip Sousa received $15,000 for one
week.
Here is the bill that was announced at the
Capitol a few weeks ago:
Van and Schenck, Winner Lightner, Jans and
Whalen, Burt Darrell, Jane Overton, Chester
Hale Girls, and others, all headliners, and a
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer picture.
At the Roxy I find: Gladys Rice and a chorus
of 100 voices, the Carolina Serenaders, 50 Negro
voices, Aronson’s Commanders, “On the Cam-
pus,” the Roxy Symphony Orchestra of 110 mu-
sicians, and, as the program says, “many other
musical novelties.” They naturally played “A
High School Hero,” (if they had time; and I
think they squeezed it between the acts).
It is reported that the operating expenses of
these houses run anywhere from fifty to one hun-
dred thousand dollars a week. They are giving a
five dollar show for one dollar or less.
There is a battle on in these houses, not really
for supremacy, but for existence; since the Roxy
opened the others felt the loss in business, and
they tried to get it back by giving as much as
the Roxy, if not more. Since they put these acts
on, they cut down the receipts of the Roxy. So
Rothapfel tried to get back at them by giving bet-
ter shows still. But he is not catching the others
asleep; they are out in the market for acts. And
the are getting them.
To give you an idea of the magnitude of the
struggle between these houses, I may mention
the fact that the management of the Capitol Thea-
tre resorted to the unethical act of throwing a
light ad on the front walls of the Paramount
Theatre advising the people to go to the Capitol
for a good show. I would not be surprised if
Sam Katz retaliated by throwing a similar ad on
the walls of the Capitol, advising the pedestrians
that they can see a good show at the Paramount.
If he should do so, Roxy may retaliate by throw-
ing the same kind of ads on the walls of the
Capitol and the Paramount, advising the New
Yorkers that the Capitol and the Paramount are
fooling them, and that they can see a better show
by going to the Roxy. The thing may end by a
boxing contest between Edward Bowes, Sam
Rothapfel and Sam Katz, at the Madison Square
Garden.
The battle between these theatres is now taking
a new direction. Each theatre is trying to out- fib
the other in size of receipts. Since nobody can
check them up, the figures they give out can be
anything. The size of them is, no doubt, gov-
erned by the size of figures the other fellow gives
out.
Feeling the competition, Sam Katz has brought
back the old bally-hoo days; he is giving a mid-
night performance at the Paramount, and has
posted an usher in front of the theatre, on a
chair, with a megaphone, yelling out that there
will be a midnight performance, advising the ped-
estrians to go in and see a good show. And if
they cannot overcome competition that way. I
would not be surprised if we saw Sam Katz and
Adolph Zuckor dressed as ushers, and ballyhooing
in front of the Paramount Theatre. And if that
should come to pass, the next thing we will see
will be Edward Bowes in company with Nick
Schenck, dressed as clowns, and performing in
front of the Capitol, and Sam Rothapfel and
\\ illiom Fox, dressed similarly (like Coney Is-
land clowns), performing in front of the Roxy.
It is needless for me to repeat that you should
not pay any attention to figures of picture re-
ceipts presented to you by a film salesman, who is
making every effort to induce you to pay big
prices for this, that, or the other of his pictures
that has been shown in a Broadway Theatre ; re-
member that the picture means nothing any long-
er; it is the most insignificant part of the bill.
Just ask the salesman what part of the bill did
the program fill.
182
HARRISON’S REPORTS
November 12, 1927
“Women’s Wares” — with Evelyn Brent,
Bert Lytell and Larry Kent
( Tiffany ; 5,614 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
The striking part about this film is the naturalness of
the characters and the smoothness with which the action
unfolds; and as the background is rich, the impression
that is created in one’s mind is deeper. One feels that no
big company could have handled it any better, and most
surely could not have produced it at as low a cost.
The story deals with two honest working girls, the
heroine and her chum. The heroine is in love with a
young man (hero). One evening he accompanies her
home. One kiss led to another, until the young hero,
forgetting himself, makes a dishonorable proposal to the
heroine. The heroine is angered and sends the hero away,
telling him never to see her again. Disgusted with men
the heroine decides in the future to take everything she
can from men and to give them nothing in return. Her
friend concurs in her decision. The first person she flirts
with is a married man. He sets up an apartment for her.
But when he asks her to be “sweet” to him, the heroine
picks up the telephone and tells him that she is going to
ask his wife if she would permit her to be sweet to him.
The married man leaves in horror, begging her to say
nothing to his wife, letting the heroine retain the apart-
ment. Other persons contribute to the maintaining of the
apartment. The heroine eventually marries the hero
whose health had broken down from a guilty conscience.
Although the situations have been handled delicately,
yet one cannot mistake as to what the characters have in
mind. It is unfortunate that the young hero should have
been allowed by the author to make a dishonorable pro-
posal to the heroine, for I believe that the spectator would
receive better satisfaction if another method had been used
to bring about the parting of the heroine with the hero.
The plot has been founded on the story by E. Morton
Hough ; it has been directed by Arthur Gregor with skill,
from a continuity by Francis Hyland. Gertrude Short,
Richard Tucker, Myrtle Stedman, Cissy Fitzgerald, Sylvia
Ashton and Stanhope Wheatcroft appear in the support-
ing cast.
An excellent picture for sophisticated audiences; not
good for young folk.
“The Cherokee Kid” — with Tom Tyler
( F . B. O., Oct. 30; 56 to 69 min.)
A pretty fair program picture with action and mrld
suspense. The story is a formula western, with
some variations: The hero, a stranger in the heroine’s
country, is suspected of being the last of the enemy
clan, and of having murdered the heroine’s father, be-
cause of the old feud. It was the villain’s scheme to
have the young hero accused of the crime so that it
might not come to light that it was he that had
murdered him. The hero takes an interest in the
heroine and attempts to protect her from the machin-
ations of the villain. Soon it comes to light that the
hero is the last of the enemy clan, but he had proved
that the murderer was not he, but the villain. He also
convinced the heroine how futile it was to carry on the
feud.
The usual horse riding, shooting and waylaying that
are found in the average Western are found in this
one also. The plot has been founded on a story by
Joe Kane, and has been directed by Robert De Lacy.
Sharon Lynn plays opposite Tom Tyler.
“Flying Luck” — with Monte Banks
( Pathe , Nov. 13; 6,400 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
Not a bad burlesque. There is some comedy in it,
and in some situations there are thrills. The thrills
are caused by the flying of the hero, who didn’t know
the first principles of flying, but was trying to learn
them from a book. The best part of the film is toward
the end, where the hero, who had just joined the
flying division of the army, is shown mistaken by the
General for the foreign dignitary that had just ar-
rived in this country to inspect the U. S. A. fly-
ing forces and equipment. He is shown given honors
due to his “rank.” The embarrassment the General
feels when he discovers that the hero is none other
than a mere private makes the spectator laugh. In
the closing scenes there are some more thrills when
the hero, who had not yet learned how to fly, takes a
machine, goes up in the air, and attempts tc win a
race. The spectator feels as if he would crash to the
ground at any moment.
The plot has been founded on a story by Charles
Horan and the star himself; it has been directed by
Mr. Herman Raymaker, from a continuity by Charles
Horan and Matt Taylor. Miss Jean Arthur plays op-
posite Mr. Banks. John W. Johnston takes the part
of the General, commander of the air forces. “Kew-
pie” Morgan takes the part of the hard-hearted ser-
geant.
The plot in the end shows the hero by mere luck
winning the air race and also the heroine as a wife.
A pretty good program picture.
“A Harp in Hock” — with Junior Coghlan
and Rudolph Schildkraut
( Pathc-DeMille , Oct. 9; 5,999 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
A human little story, revolving around the attach-
ment of an elderly Hebrew for an urchin of Irish par-
enthood. The emotions of sympathy are touched al-
most in every situation. The scenes that show the au-
thorities taking the boy away from the kind-hearted
Hebrew, who had become attached to the boy and had
been rearing him as his own son, are deeply pathetic.
So are the scenes that show the old man looking
through the window at the orphan’s home, where the
boy had been taken. The closing scenes, where the
mob is shown attacking the old man’s pawnshop and
injuring the old Hebrew, besides being pathetic, are
tensely suspensive; one learns to sympathize with
the Hebrew and to fear lest harm befall him. The
scenes that show the hero and the heroine, friends of
the old man, rushing to his rescue with an order from
the court permitting him to adopt the boy are
cheering. The plot has been founded on a story by
Evelyn Campbell; it has been directed well by Renaud
Hoffman, from a scenario by Sonya Levien. Bessie
Love makes a good heroine, and Joseph Syriker a good
hero. May Robson, Louis Natheaux, Elise Bartlett,
Mrs. Charles Mack and others appear in the support-
ing cast.
It may be considered as a good program attraction.
“The Girl From Chicago” — with Hyma
Loy, Conrad Nagel and William Russell
( Warner Bros., Nov. 6; 5,978 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
This is the old, old story of the boy who, though
innocent, had been convicted to hang, but who is saved
from the electric chair at the last minute. But it has
been handled so well that, in the stiuations where the
boy’s sister is shown making every effort to save the
life of her brother, the spectator is held in as tense
suspense as he has been held by a similar situation in
other pictures of this type. Everything is timed to
save the life of the young man — the detective (hero)
is convinced that the young man is innocent and begs
his chief to communicate with the Governor and to
implore him to have his telephone connections made
so that in case he should discover evidence at the
last minute to prove that the boy was innocent noth-
ing might go wrong in the saving of the young man’s
life. Yet all these appear natural. In fact one hopes
that the young man’s life might be spared and “urges”
the characters to exert their greatest efforts. The
scenes that show the encounter between the trapped
criminals and the police, who employ machine guns
to dislodge those of the criminals that were left alive,
remind one of the scenes in “Underworld,” in which
the hero is trapped by the police, who had surrounded
his lair also with machine guns. Myrna Loy, as the
heroine, arouses the spectator’s admiration for her
pluck. Conrad Nagel is fair as the hero. William
Russell is good as the leader of the gunmen.
The plot has been founded on the Arthur Somer
Roche story, “Business is Best”; it has been directed
with skill by Ray Enright, from an intelligently con-
structed scenario by Graham Baker.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
183
November 12, 1927
“Uncle Tom’s Cabin”
( Universal Super-Special )
In “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” Mr. Carle Laemmle has
produced what may truly be called a classic of the
screen. In the welter of superlatives which usually
accompany preliminary notices of moving pictures, it
is refreshing to note that too much has not been said
about this production. It is a great picture, one which
should rank with the greatest. It is replete with drama
and pathos. Humor has not been overlooked nor is it
overdone. There is plenty of it and to spare, but it is
not “dragged in by the scruff of the neck.” It comes
naturally.
With but one striking exception, the picture is
usually faithful to the book. The exception is the
introduction of scenes from the Civil War. Inasmuch
as the book was published some ten years before
the outbreak of the war, this is an anachronism. Never-
the less, it is one which, if anything, improves the
story. The introduction of these scenes is strikingly
appropriate; they round out the story and give it a
fullness and a significance that would not otherwise
have been possible. They give an additional thrill
and an added historical value to the story. Through-
out the film are many excellent shots of southern plan-
tations; of the lordly Mississippi; of Grant’s army on
its “march to the sea,” and others which put the pic-
ture in a class by itself.
As said, the story follows the book with unusual
fidelity. We see the marriage of Eliza and George,
and are introduced to the kindly Shelby and his wife.
Then comes the slave owner to tear these two happy
souls apart. We meet Uncle Tom, and Little Eva,
Topsy, Simon Legree and Lawyer Marks — in fact, all
those wonderful people who formed so large a part
of the days when “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” was something
terrible and vividly real to youthful imaginations.
They come to life again on the screen and we live
over, once more, the sorrows and the joys, the thrills
and the despair which kept the youth up at night
long after they should have been sound asleep in
their beds.
To young and old alike the appeal of this picture
must prove irresistible. It is the story of a great
tragedy, of a great wrong and, as such, is an integral
part of the history of this Republic.
Director Pollard and the players alike have evi-
dently been impressed with the responsibility de-
volving upon them. All are deserving of unstinted
praise. James B. Lowe, (Uncle Tom) gives a faith-
ful and impressive impersonation of the faithful negro.
George Siegmann (Simon Legree) presents the un-
speakable villain of the play in a way that brings
shudders to the most sophisticated. Aileen Manning
(Miss Ophelia) is excellent. So is Mona Ray (Topsy).
Margarita Fischer (Eliza) and Arthur Edmund Ca-
rew (George Harris) are deserving of unstinted com-
mendation for their excellent work.
One of the greatest scenes ever put on the films is
the famous crossing of the icy river by Eliza. This has
never been done so well. There is a real thrill when
the girl is rescued in the nick of time by the kindly
and heroic Quaker. Even the hardened theatre-goer
will find it difficult to suppress a thrill when he sees
this. The girl, with the baby in her arms, is desperately
trying to keep her footing on the floating cake of ice
as it near the falls. The Quaker (Nelson McDowell)
climbs out on the branch of a tree and, hanging by
his feet, grasps the girl as she is about to be dashed to
death. Other “thrillers” have been shown in motion
pictures, but this one caps them all.
It seems as if “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” has a long
and prosperous future ahead of it. It has all the re-
quisites of a great picture, one that should play to
packed houses all over the country. It is a credit to
all connected with it.
“The Main Event” — with Vera Reynolds
and Charles Delaney
( Pathe-DeMille , Nov. 20; 75 to 92 min.)
Not a bad picture, in which the leading men char-
acters are pugilists. There is strong love interest al-
most all the way through. A few rounds in the ring
between the hero and the villain hold the spectator
in pretty tense suspense. Considerable sympathy goes
to the hero’s father, impersonated by Rudolph Schild-
kraut, who sees his son (Charles Delaney) wasting
himself because of his love for a girl, and is impotent
to make him train so that he might not lose the fight.
The heroine had been talked to by her sweetheart to
associate with the hero and to keep him out nights
so that by weakening him, he (the sweetheart) might
not lose the fight with him, whose right hand punch
he feared. The scenes that show the heroine, in “con-
spiracy” with the hero’s father, insulting the hero so
that by humiliating him, she might spurr him into put-
ting up a hard fight at the ring arouse sympathy for
the heroine; she did that in spite of the fact that her
heart was breaking. The plot has been founded on the
story “That Makes Us Even,” by Paul Allison; it has
been directed skillfully by William K. Howard, from a
continuity by Rochus Gliese. Julia Faye, Robert Arm-
strong and Ermie Adams are in the supporting cast.
It should give good satisfaction.
“The Singleshot Kid” — with Young Buzz
Burton
(F. B. O., Dec. 4; 4,886 ft.; 56 to 70 min.)
The second picture with Buzz Burton, the young
boy wonder, does credit to the first. It is full of action
from beginning to end. In some situations the spec-
tators, particularly young boys, will cheer young Bar-
ton; he is shown lassoeing the villain and rescuing the
heroine from his hands. The scenes that show him on
horseback, riding fast in an effort to overtake the vil-
lain, too, should bring the house down. There are
many such situations all the way through the picture.
Also in this picture young Burton, in company with
his pal, an elderly man, is in search of his father,
whom he refuses to believe dead. They come to a
dead mining town, and meet the heroine, conducting
a ranch nearby. The villain, who had an eye on the
ranch, and on the heroine, had made every one of
the ranch hands quit. The young hero and his pal
agree to work for the heroine. It is then that they
come face to face with danger, because the villain was
determined to get the ranch and the heroine at any
cost. But the young hero and his pal eventually out-
wit the villain.
The plot has been founded on the story by Oliver
Drake; it has been directed by Louis King.
It should give the same kind of satisfaction “The
Boy Rider” gave.
“May of Vassar” and “The Fair Co-Ed”
the Same
Several subscribers have asked me to tell them if
“The Fair Co-Ed” and “Mary of Vassar” are the same
picture.
“Mary of Vassar” was thus described in a Metro-
Goldwyn-Mayer advertisement, inserted in the trade
papers of June, 1926:
“Marion Davies. Successor to ‘Brown of Harvard’
from college girls’ angle. Cosmopolitan production.”
The number given to “Mary of Vassar” was 736, and
as 736 is the number of “The Fair Co-Ed,” which also
is a “Brown of Harvard” from a college girls’ angle,
one assumes that the two are the same picture.
“The Gorilla,” First National, is an excellent mys-
tery melodrama, something of the type of “The Bat,”
and “The Cat and the Canary.” “The Girl in the Pull-
man,” Pathe-DeMille, is a fair farce comedy of the
bedroom sort. “Shanghai Bound,” with Richard Dix,
Paramount, is a good melodrama, treating with the
Chinese revolution and how the hero escaped, and
how he helped the heroine and her father escape
from the hands of the Chinese bandits, who intended
to capture them, the “Foreign Devils.” “My Best Girl,”
with Mary Pickford, a good picture, but it is not draw-
ing. (Wait for an article on this picture next week.)
Full reviews next week.
184
HARRISON’S REPORTS
ANOTHER MAGDALENE?
The opening paragraphs of the Hearst editorial
espousing censorship that has created so much
sensation read as follows :
' Mr. Louis B. Mayer’s statement on the de-
sirability of purer films is entirely sound, and he
is speaking both in the interest of the public and
in the interest of the film industry.
‘‘Suggestive films and ultrasex films have be-
come altogether too numerous of late. Their ef-
fect on the community is bad and their reaction
on the industry bad.
‘The explanation of this flood of sex films is
simple. That is the cheapest and easiest way of
attracting the attention of a certain element of the
public . . .”
Every one connected with the motion picture
industry was asking one another: “What is
Hearst’s motive in coming out for censorship?
He certainly should have been the last man on
earth to espouse censorship, for some of the news
items in his papers have been more demoraliz-
ing than the sexiest of films.”
Mr. Hearst’s advocacy of censorship seems
inconsistent also for another reason: In advo-
cating it, he took as his text the statement
Louis B. Mayer made at the Trade Practice
Conference. It was a poor text, and the com-
pany he selected as advocating “clean pictures,”
which is his, Hearst’s, partner, is a poor sub-
ject: Every one knows that Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer, of whose production department Mr.
Mayer is the head, has made ninety per cent
of the sex pictures ; at least in the last three
or four years.
Perhaps Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer is another
Madgalene.
IN THE INTEREST OF ACCURACY
In the issue of October 29, I stated in Har-
rison’s Reports that “Annie Laurie” was not
shown at the Capitol Theatre, this city. This
was an error. What I wanted to say was that
it was shown at the Capitol only one week, con-
trary to the policy of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer of
showing all their big pictures at that theatre
for at least two weeks.
But regardless of the inadvertent error,
“Annie Laurie” has proved a flop.
A flop as a two-dollar attraction has proved
also “The Garden of Allah” ; it was shown at
the Embassy only eight weeks ; it opened Sep-
tember 2 and was pulled off October 29. This
shows that the two dollar attractions don’t
grow on trees.
And since we are talking about two dollar
flops, we might just as well take up also “Sun-
rise”; it is proving a box office failure.
The pitiful part about “Sunrise,” however,
is the fact that it is worth fully a two dollar
admission price, but the public does not seem
to take kindly toward it; the story is too de-
pressing, even though treated by director Mur-
neau masterly.
November 12, 1927
EVIDENCE FOR THE FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION
In a prospectus put out by H. W. Noble &
Company, of Detroit, Michigan, extolling the
virtues of the stock offered by United Artists
in their theatre venture, the following state-
ment is made :
“The new circuit will derive great strength
from its affiliation wiht United Artists Cor-
poration (of Delaware), which has contracts
pursuant to which it ‘distributes’ (or in the
course of the next theatrical season will be
‘distributing’) to theatres throughout the world
new motion pictures featuring: ...”
If the Federal Trade Commission needed an
evidence to prove that the affiliation of a cir-
cuit with a production and distribution con-
cern gives it an advantage over independent
theatres, they can have it in this statement,
which comes from the financial agent of United
Artists.
A PROTEST TO MR. HAYS
The following letter was received by this
office from Mr. George Aarons, Secretary of
the Philadelphia exhibitors’ organization, with
a request that it be published:
“October 31, 1927.
“Charles C. Pettijohn, Esquire,
“General Counsel,
“Film Boards of Trade,
“New York City, N. Y.
“Dear Mr. Pettijohn:
“It has become known that many of the
National Distributing Organizations have sent
orders to their various local offices to imme-
diately begin a campaign for the securing of
more non-theatrical business.
“The exhibitors of Eastern Pennsylvania,
Southern New Jersey and Delaware, through
their Board of Managers, at a meeting held on
Thursday, October 27th, passed resolutions
strenuously objecting to this method and to
the development of the non-theatrical business.
“A non-theatrical in most every instance
can pick out from an exchange the best pictures
for the average sum of $10 and the shows are
generally shown in auditoriums, without the
proper regard for fire regulations.
“The exhibitors of this territory pay to the
film companies on an average of $125,000 per
week for film rentals, and on the other hand,
the same companies receive in comparison for
non-theatrical showing the sum of approxi-
mately $500 per week.
“This is not only unfair competition in sup-
plying these non-theatrical organizations, but
further, in view of the fact that their business
amounts to so little, there is no reason why
steps should not be taken to eliminate it.
“We would appreciate a statement from you
as to your position in this very important sub-
ject.
“Very truly yours,
“Secretary.”
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
Entered as second-class matter January 4. 1921, at t ho post office at New York, New York, Under the act of March S. IStt.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Bates:
United States.. $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 11.00
Canada and Mexico.. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors.
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly b j
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
TeL : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address:
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Voi. IX
SATURDAY, NO VKMD&R 19, 1927
No. 47
A Grave Issue and How You Should Meet It
An issue arose between an exhibitor and an ex-
change last month, which issue affects almost
every exhibitor in the United States. It is such
that it deserves editorial treatment in these col-
umns, so that all those that may at some time or
other he similarly affected, may know how to meet
it. I am not mentioning names at the request of
the exhibitor, who does not want to embarrass the
branch manager, with whom his relations are
friendly. The issue is of such importance, how-
ever, that I requested him to allow me to treat
on the question even though his friend exchange-
man may know that the article refers to him.
This exhibitor had a big picture booked last
month, to play it on a percentage basis.
The terms of the contract gave the company
the right to send a representative to check up the
receipts; percentage contracts always provide for
such a right to the distributor.
The exhibitor did not object to that; the fact
that he signed the contract with that provision in
it is the proof of it.
On the opening day of the engagement, how-
ever, the exchange called up the local bank and
offered them three dollars a day to send one of
their clerks to watch the exhibitor’s box office and
to take tickets at the door during the engagement.
The excuse they gave to the bank was that they
did not have a man available to send.
When the exhibitor was notified by the bank’s
cashier of the exchange’s wishes he objected
strenuously. He called up the exchange on the
telephone and stated to the branch manager that
if they wanted the receipts checked up they had
to send a man of their own, as was the custom,
and not a townsman of his, for he did not want
a local man to know all about his business.
The exchange manager told the exhibitor that
if he would not allow the bank to check up the
receipts during the engagement of their picture,
he would stop the show. And to prove that he
meant business, in the afternoon of the same day
he called the bank up on the telephone and asked
the cashier to give him the name of a good law-
yer, with the purpose of instructing him to take
the necessary steps to take the print out of the
exhibitor’s possession.
The cashier of the bank, with whom the ex-
changeman was negotiating, was naturally put in
an embarrassing position. He so stated to the ex-
hibitor; also that the conduct of the exchangeman
reflected upon his, the exhibitor’s, character. The
cashier said that he was brought into the con-
troversy through no fault of his own, and against
his wish ; and felt that it was an unpleasant posi-
tion for him to be in. To save the exhibitor from
embarrassment, however, he requested him to per-
mit him to check his box office up. This the ex-
hibitor agreed to do.
4= * 4=
Unfortunately, the contract gives the right to
the distributor to employ any person he sees fit
to check up the receipts of an exhibitor that plays
his pictures on percentage basis. But whether
morally he has such a right, that is a different
question. It is a dangerous practice for an ex-
change, regardless of its rights in the matter, to
employ a man that might use the information to
the exhibitor’s disadvantage when his purpose is
not to do so. The evil of such a practice is evident
to any one with a fair amount of horse sense ; in
a small town the information so gained becomes
common property through gossip. This is bound
to hurt the exhibitor. The exchange is not in a
position to know the caliber of the man he is em-
powering to represent him. This is not, of course,
any reflection on the bank cashier in question ; it is
pointed out merely because of the principle in-
volved.
The matter becomes serious in this exhibitor’s
case also because right now reformers are active
in an endeavor to have a censorship bill passed
through the legislature of his State. And if cen-
sorship were to be put through there, the pro-
ducer-distributors would naturally suffer more
than would the exhibitors.
Aside from the moral principle, there is also a
legal principle involved : the contract the exhibitor
signed, and which every exhibitor signs, irrespec-
tive of whether its terms are flat rental or per-
centage, contains a clause obligating the distributor
to an equal degree as it obligates the exhibitor to
submit all disputes that might arise under that
contract to arbitration. When the exchange arbi-
trarily telephones to a lawyer to take legal steps
to remove the print from the possession of the
exhibitor instead of taking the matter up with the
arbitration board, which now can be called within
twenty-four hours’ notice, such exchange breaches
the contract, and makes itself liable for damages.
It is well for you to know your rights in the mat-
ter, so that you might not allow an exchangeman
to bulldoze you any time a dispute arises.
You are urged to bring all such cases to the
attention of this paper, so that I may take the
matter up with the Home Office of the company
involved. Publicity is the greatest cure for abuses.
And Harrison’s Reports stands ready at all times
to bring such cases to the attention of all exhibi-
tors if the company involved should refuse to
order its representatives to cease taking matters
into their hands.
186
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Shanghai Bound”- — with Richard Dix
( Paramount , Oct. 15; 5,515 ft.; 64 to 78 min.)
For a director to succeed in making the action ap-
pear as if unfolding on the locale of the story is no
mean accomplishment. As the title indicates, “Shang-
hai Bound”- unfolds in China, on the Yangtse River,
and in and near Shanghai. The picture has been
naturally photographed on the West Coast, but di-
rector Luther Reed has directed it so skillfully that
one is made to feel as if it has been photographed
in China. The Chinese ugly-looking bandits, who are
determined to oust the “Foreign Devils,” the Yangtse
River, the sampans (Chinese boats), the dresses, and
everything that is Chinese looks Chinese; and the
Chinese characters act as natives. The trick the Chi-
nese bandit leader employs to enable him and his
band to board the paddle wheel river boat, which the
hero commanded, is original, and is no doubt a trick
employed by real Chinese bandits: Two sampans are
shown tied with a hawser, so that, when the boat
would strike the hawser, its force would bring the
sampans close to the sides of the ship, enabling the
bandits to scale up. It is a thrilling sight: it follows
a somewhat slow previous action. The scenes that
show the hero rescuing the American party, consist-
ing of the heroine, her fiance, and her father, are
thrilling. In these scenes, the hero is shown using
some intelligence to extricate himself and the others
from a tight situation. The scenes on board the ship,
where the hero is shown taming the haughty heroine,
are comical; but the action is not convincing — nothing
noteworthy is shown to make the heroine change
character. Her character is, in fact, illogical; no
woman, however snobbish, would have acted towards
the man that saved her life as haughtily as the heroine
is shown acting toward the hero in this picture. But
the lack of sound logic in these situations does not
nullify their entertaining values.
The plot has been founded on the story by Tex
O’Reilly, an ex-member of the International Police
force at Shanghai. Mr. Reed has, as said, directed
it with skill. The scenario has been^ written by John
Goodrich and Ray Harris. Richard Dix, as the U. S.
Navy Lieutenant, temporarily commander of the river
boat, does good work. Mary Brian is good as the
haughty heroine. Jocelyn Lee, as a member of the
U. S. Navy Intelligence Department, assistant to the
hero, does good work, too. Tetsu Komai, as the
Chinese bandit leader, looks ferocious.
The picture should entertain pretty well.
“Quality Street” — with Marion Davies
( Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Cosmopolitan Special )
There is something about “Quality Street” reminiscent
of lavender and old lace. As a picture it will prove a
lasting delight to those who appreciate whimsical humor
and the delicate aroma of century-old courtesy. If your
audience prefers more robust entertainment, “Quality
Street” may not prove exceptionally popular.
Sidney Franklin has adapted Sir J. M. Barrie’s play of
the same name with considerable skill. It is the story of
a young girl, Phoebe Throssel (Marion Davies), in love
with a handsome young doctor, Valentine Brown (Conrad
Nagel). She and her sister, Susan (Helen Jerome
Eddy), believe his proposal imminent; but when he comes
to make his declaration it is only to announce that he is
going off to the Napoleonic Wars. Many years elapse
before he returns to find his beautiful young sweetheart
has become a prim school-teacher. His ardor cools for
the moment ; and Phoebe, realizing this, assumes the dress
and mannerisms of a young girl, her own imaginary niece.
Again the hero is captivated, but the innocent deception
brings upon the girl unexpected difficulties due to the
activities of the neighborhood gossips. Eventually every-
thing is straightened out, and a very pretty romance ends
in happiness.
Marion Davies has seldom appeared to better advan-
tage. She portrays humor and pathos with real artistry.
Conrad Nagel is equal to the task imposed on him. Helen
Jerome Eddy is very good. There are many beautiful
scenes in the picture, which depict an English town in
1805. All in all, an excellent picture, but one the success
November^, 1927
of which will depend upon the taste of your audience.
Note.— I saw this picture Thursday night, November
10, the twelfth day of the engagement. There were about
75 seats empty, and I do not know how many attended
the performance on passes. This means that the fame of
the author, of Marion Davies, and of Toscha Seidel, the
famous Russian violinist, have not been able to keep full,
on Broadway, a house that seats only 600. The picture
is excellent but it seems to appeal only to the highly
cultured.
“The Girl in the Pullman” — with
Marie Prevost
( Pathe-DeMille , Oct. 30; 5,867 ft.; 68 to 83 min.)
“The Girl in the Pullman” may be classed as a
pretty good farce comedy, provided that the house
is full or nearly full; if the house is empty, it could
hardly be classed as more than fair. Its plot is
thin, and whatever entertaining values it possesses,
they are owed chiefly to the acting of Miss Prevost.
Miss Prevost takes the part of the hero’s ex-wife,
who is determined that no other woman shall have
the hero, despite the exhortations of the hero, who
was engaged to another woman and feared lest his
ex-wife’s presence might spoil the affair. Most of
the comedy comes from the hero’s efforts to avoid
the heroine, and where he could not avoid her to
make his sweetheart believe that he had never seen
the “stranger” before; and of the heroine, to make
herself as conspicuous as possible, and to convey the
thought that she and the hero knew each other.
Other comedy is caused by the hero’s efforts to avoid
being found in the stateroom alone with his ex-wife.
The story ends with the re-marriage of the hero to
his ex-wife.
The plot has been founded on the story “The Girl
in Upper C,” by Wilson Collison; it has been di-
rected by Erie C. Kenton, from a continuity and
adaptation by F. McGrew Willis. Miss Prevost does
good work. Mr. Harrison Ford, who plays the part
of the hero, a doctor, does good work, too. Franklin
Pangborn, as the hero’s friend, is comical. Kathryn
McGuire, Ethel Wales and Mary Myers, do well in
the supporting cast.
“Pajamas” — with Olive Borden and
Lawrence Gray
(Fox, Oct. 23; 5,876 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
Not a bad romance, with comedy situations. The
story is slight, but well told. The picture was photo-
graphed in the Canadian Rockies. The director
selected vantage points in filming the scenes. As a
result, the background is beautiful. The hero’s tam-
ing of the heroine, a girl that never takes anything
seriously, who all the while teased and taunted the
hero, until she finally fell in love with him, is the
theme. The scenes up in the mountain, where the
hero “mistreats” the heroine, telling her to keep on
her side of the line and not to bother him, are humor-
ous. Earlier in the story some comedy is caused when
the hero finds out that the young woman, who had
“hogged” the road with her car was no other than
the daughter of the man to whom he was about to
sell some property in Canada.
Their being stranded high up in the Canadian Si-
erras was caused by the fact that the hero had wetted
the papers that were describing his property and it
was necessary for him to have them the following
day at the latest if he wanted to put the deal through.
The heroine’s father suggests to the hero to go to
Canada in his plane, piloted by a famous pilot. Un-
perceived, the heroine takes the seat of the pilot, and,
when the hero entered, she “lets her go.” The hero
discovers the identity of the pilot too late to do him
any good. While over the Canadian Sierras, one of
the wings breaks off, and the two are compelled to
descend in parachutes.
They are eventually rescued by her father and her
lazy fiance, whom the heroine discards for the hero.
It may be classed as a fairly entertaining program
picture.
November 19, 1927
HARRISON’S REPORTS
187
“The Gorilla” — with a Star Cast
( First National, Nov. 13; 7,133 ft.; 83 to 11)2 min.)
I believe that First National has hit upon another
good one. “The Gorilla” is a. creepy, suspensive
melodrama, of the “Bat” and “The Cat and the
Canary” type, only more breath-taking, if that is pos-
sible. The scenes, for example, where the gorilla
takes hold of Charles Murray, whhe Mr. Murray is
looking for the gorilla on the roof, and holds him with
his hand hanging over the roof, ready to drop him to
be dashed on the pavement below, will take one’s
breath away. The scenes where the gorilla is shown
following Mr. Murray, who is unaware of the danger
that dogs his steps, will surely stop one’s breath com-
pletely, particularly in the scenes where the gorilla
is shown listlessly and lazily swinging his hands as if
to grab Mr. Murray, the latter just escaping by mak-
ing a timely involuntary movement ahead, away from
the death-dealing hands of the gorilla. The scenes
that show the heroine coming face to face with the
gorilla and swooning, being taken by the gorilla in
his arms, are other scenes that will stop one's breath
completely. Throughout the picture, the element of
mystery is maintained successfully'; also the suspense.
Whoever made up as a gorilla deserves great praise,
for he acts as if he were a real gorilla; the fur appears
real, and the movement of his body and the swing of
his hands are no different from the movements and
swingings of the real animal.
The plot has been founded on the famous play' by-
Ralph Spence; it has been directed most skillfully
by Alfred Santell. Charles Murray and Fred Kelsey
make an excellent pair of detectives; only that Mr.
Murray causes most of the comedy. Alice Day makes
a good heroine. Tully Marshall, Claude Gilling-
water, Walter Pidgeon, Gaston Glass, Aggie Her-
ring, Syd Grossley, and Brooks Benedict are in the
cast; they all do good work.
The story revolves around a young villain, friend
of the heroine’s father, who defrauds him of a con-
siderable sum of money, and who, because he was
suspected of the theft, murders him and then hires
from an Italian a trained gorilla to make it appear
as if the gorilla had murdered him. In the end, his
deception becomes known and he is arrested. The
heroine’s young finace is thus freed of the suspicion
of having committed the crime, to the joy of the
heroine, who had never ceased to have faith in him.
It should please everywhere, particularly where
strong pictures are liked.
“My Best Girl” — with Mary Pickford
( United Art., Approx. 8,500 ft.; Rel. Date Not Set.)
Not a bad romance, but nothing to brag about. It
is pleasing, and in many situations one is made to
laugh, the comedy being caused by the situations,
by the subtitles, and by Miss Pickford’s acting. The
story is the shop-worn tale of the poor girl that mar-
ries a rich young man. Only that director Sam
Taylor has handled it more skillfully than similar
stories are usually handled by other directors. The
love affair between Charles Rogers, who takes the part
of the son of a millionaire father, chain store owner,
and Miss Pickford, who poses as Maggie, is charming.
The scenes where the young hero (who poses as Joe
Grant, instead of as Joe Merrill, his right name, his
desire being to make success in life without even his
father’s name), is shown taking the heroine to his
parents’ home by telling her that the Merrills want to
see their employes “drop in for dinner” now and then,
are comical. By winking his eye, the hero “tips” the
butler off so that the innocent deception might not be
disclosed. The heroine is embarrassed and wants to
go away, fearing lest the Merrills should show up and
scold them for their audacity, but the young hero re-
assures her.
The scenes at the table, where the heroine repri-
mands the hero for eating his lobster cocktail with
a fork rather than with a spoon, are amusing. The
scenes that show the father offering the heroine a
check for ten thousand dollars so that she might
give up his son are dramatic; but they have been
overdone a little: the heroine, because she loved the
hero and did not want to spoil his future, pretended
that she did not love him, and that she would accept
the money to give him up.
Adults should receive fair satisfaction out of it.
Children should enjoy it well. But it is not a story
for Mary Pickford, however well it has been done.
Note: I went to review this picture • at the Rialto
Monday night, the third day of the engagement, at
8:15. The weather was ideal; it was crisp, but not
too cold — almost made for the theatres. And yet
there were empty seats in the house, when an ordin-
ary picture would have had people standing up at
that time of the evening. There were empty seats
even at 9:30, before the performance was over.
“Dead Man’s Curve” — with Douglas
Fairbanks, Jr., and Sally Blaine
( F . B. 0., Jan. 15; 5,511 ft.; 64 to 78 min.)
Evidently this picture was made for the purpose of
using up the odd and ends of the Santa Monica auto
racing scenes, which were taken for “The Racing
Romeo,” with Red Grange, another F. B. O. pic-
ture; for, several shots are almost the same as shots
seen in “The Racing Romeo.”
“Dead Man’s Curve” is onty a fair program pic-
ture, with Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., as the hero, try-
ing to convince people that his motor, an invention
of his own, is a good motor and that it could beat
at the auto races anything on wheels; and with the
villain, manager of the heroine’s father’s automobile
works, desperately trying to prevent the hero from
being given a chance to try his motor, lest he suc-
ceed in winning the race, for he felt that, should he
win the race, he would win also the heroine, whom
he wanted as a wife for himself. In the development,
the hero is, of course, shown succeeding, for the hero-
ine, unknown to the hero, backs him up through a
friend.
The plot has been founded on the story “ The
Century Championship,” by Frank Richardson
Pierce; it has been directed by Richard Rosson, from
a screen adaptation by Ewart Adamson.
If you have it bought, do not play it close to the
days you will play “The Racing Romeo.”
“Body and Soul” — with Aileen Pringle,
Norman Kerry, Lionel Barrymore,
and T. Roy Barnes
(Metro-Gold.., Oct. 11; 5,902 ft.; 68 to 84 min. )
Poor! It is no entertainment; no one can be en-
tertained with the doings of a perverted mind. The
villain marries the heroine by making her believe that
the hero did not love her. Several months later the
hero goes to the heroine to find out why she had not
been answering his letters. He meets the villain and
learns that the heroine had married him. The liquor
crazed villain, fearing lest the hero take her away
from him, brands her with a hot iron, so that she
might always be his property. Later on the hero,
fearing lest the villain do some harm to the heroine,
goes to her rescue; he finds her in pains from the
branding, and goes for a doctor. While skiing a
snow avalanche occurs and he is dangerously injured.
He is found by some mountain climbers and taken to
a cabin nearby. They then go to town for a doctor.
The villain is the only doctor in the vicinity, and he
is induced to go with them to treat the injured man.
When he finds out that the man that was hurt was
the hero, and that he was nursed by the heroine, he
decides to kill him. But in the end, his crazed mind
relents; he operates on the hero and saves his life.
He then commits suicide by jumping in a chasm.
Such are the doings of the villain; they are cer-
tainly most unpleasant.
The hero does not do anything that would arouse
the spectator’s good will either; his characterization
is poor; one does not know at first whether he really
loves the heroine or he considers her only as a pass-
ing fancy. It is only toward the end that one realizes
that he loves her.
The picture has been produced well. Its action
unfolds in Switzerland. The plot has been founded
on a story by Katherine Newlin Burt; it has been
directed by Reginald Barker.
188
HARRISON’S REPORTS
THE BLUE SECTION THIS WEEK
The Blue Secion this week contains more infor-
mation than it has ever contained. In addition to
the- First National Exhibition Values, the two-reel
comedies of all distributors, and the News Week-
lies’ Release Chart with the release dates of the
different Newsweeklies, there are given the one-
reel comedies of all national distributors, and the
feature picture release schedules of all national
distributors and of the worth-while regional dis-
tributors. This section is veritably Pandora’s Box ;
it is “The Industry in Four Pages.” This one
section alone is worth to an exhibitor more than
the price of the yearly subscription.
Notice that, in the release schedules of the na-
tional distributors, also the release or identification
numbers of the pictures are given. This should
prove of inestimable value to every exhibitor.
No identification or release numbers are given
with the regional distributors’ pictures, because
such numbers are not the same in all the exchanges.
It is difficult for the average person to realize
the amount of work involved in the preparation of
this Blue Section, as of all Blue Sections. Suffice
it to say that for three straight weeks I tried hard
to get the Fox feature release schedule, but,
despite such efforts and the promises of the Fox
second-rank executives, I have not succeeded in
obtaining it. It seems as if the Fox subordinates
fear to open their mouths to me. In fact, I under-
stand that they become panic-stricken whenever,
during the absence of Jimmy Grainger, I call them
up on the telephone for information.
There is no reason why I should not be able to
get such information without any effort from Fox
as I get it from every other producer-distributor.
But 1 am not able to ; and I would have asked you
to enter a strong protest, were it not for the fact
that Jimmy Grainger is out of town atnd I know
that none of the lesser executives dares give any
information out during his absence — if he wants to
retain his scalp. For this reason, I am not asking
you to protest, for I am sure that when Jimmy
Grainger returns, I shall be able to obtain this in-
formation without any trouble.
In the last two Blue Sections I informed you
that I could not obtain the data from Metro-Gold-
wyn. Because this time I wanted to have the sec-
tion as complete as possible, I wrote a letter to
Mr. Felix Feist, asking for it. Mr. Feist was out
of town at the time I sent it. Upon his return,
however, he sent me all the information I asked
for, and showed a willingness to co-operate with
this paper in such matters. I am giving you this
information so that you may know that I do not
hesitate to give credit to him to whom credit is due.
I want to enrich the Blue Section further; I
want to give in it anything that will prove helpful
to an exhibitor, within reason, taking into consid-
eration the limitations of Harrison’s Reports —
the fact that all its revenue comes from the sub-
scriptions. To this end, I am asking you to send
me suggestions.
Let me say at this time that the suggestion from
several subscribers to give the release or identifi-
cation number of a picture with the title in the
review is impracticable, for the reason that, in the
first place, it will be difficult to obtain the numbers
at the last minute, causing unavoidable delay in
the mailing of the paper; in the second, figures
taken over the telephone are liable, because of
sound distortion, to be wrong ; and thirdly, it may
November 1 9 ,192 7
cause confusion, because of the fact that the pic-
tures of the national distributors will have num-
bers and those of the regional distributors will
not. To offset these difficulties and disadvantages,
I have decided to print all the schedules, with the
numbers and release dates, so that he who wants
to know a picture’s release number may find it in
such schedule.
Let constructive, practical suggestions for the
improvement of Harrison’s Reports, your paper,
come forward.
COMMENDATION FROM GREAT
BRITAIN
Under date of October 11, I received the fol-
lowing letter from Mr. Arthur S. Albin, of The
Regent, Edinburgh, Scotland, and President of
the East of Scotland Section of The Cinemato-
graph Exhibitors Association of Great Britain and
Ireland :
“Dear Mr. Harrison :
“I wish you would change the address of my
REPORTS from Tollcross Cinema, Edinburgh,
to The Regent Picture House, Abbeymount, Edin-
burgh. I am now Resident Manager of Edin-
burgh’s new Super-Cinema, and I need Harrison’s
Reports more than ever.
“With all good wishes from a satisfied sub-
scriber to your paper for many years, I am,
“Sincerely yours,
“A. S. Albin.”
I wrote to Mr. Albin, asking him if I could
reproduce his letter in Plarrison’s Reports. The
following is his reply, under date of October 31st:
“Dear Pete:
“Many thanks for reply re change of address.
“About reproducing my letter : Yes You may
do so in your ‘little paper,’ as you call it. It is
little, but it has a big voice, and a hammer punch
behind it. I hope you will be spared to continue
using the blows on the exhibitors’ behalf, as you
have been doing since I first sent my subscription,
which I think was about 1922.
“While I am writing, I am enclosing my check
for £3 for 1928.”
“P. S. I have addressed you as. ‘Pete.’ Excuse
the familiarity; I have become so intimate with
you through your paper that I cannot help it.”
NOT THE TITLE BUT THE STORY
Mr. George Gerhard, motion picture critic of
“The New York Evening World,” thus wrote in
the issue of November 10:
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer believes it has stumbled
upon the reason why Lillian Gish’s “Annie Laurie”
proved such a disappointment, particularly in this city.
And that is that the title killed it.
Investigation revealed that the public was led by the
title to believe that “Annie Laurie” was another of
those costume plays and that thousands kept away
from it for that reason. As a result it flopped in sev-
eral houses throughout the country.
Now M-G-M- is taking a long chance in Los An-
geles, according to advices from that city, by chang-
ing the title of the picture to “Ladies From Hell,”
in the belief that the picture really is a winner instead
of a loser. It will open in the California city under
that title on Monday. “Ladies From Hell,” by the
way, is the title given the Scotish kilted troops in the
late war.
The trouble is not with the title but with the
picture; it is not entertaining, and the picture-
goers know it ; they know when a picture is bad
just as they know when it is good.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Vol. IX
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1927
No. 47
Partial Index No. 6— Pages 161 to 184
Angel of Broadway, The — Pathe-DeMille. .
Becky — Metro-Goldwyn
Broadway Madness — Excellent- Reg
Bugle Call, The— Metro-Goldwyn
Cherokee Kid, The — F. B. O
College Widow, The — Warner Bros
Crystal Cup, The— First Nat
Devil’s Twin, The — Pathe
Dog of the Regiment, A— Warner Bros...
Dress Parade — Pathe-DeMille
East Side, West Side — Fox
Fair Co-Ed, The — Metro-Goldwyn
Firemen, Save My Child — Paramount
Flourflusher, The — Universal
Flying Luck — Pathe
Forbidden Woman, The — Pathe-DeMille...
Frontiersman, The — Metro-Goldwyn
Garden of Allah — Metro-Goldwyn
Gay Rerteat, The — Fox
Gentleman of Paris, A — Paramount
Girl from Chicago, The -Warner Bros....
Harp in Hock, A — Pathe-DeMille
Harvester, The — F. B. O
High School Hero — Fox.
Hook and Ladder No. 9 — F. B. O
Jazz Singer, The — Warner Bros
Jesse James — Paramount
Loves of Carmen, The — Fox....
Magic Flame, The — United Artists
Main Event, The — Pathe-DeMille
Million Dollar Mystery, The — Rayart Reg.
Nest, The — Excellent-Reg
No Place to Go — First National
Once and Forever — Tiffany
Pretty Clothes — Sterling Reg
Racing Romeo, The — F. B. O
Reno Divorce, A — Warner Bros
Road to Romance, The — Metro-Goldwyn.
“Sailor Izzy Murphy”
Sailor’s Sweetheart, A — Warner Bros
Silver Valley — Fox
Singleshot Kid, The — F. B. O
Spring Fever — Metro-Goldwyn
Stranded — Sterling
Student Prince, The — Metro-Goldwyn
Tea for Three — Metro-Goldwyn
Tell It to Sweeney — Paramount
Twelve Miles Out — Metro-Goldwyn
Two Arabian Knights — United Artists
Uncle Tom’s Cabin — Universal
We’re All Gamblers — Paramount
Women’s Wares — Tiffany
.179
.167
,175
,162
.182
.171
.162
.170
.178
.178
.170
.175
.170
.178
.182
,179
.174
155
175
167
182
182
178
175
166
171
171
163
162
183
167
163
179
170
174
171
174
170
.166
163
162
183
174
166
163
179
175
147
175
183
167
182
377 The Sunset Derby — June 3 700,00GB — 700.000P
407 Dance Magic — June 12 900, OOOB — 800, OOOP
404 Framed — June 19 950, OOOB — 950, OOOP
391 Naughty But Nice — June 26 1,300,0C0B
385 Lonesome Ladies — July 3 700,000B
422 The Devil’s Saddle — July 10 500, OOOB
443 The Prince of Headwaiters — July 17 900,OOOB
413 White Pants Willie — July 24 800.000B
409 For the Love of Mike — July 31 900,OOOB
548 Poor Nut — Aug. 7 1, 000,0003
432 The Stolen Bride — Aug. 14 1,100,00GB
405 Hard Boiled Haggerty — Aug. 21 9SO,OOOB
428 Three’s a Crowd— Aug. 28 1,000, OOOB
368 Camille — Sept. 4 Special
465 The Red Raiders — Sept. 4 700, OOOB
450 Smile, Brother, Smile — Sept. 11 900,000B
453 The Life of Riley — Sept. 18 1,100,0003
400 The Drop Kick — Sept. 25 1,100,000b
545 Rose of the Golden West — Oct. 2 Special
433 American Beauty — Oct. 9 1,100, 000B
379 The Crystal Cup — Oct. 16 900, OOOB
319 Breakfast at Sunrise — Oct. 23 Special
457 No Place to Go — Oct. 30 800,00GB
469 Gun Gospel — Nov. 6 500,0006
547 The Gorilla — Nov. 13 Special
542 Helen of Troy — Nov. 20 Special
452 Man Crazy — Nov. 27 9DO,OOOB
COLUMBIA FEATURE PICTURE
RELEASES
1927-28 Product
Aug. 10 — “The Blood Ship” Hobart Bosworth
Aug. 22 — “Alias the Lone Wolf” Bert Lytell
Sept. 3 — “Sally in Our Alley” Shirley Mason
Sept. 15 — “By Whose Hand?” Ricardo Cortez
Sept. 27 — “Isle of Forgotten Women” Conway Tearle
Oct. 9 — “The College Hero” Bobby Agnew
Oct. 21 — ’’The Tigress” Jack Holt
Nov. 2 — “Stage Kisses” Kenneth Harlan
Nov. 14 — “The Opening Night” Claire Windsor
Nov. 26 — “The Warning” .Jack Holt
Dec. 8 — “So This Is Love” Viola Dana
Dec. 20 — “The Siren” Dorothy Revier
EXCELLENT FEATURE PICTURE
RELEASES
1927-28 Product
7489 “"The Nest” — Pauline Frederick Aug. 1
5867 “Your Wife and Mine” — Phyllis Haver. .. .Sept. 1
6300 “B’way Madness” — Marguerite de la Motte.Oct. 1
6900 “A Bowery Cinderella” — Pat O’Malley Nov. 1
6100 “Back to Liberty”— George Walsh Dec. 1
6800 “Satan and the Woman” — Claire Windsor. . .Jan. 1
FIRST NATIONAL PICTURE
EXHIBITION VALUES
362 Lunatic at Large — Jan. 2 700.000B — 700,O00P
396 Lady in Ermine— Jan. 9 1, 100, 000B— 1,100, 000P
388 The Perfect Sap— Jan. 16 800, OOOB— 700, OOOP
383 The Masked Woman — Jan. 23. . .600.000B — 600,OOOP
420 The Overland Stage— Jan. 30.. . .700,000B— 700, 000 P
366 McFadden’s Flats — Feb. 6 Special
416 Affair of the Follies— Feb. 13. . . .750,00GB— 9O0,O00P
381 Easy Pickings— Feb. 20 700, OOOB— 650, 000 P
403 The Sea Tiger— Feb. 27 950.000B— 950,000P
392 Orchids and Ermine — Mar. 6.1,300.000B — 1,300,000P
408 High Hat— Mar. 13 900,OOOB— 600,000P
318 Venus of Venice — Mar. 20 Special
387 Notorious Lady— Mar. 27 800.000B— 800.000P
394 Three Hours— Apr. 3 1, 100, OOOB— 1,100, 000 P
421 Somewhere in Sonora — Apr. 3. . . 500, OOOB — 5Q0,000P
370 Long Pants— Apr. 10 l.OOO.OOOB— 1.000, 00OP
382 See You in Jail— Apr. 17 800, OOOB— 800.000P
374 Convoy — Apr. 24 Special
364 The Tender Hour— May 1 Special
412 All Aboard— May 8 800,000 B— 800, 000 P
410 Broadway Nights— May 13 900, OOOB— 900, OOOP
423 Babe Comes Home — May 22 Special
367 Lost at the Front — May 29 Special
418 Land Beyond the Law — June 6... 500, OOOB — 600, OOOP
FIRST DIVISION FEATURE PICTURE
RELEASES
1927-28 Product
July 24 — “Satin Woman” Mrs. Wallace Reid
July 31 — “Million Dollar Mystery” James Kirkwood
Aug. 7“ Rose of Kildare” Pat O’Malley
Aug. 14 — “Silent Hero” Edna Murphy
Aug. 21 — “Return of Boston Blackie” Corliss Palmer
Aug. 28 — “Girl From Rio” Carmel Myers
Sept. 4 — “Cruise of the Hellion” Tom Santchi
Sept. 11 — “Better Days” Dorothy Devore
Sept. 18 — “Boy of the Streets” Micky Bennett
Sept. 25 — “Gun Hand Garrison” Tex Maynard
Oct. 2 — “Death Valley” Carrol Nye
Oct. 9— “Cabaret Kid” Geo. Hackethorne
Oct. 16 — “Light in the Window” Henry B. Walthal
Oct. 23 — “Finnigan’s Ball” Cullen Landis
Oct. 30 — “On the Stroke of 12” David Torrence
Nov. 6 — “Wheel of Destiny” Georgia Hale
Nov. 13 — “Cheer Leader” Ralph Graves
Nov. 20— “Casey Jones” Ralph Lewis
Nov. 27 — “Heroes in Blue” John Bowers
Dec. 3 — “The Miracle Girl” Betty Compson
Dec. 10— “The Law and the Man”. .. .Gladys Brockwell
Dec. 17 — “Ridin’ Luck” Tex Maynard
Partial Index No. 6
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Sat., Nov. 19, 1927
F. B. O. FEATURE RELEASE SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Aug. 7 — 8291 — “Breed of Courage Ranger
Aug. 15 — 8201 — “Great Mail Robbery,'’
Theodore Von Eltz
Aug. 21 — 8212 — “The Coward” Warner Baxter
Aug. 31 — 8205 — “Not for Publication” Ralph Ince
Sepa. 4 — 8221 — “Flying U Ranch” Tom Tyler
Sept. 17 — 8202 — “Clancy’s Kosher Wedding,”
George Sidney
Sept. 18 — 8216 — “In a Moment of Temptation,”
Charlotte Stevens
Sept. 25 — 8231 — “The Mojave Kid” Bob Steele
Oct. 2 — 8203 — ‘“Gingham Girl” Lois Wilson
Oct. 9 — 8292 — “Ranger of the North” Ranger
Oct. 16 — 8213 — “Jake the Plumber” Jesse Devorska
Oct. 19 — 82010 — “Shanghaied” Ralph Ince
Oct. 23 — 8241 — “Boy Rider” Buzz Barton
Oct. 30 — 8222 — “Cherokee Kid” Tom Tyler
Nov. 6 — 8204 — “Judgment of the Hills”. .Virginia Valli
Nov. 13 — 8211 — “Hook and Ladder No. 9,”
Cornelius Keefe
Nov. 20 — 8232 — “The Bandit’s Son” Bob Steele
Nov. 23 — 8206 — “The Harvester” Orville Caldwell
Dec. 4 — 8242 — “Slingshot Kid” Buzz Barton
Dec. 10 — 82013 — “South Sea Love” ... Patsy Ruth Miller
Dec. 11 — 8293 — “The Swift Shadow” ... Ranger, the Dog
Dec. 18 — 82112 — “Aflame in the Sky” Sharon Lynn
Dec. 25 — 8223 — “Desert Pirate” Tom Tyler
Dec. 27 — 8208 — “Legionaires in Paris” A1 Cooke
SPECIALS
June 25 — 8381— “Moon of Israel” Maria Corda
Oct. 17 — 8382 — “Racing Romeo” “Red” Grange
GOTHAM FEATURE PICTURE
RELEASES
1927-2S Product
Sept. 1 — “The Satin Woman” Mrs. Wallace Reid
Aug. 15 — “The Rose of Kildare” Helene Chadwick
Sept. 15 — “The Girl From Rio” Carmel Myers
Oct. 15 — “Blondes by Choice” Claire Windsor
Nov. 15 — ‘The Cheer Leader” Ralph Graves
Dec. 15 — “The Fruit of Divorce” Percy Marmont
METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER FEATURE
PICTURE RELEASE SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Sept. 3 — 844 — “Foreign Devils” Tim McCoy
Sept. 10 — 851 — “The Big Parade” John Gilbert
Sept. 17 — 836 — “Annie Laurie” Lillian Gish
Sept. 24 — 729 — “Road to Romance” Ramon Novarro
Oct. 8 — 850 — “Ben Hur” Ramon Novarro
Oct. 11 — 809 — “Body and Soul” Norman Kerry
Oct. 15 — 736 — “The Fair Co-Ed” Marion Davies
Oct. 22 — 815 — “Spring Fever” Wm. Haines
Oct. 29 — 823 — “In Old Kentucky” James Murray
Nov. 5 — 837 — “Garden of Allah” Alice Terry
Nov. 12 — 818 — “Becky” Owen Moore
Nov. 19—834 — “Man, Woman and Sin” John Gilbert
Nov. 26 — 801 — “Thirteenth Hour” Dog Picture
Dec. 3 — 838 — “London After Midnight Lon Chaney
Dec. 10 — 847 — “Spoilers of the West” Tim McCoy
Dec. 10 — 804 — “Tea For Three” Aileen Pringle
Sept. 17— 820— “The Lovelorn” Sally O’Neil
Dec. 24 — 808 — “Buttons” Jackie Coogan
Dec. 31 — 824 — “Bridal Night” Norma Shearer
PARAMOUNT FEATURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Aug. 1 — 2771 — “Beau Geste” Ronald Colman
Aug. 1 — 2701 — “Firemen, Save My Child,”
Beery — Hatton
Aug. 6 — 2776 — “The Covered Wagon” Re-issue
Aug. 6 — 2730 — “Service for Ladies”. . .Adolphe Menjou
Aug. 13 — 2773 — “Metropolis” Special Cast
Aug. 13 — 2747 — “Mme. Pompadour” Dorothy Gish
Aug. 20-2744— “Running Wild” W. C. Fields
Aug. 27 — 2706 — “Hula” Clara Bow
Aug. 27 — 2680 — “Soft Cushions” Douglas MacLean
Sept. 3 — 2779 — “Chang” Special
Sept. 3 — 2721 — “We’re All Gamblers”. Thomas Meighan
Sept. 10— 2719— “Barbed Wire” Pola Negri
Sept. 10 — 2752 — “Nevada” (Zane Grey) Gary Cooper
Sept. 17 — 2725 — “Swim, Girl, Swim” Bebe Daniels
Sept. 17 — 2748 — “Stark Love” Special Cast
Sept. 24 — 2735 — “One Woman to Another”. .Flor. Vidor
Sept. 24 — 2710 — “Tell It To Sweeney”. .Chester Conklin
Oct. 1 — 2778 — “The Rough Riders” Noah Beery
Oct. 1 — 2780 — “The Way df All Flesh Emil Jannings
Oct. 8 — 2739 — “Figures Don’t Lie” Esther Ralston
Oct. 8 — 2756 — “Shootin’ Irons” Jack Luden
Oct. 15 — 2715 — “Shanghai Bound” Richard Dix
Oct. 15 — 2731 — “A Gentleman of Paris” . Adolphe Menjou
Oct. 22 — 2774 — “Jesse James” Fred Thomson
Oct. 22 — 2702 — “Now We’re in the Air”.. Wallace Beery
Oct. 29 — 2781 — “Underworld” George Bancroft
Oct. 29 — 2720 — “Woman On Trial” Pola Negri
Nov. 5 — 2753 — “Open Range” Lane Chandler
Nov. 12 — 2726 — “She’s a Sheik” Bebe Daniels
Nov. 12 — 2722 — “The City Gone Wild”. Thomas Meighan
Nov. 19 — 2740 — “The Spotlight” Esther Ralston
Nov. 26— 2749— “The Last Waltz” Ufa
Dec. 3 — 2736 — “Honeymoon Hate” Florence Vidor
Dec. 10 — 2782 — “The Street of Sin” Emil Jannings
Dec. 10 — 2716 — “The Gay Defender” Richard Dix
Dec. 17 — 2711— “Two Flaming Youths” W. C. Fields
Dec. 24 — 2745 — “The Secret Hour (Tent) .. .Pola Negri
Dec. 31 — 2732 — “Serenade” Adolphe Menjou
Jan. 7 — 2772 — “Beau Sabreur” Gary Cooper
Jan. 7 — 2705 — “Now We’re in Dutch”. . .Wallace Beery
Jan. 21 — 2761 — “Honky Tonk” George Bancroft
Jan. 14 — 2707 — “Get Your Man” Clara Bow
Jan. 14 — 2741 — “The Glory Girl” (Tent) .Esther Ralston
Jan. 21 — 2713 — “The Pioneer Scout” Fred Thomson
PATHE-DeMILLE FEATURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Aug. 29 — 330 — “Fighting Eagle” Rod LaRocque
Oct. 10 — 302 — “Angel of Broadway” Leatrice Joy
Oct. 24 — 308 — “Wise Wife” ....Phyllis Haver
Oct. 31 — 307 — “Girl in the Pullman” Marie Prevost
Nov. 7 — 335 — “The Forbidden Woman”. . .Jetta Goudal
Nov. 11 — 331 — “The Dress Parade” William Boyd
Nov. 11 — 332 — “The Wreck of the Hesperus,”
» Virginia Bradford
Nov. 18 — 306 — “The Main Event” Vera Reynolds
Nov. 27 — 312 — “My Friend From India,”
Franklin Pangborn
Dec. 10 — 320 — “On To Reno” Cruze Picture
Dec. 18 — 300 — “Almost Human” Vera Reynolds
Dec. 31 — 301 — “The Rush Hour”.. Marie Prevost
UNIVERSAL FEATURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Sept. 4— A5695 — “Back to God’s Country”.Renee Adoree
Sept. 18 — A5691 — “The Lone Eagle” Kent- Keane
Sept. 25 — A5692 — “Painted Ponies” Hoot Gibson
Oct. 2 — A5693 — “Silk Stockings” Laura LaPlante
Oct. 9 — A5696 — “Cheating Cheaters”.. Compson-Harlan
Oct. 23 — A5690 — “The Chinese Parrot” All Star
Nov. 6 — A5700 — “The Small Bachelor” All Star
Nov. 13— A5706 — “The Thirteenth Juror,”
Bushman-Nilsson
Nov. 20 — A5708 — “Galloping Fury” Hoot Gibson
Nov. 27 — A5694 — “Wild Beauty” Rex-Marlowe
Dec. 4 — A5710 — “The Irresistible Lover,”
Kerry-Moran
Dec. 18 — A5721 — “Paris Or Bust” Glenn Tryon
Dec. 25 — A5709 — “A Man’s Past” Conrad Veidt
Jan. 8 — A5702 — “Finders Keepers” Laura LaPlante
Jan. 22 — A5719 — “Alias the Deacon,”
Hersholt-Marlowe-Graves
Jan. 29 — A5697 — “The Rawhide Kid” Hoot Gibson
Feb. 5— A5698— “The Shield of Honor All Star
Feb. 19 — A5704 — “The Four Flusher” George Lewis
Feb. 26 — A5701 — “Midnight Rose” DePutti-Harlan
Mar. 4 — A5705 — “Surrender” Philbin-Mosj ukine
Mar. 11— A5707— “The Girl Show” All Star
Mar. 18 — A5703 — “A Trick of Hearts” Hoot Gibson
Apr. 1 — A 57 12 — “Thanks for the Buggy Ride,”
Laura LaPlante-Tryon
Apr. 8 — A5714 — “13 Washington Square” All Star
Apr. 22 — A5711 — ‘“Buck Privates” DePutti
May 6 — A5699 — “Hot Heels” Glenn Tryon
May 20 — A5713 — “The Wild West Show”.. Hoot Gibson
June 3 — A5717 — “The Symphony,”
Hersholt-Nixon-Lewis
June 17 — A5715 — “We Americans” All Star
Partial Index No. 6
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Sat., Nov. 19, 1927
T uly 1 — A5720 — “The Count of Ten,”
Chas. Ray-Ralston-Greason
juiy 8 — A5718 — “A Society Cowboy” Hoot Gibson
julv 22— A5716 — “The Grip of the Yukon” All Star
Aug. 19— A5722— “Riding For Fame” Hoot Gibson
rayart feature release
SCHEDULE
Oct. 22 — 195 — “Sailor Izzy Murphy” George Jessel
Nov. 5 — 208— “A Reno Divorce” May McAvoy
Nov. 12 — 203 — “A Dog of the Regiment”. . .Rin-Tin-Tin
Nov. 19 — 204 — “The Girl From Chicago” .... Myrna Loy
Nov. 26 — 210 — “Good Time Charley” Warner Oland
Dec. 3 — 217 — “The Silver Slave” Irene Rich
Dec. 10 — 196 — “Ginsberg the Great” George Jessel
Dec. 17 — 207 — “Brass Knuckles” Monte Blue
1927-28 Product
Jan. — “The Mystery Brand” Ben Wilson
j an.— “Smiling Billy” Billy Sullivan
Jan. — “Speeding Hoofs” Dick Hatton
Jan. — “The Scorcher” Reed Howes
jan. — “The Show Girl” ...Mildred Harris, Gaston Glass
Jan. — “Where North Holds Sway” Jack Perrin
beb. — “A Yellow Streak” Ben Wilson
jreb — “The Action Craver” Dick Hatton
Feb.— “The Laffin’ Fool” Jack Perrin
Mar. — “Riders of the West” Ben Wilson
Mar. — “Saddle Jumpers” Dick Hatton
Mar— “The Midnight Watch” Roy Stewart
Apr— “Range Riders” Ben Wilson
Apr. — “Western Courage” Dick Hatton
Apr— “The Lost Limited” Reed Howes
Apr— “When Seconds Count” Billy Sullivan
^pr —“Thunderbolt’s Tracks” Jack Perrin
May— “Daring Deeds” Billy Sullivan
May— “Modern Daughters” Edna Murphy
June — “Speedy Smith” Billy Sullivan
June— “The Romantic Rogue” Reed Howes
July— “The Royal American” Reed Howes
Aug— “The Racing Fool” Reed Howes
Aug.— “The Silent Hero” Robert Frazer
Aug.— “Million Dollar Mystery” James Kirkwood
Sept. — “Prince of the Plains” Tex Maynard
Sept. — “Cruise of the Hellion” Edna Murphy
Sept.— “A Boy of the Streets” Johnny Walker
Oct. — “Gun-Hand Garrison” Tex Maynard
Oct. — “A Light in the Window” H. B. Walthall
Oct.— “The Wheel of Destiny” Forrest Stanely
Oct.— “Ridin’ Luck” Tex Maynard
Nov— “A Wanderer of the West” Tex Maynard
Nov. — “Heroes in Blue” John Bowers, Sally Rand
Nov. — “On the Stroke of Twelve” D. Torrence
Dec.— “Wild Born” Tex Maynard
STERLING FEATURE PICTURE
RELEASES
1927-28 Product
Aug. 15 — “Stranded”. Shirley Mason, William Collier, Jr.
Oct. 15 — “Pretty Clothes’. Jobyna Ralston
Dec. 15 — “Outcast Souls” Priscilla Bonner
Jan. 30 — "Burning Up Broadway”. (No cast announced)
RELEASE SCHEDULE FOR
ONE AND TWO REEL COMEDIES
Paramount — One Reel
Oct. 1 — Koko the Kop Inkwell
Oct. 8 — Tired Wheels Krazy Kat
Oct. 15 — Koko Explores Inkwell
Oct. 22 — Topsy Turvey Krazy Kat
Oct. 29 — Koko Chops Suey Inkwell
Nov. 5 — The Pie Cure Krazy Kat
Nov. 12 — Koko’s Klock Inkwell
Nov. 19 — For Crimes Sake Krazy Kat
Nov. 26 — Koko Kicks Inkwell
Dec. 3 — Milk Made Krazy Kat
Dec. 10 — Koko’s Quest Inkwell
Dec. 17— The Stork Exchange Krazy Kat
Dec. 24 — Koko the Kid Inkwell
Dec. 31 — Wired and Fired Krazy Kat
Paramount — Two Reels
Sov. 5 — Find the King Christie
Nov. 12 — Easy Curves Christie
Nov. 19 — Ocean Blues Christie
Nov. 26 — Mad Scrambles Christie
Dec. 3 — Splash Yourself Christie
Dec. 10 — Toddles Novelty
Dec. 17 — Dizzy Sights Christie
Dec. 2-1 — Nifty Nags Christie
Dec. 31 — Swiss Movements Christie
TIFFANY FEATURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Sept. 15 — “The Girl From Gay Parce”. .Barbara Bedford
Oct. 1 — “Women’s Wares” Evelyn Brent, Bert Lytell
Oct. 15 — “Once and Forever” Patsy Ruth Miller
Nov. 1 — “Night Life" Alice Day, John Harron
Nov. 15 — “Wild Geese” Belle Bennett, Donald Keith
Dec. 1— “The Haunted Ship”. Dorothy Sebastian
Dec. 15 — “Streets of Shanghai” Kenneth Harlan
Jan. 1 — “A Woman Against the World”. .Harrison Ford
UNITED ARTISTS FEATURE RELEASES
1927-28 Product
Oct. — “Topsy and Eva” Duncan Sisters
Oct. — “The Magic Flame”. Ronald Colman, Vilma Banky
Nov. — “Two Arabian Knights” William Boyd
Nov. — “College” Buster Keaton
Dec. — “My Best Girl” Mary Pickford
Dec. — “Sorrell and Son” H. B. Warner
Jan. — “The Circus” Charles Chaplin
Jan. — “Sadie Thompson” Gloria Swanson
Jan. — “Gaucho” Douglas Fairbanks
Feb. — “The Garden of Eden” Corrinne Griffith
Feb. — '“The Dove” Norma Talmadge
Feb. — “The Devil Dancer” Gilda Gray, Give Brook
Mar. — “Drums of Love” Mary Philbin, L. Barrymore
Mar. — “Ramona” Dolores Del Rio, Warner Baxter
Mar. — “Tempest” John Barrymore
Universal — One Reel
Oct. 3 — The Mechanical Cow Oswald Cartoon
Oct. 10 — Saxaphobia Snappy Comedy
Oct. 17 — Great Guns Oswald Cartoon
Oct. 24 — Hot Stuff Snappy Comedy
Oct. 31 — All Wet Oswald Cartoon
Nov. 7 — The Love Wallop Snappy Comedy
Nov. 14 — The Ocean Hop Oswald Cartoon
Nov. 21 — Scrambled Honeymoon. .. .Snappy Comedy
Nov. 28 — The Banker’s Daughter .... Oswald Cartoon
Dec. 5 — Swell Clothes Snappy Comedy
Dec. 12 — Harem Scarem Oswald Cartoon
Dec. 19 — A Rattling Good Time Snappy Comedy
Dec. 26 — Riskety Gin Oswald Cartoon
Universal — Two Reels
Nov. 2 — Passing the Joneses Stern Bros.
Nov. 7 — The Newlyweds’ Mistake Stern Bros.
Nov. 9 — The Disordered Orderly Stern Bros.
Nov. 14 — Ocean Bruises Gump-Univ. Spec.
Nov. 16 — Buster! What’s Next Stern Bros.
Nov. 23— Oh Mabel Stern Bros.
Nov. 28 — A Total Loss Gump-Univ. Spec.
Nov. 30 — On Deck Stern Bros.
Dec. 5 — Newlywed’s Friends Stern Bros.
Dec. 7 — Showing Off Stern Bros.
Dec. 12 — Andy Nose His Onions. .. Gump-Univ. Spec.
Dec. 14 — Run Buster Stern Bros.
Dec. 21 — There’s a Will Stern Bros.
Dec. 26 — The Mild West Gump-Univ. Spec.
Dec. 28 — Model George Stern Bros.
WARNER BROS. FEATURE PICTURE
RELEASES
1927-28 Product
Sept. 3 — 191 — “The Bush Leaguer” Monte Blue
Sept. 10 — 205 — “The Desired Woman” Irene Rich
Sept. 17 — 197 — “Slightly Used” May McAvoy
Sept. 24 — 212 — “Jaws of Steel” Rin-Tin-Tin
Oct. 1 — 198 — “One Round Hogan” Monte Blue
Oct. 8 — 194 — “A Sailor’s Sweetheart” .. Louise Fazenda
F. O. B. — One Reel
Sept. 4 — Newslaff No. 1 Newslaff Series
Sept. 18 — Newslaff No. 2 Newslaff Series
Oct. 2 — Newslaff No. 3 Newslaff Series
Oct. 16 — Newslaff No. 4 Newslaff Series
Oct. 30 — Newslaff No. 5 Newslaff Series
Nov. 13 — Newslaff No. 6 Newslaff Series
Nov. 27 — Newslaff No. 7 Newslaff Series
Dec. 11 — Newslaff No. 8 Newslaff Series
Dec. 25 — Newslaff No. 9 Newslaff Series
F. O. B.— Two Reels
N<5V, ‘j — Mickey’s Eleven Mickey McGuire
Nov. 14 — Fleshy Devils Standard Comedy
Dec. 5 — Mickey’s Battle Mickey McGuire
Dec. 12 — Three Missing Links Standard Comedy
Educational — One Reel
Qct. '2— Switches Witches..'. Felix the Cat
Oct. 9— Eats for Two Dunham-Thompson-Cameo
Oct. 16 — No Fuelin’ Felix the Cat
Oct. 16 — Here and There in Travel Land,
Hodge Podge
Oct. 23 — Burning Timber — Rough Country,
Outdoor Sketches
Oct. 23 — Shooting Wild Lloyd-Cameo
Oct. 30 — Daze and Knights Felix the Cat
Oct. 30 — For Men Only Curiosities
Nov. 6 — He Tried to Please. .. Collins-Hutton-Cameo
Nov. 13 — Uncle Tom’s Crabbin’ Felix the Cat
Nov. 13 — Models in Mud Hodge Podge
Nov. 20 — Many Wings — Beside the Still Waters,
Outdoor Sketches
Nov. 20 — Rest Day Cameo Comedy
Nov. 27— Whys and Other Whys Felix the Cat
Dec. 4 — Lovingly Yours Curiosities
Dec. 4 — Ain’t Nature Grand? Quillan-Cameo
Dec. 11— Hits the Deck Felix the Cat
Dec. 11 — A Whirl of Activity Hodge Podge
Dec. 18 — It’s Me Collins-Cameo Comedy
Dec. 25 — Injun Food — Moods of the Sea,
Outdoor Sketches
Dec. 25 — Behind in Front Felix the Cat
Educational — Two Reels
Nov. 6 — Brunettes Prefer Gentlemen . Drew-Mermaid
Nov. 6 — Some Scout Lupino Lane
Nov. 13 — Scared Silly Arthur-Tuxedo
Nov. 20 — The Little Rube Dorothy Devore
Nov. 27 — Red Hot Bullets Quillan-Mermaid
Nov. 27 — Shamrock Valley Big Boy Juvenile
Dec. 4 — Oh What a Man Larry Semon Comedy
Dec. 11 — Nothing Flat Davis-Mermaid
Dec. 18 — Papa’s Boy Lloyd Hamilton
Dec. 25 — Hello Sailor Lupino Lane
Dec. 25 — Angel Eyes Big Boy Juvenile
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
Aug. 27 — An African Adventure Oddity
Sept. 10 — Jewels of Venus Oddity
Sept. 24 — Soaring Wings Oddity
Oct. 8 — Dog Days Oddity
Oct. 22 — Hidden Death Traps Oddity
Nov. 5 — Assorted Babies Oddity
Nov. 19 — A Fight for Life Oddity
Dec. 3 — Winged Death Oddity
Dec. 17 — The Lion Hunt Oddity
Dec. 31 — The Parasol Ant Oddity
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Sept. 3 — The Sting of Stings Charley Chase
Sept. 10 — Sugar Daddies All Star- Roach
Sept. 17 — What Every Iceman Knows. .Max Davidson
Sept. 24 — Yale vs. Harvard Our Gang
Oct. 1 — The Lighter That Failed Charley Chase
Oct 1 — The Flag (Technicolor) ...... .Great Events
Oct. 8 — The Second Hundred Years.. All Star-Roach
Oct. 15 — The Call of the Cuckoo Max Davidson
Oct. 22 — The Old Wallop Our Gang
Oct. 29— The Way of All Pants Charley Chase
Nov. 5— Hats Off All Star-Chase
Nov. 12 — Love ’Em and Feed ’Em Max Davidson
N ov. 19 — Heebee- J eebees. Our Gang
Nov. 26 — Us.. Charley Chase
Nov. 26 — Buffalo Bill’s Last Fight (Technicolor),
Great Events
Dec. 3 — Putting Pants on Phillip All Star-Chase
Dec. 10 — Fighting Fathers Max Davidson
Dec. 17 — Not Titled Our Gang
Dec. 24 — Not Titled Charley Chase
Fox — One Reel
Aug. 21 — The Salmon Run Fox Varieties
Sept. 4 — Sky Frontiers Fox Varieties
Sept. 18 — Under Colorado Skies Fox Varieties
Oct. 2 — Argentina Fox Varieties
Oct. 16 — Northern Alaska Today Fox Varieties
Oct. 30 — The Romantic Alhambra Fox Varieties
Nov. 13 — The Moose Country Fox Varieties
Nov. 27 — Lights and Shadows of Sicily. .Fox Varieties
Dec. 11 — Solitudes Fox Varieties
Dec. 25 — Art Treasures of the Vatican,
Fox Varieties
Fox — Two Reels
Nox. 6 — Four Faces West Van Bibber
Nov. 20 — A Silly Sailor Imperial Comedies
Dec. 4 — Wild Puppies Animal Comedies
Dec. 18 — Love Is Blonde Imperial Comedies
Pathe — One Reel
Oct. 2 — The Kick Meehan-Rice
Oct. 9 — The Forward Pass Meehan-Rice
Oct. 16— The Lateral Pass Meehan-Rice
Oct. 23 — Football Field Officials Meehan-Rice
Oct. 23 — From Soup to Nuts Rarebits-Record
Nov. 20 — -Winging Around Europe with
Will Rogers Rogers-Clancy
Nov. 20 — Have a Drink Rarebits-Record
Dec. 18 — Exploring England with Will Rogers,
Rogers-Clancy
Pathe — Two Reels
Nov. 6 — Chicken Feed Roach-Our Gang
Nov. 13— Smith’s Cousin Mack Sennett
Nov. 13 — King Harold ....Gaiety
Nov. 20 — Do Detectives Think? Roach
Nov. 27 — The Bull Fighter Mack Sennett
Nov. 27 — From Hand to Mouth (re-issue),
Roach-Lloyd
Nov. 27 — Fiddlesticks Sennett-Langdon
Nov. 27 — Young Hollywood Brandeis
Dec. 4 — Assistant Wives Roach-Chase
Dec. 11 — Smith’s Modiste Shop Sennett
Dec. 18 — Flaming Fathers Roach
Dec. 25 — Love in a Police Station Sennett
Pathe — Three Reels
Dec. 25— Sunnyside Charlie Chaplin
Pathe
93 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 12
94 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Nov. 16
95 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 19
96 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Nov. 23
97 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 26
98 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Nov. 30
99 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 3
100 Even Number .. .Wednesday, Dec. 7
101 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 10
102 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Dec. 14
103 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 17
104 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Dec. 21
Fox
14 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 12
15 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 16
16 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 19
17 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 23
18 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 26
19 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 30
20 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 3
21 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 7
22 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 10
23 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 14
24 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 17
25 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 21
Paramount
31 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 12
32 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 16
33 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 19
34 Even Number. . . .Wednesday, Nov. 23
35 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 26
36 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 30
37 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 3
38 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Dec. 7
39 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 10
40 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Dec. 14
41 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 17
42 Even Number. . . .Wednesday, Dec. 21
International
92 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 12
93 Odd Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 16
94 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 19
95 Odd Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 23
96 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 26
97 Odd Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 30
98 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 3
99 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 7
100 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 10
101 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 14
102 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 17
103 Odd Number. . . .Wednesday, Dec. 21
Metro-Gold wyn
26 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 12
27 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 16
28 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 19
29 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 23
30 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 26
31 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 30
32 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 3
33 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 7
34 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 10
35 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 14
36 Even Number Saturday, Dec. 17
37 Odd Number Wednesday, Dec. 21
Kinograms
6243 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 12
6244 Even Number. .Wednesday, Nov. 16
6245 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 19
6246 Even Number. .Wednesday, Nov. 23
6247 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 26
6248 Even Number. .Wednesday, Nov. 30
6249 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 3
6250 Even Number. .Wednesday, Dec. 7
6251 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 10
6252 Even Number. .Wednesday, Dec. 14
6253 Odd Number Saturday, Dec. 17
6254 Even Number. .Wednesday, Dec. 21
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New Y'ork, under the act of March 3, 1?79.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions .• • • • 12-00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. IX
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1927
No. 48
A Statement Worth Noting by Exhibitors and Stars
“Exhibitors’ Herald,” in the issue of November 12,
states the following under the caption, "No Profit,
No Rental”:
“The financial brokerage firm which is offering for
sale stock in the United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc.,
is making certain assurances to prospective purchasers
which will be very interesting to exhibitors generally.
“In a circular letter the company declares:
“ ‘The rental is made directly dependent upon the
irawing power of the picture at the box office. No
rental is paid for the picture unless our theatres make
a net profit for the common stockholders.’
"The United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc., a sub-
sidiary of the United Artists corporation, through its
brokerage firm herewith presents a rental scheme
which, we are sure, would be hailed with great delight
by all kinds of exhibitors, everywhere.
“No film rental unless the theatre makes a net profit
is ideal enough for the exhibitor, but we wonder how
United Artists, as a producing and distributing com-
pany, would like to adjust their selling system to con-
form with this idea.”
* * *
Mr. Quigley means well when he makes the sug-
gestion that United Artists apply the “No Profit, No
Rental,” plan in their dealings also with independent
exhibitors; but, with all due respect for his opinions, I
think that the suggestion, if put into force by United
Artists now, would prove ruinous to the independent
exhibitors. Such a plan would have been the exhibi-
tors’ salvation two or three years ago, when United
Artists had good pictures; but not this year, when
almost every one of the pictures they have released
this season has proved a box office flop.
“Topsy and Eva,” for example, has proved such a
box-office failure that United Artists are attempting
to make the exhibitors believe that it is a big drawing
card by telling them only half of the truth; in a re-
cent ad of theirs in the trade papers, they failed to
state explicitly that the big receipts in the Chicago
Theatre Chicago, were owed chiefly to the personal
appearance of the Duncan sisters, who are popular
everywhere, particularly in Chicago, and not to the
film itself. “Two Arabian Knights” is not making
the success it deserves, perhaps for the same reason
that made Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer change the title of
"Annie Laurie” — it may lead the picture-goers to be-
lieve that it is a costume play. “My Best Girl”? — Oh,
what a “flop”! I have never seen a failure of a pic-
ture more pitiful. In my review of it I said in the
note that the night I saw it at the Rialto, the third
night of the engagement, I saw no one standing up
at 7 :00 when I went in, and I saw no one standing up
at 9:30, when I went out. Well, I passed by the
Rialto Friday night, November 11, at 9:30 p. m., the
seventh day of the engagement, but I saw nobody
standing up in the back part of the house. I passed
by there Saturday night, at 7:30, and the same condi-
tion existed. Sunday night, at 6:30 p. m., there was
no one standing up at the back part of the house, and
there was no line in front of the box office, when other
theatres were having long ques. That is why I say
that Quigley’s suggestion would prove ruinous to you
now, unless you can induce United Artists to agree to
take off your “nut” first, before letting them share in
the receipts. If you cannot induce them to accept
such an arrangement, then the best thing for you to
do is to offer them “so much” for the picture, and
tell them: “Take it or leave it.” In other words, for
the first time since United Artists has been formed
you are going to reverse the tables on them.
In connection with the “No Profit, No Rental”
statement of the United Artists financial brokerage
firm, I wonder how the stars will relish the idea of
letting United Artists put their pictures in the United
Artists’ theatres under such a scheme. And I wonder
how the directors would relish it.
“THE PICTURE NOT THE THING,”
SAYS A PROMINENT CRITIC
Two weeks ago I said in an editorial that the pic-
ture is no longer “The Thing,” and that vaudeville
and musical comedy acts have overshadowed it. Mr.
Richard Watts, Jr., a prominent daily critic, on the
“New York Tribune” staff, agrees with these deduc-
tions; in the November 14 “Sunday Tribune,” he has
a long article on the subject, which says:
“It may conceivably be significant that possession
of one of those ascending orchestra pits has become
of more importance to a film theatre than a projec-
tion machine. The popularity of its jazz band and the
name of its vaudeville headliner currently means more
to a house than the quality of the picture shown or
the excellence of the star. In other words, the pres-
ent overwhelming of both cinema and variety as sepa-
rate entitles before the onward sweep of a combined
form of the two, that incidentally minimizes the pic-
ture, has become one of the most important phe-
nomena of the amusement world. ..."
Mr. Watts, however, shows an optimism as to the
future of the motion picture, expressing the belief
that the picture will hold its own in the end. “You
can't, I suspect,” says he, “step on the incoming
cinema with any impunity, and when the current rage
is over the vaudeville element in the film world is
likely to grow considerably more humble than at
present.”
GOOD WORK BY A NEWSPAPER
CRITIC
Mr. Chester B. Balm, Dramatic Critic of the “Syra-
cuse Herald," is doing much good work for the ex-
hibitors; he is telling the public what they are up
against in conducting their theatres.
The value of public good will cannot be estimated
in dollars and cents. Up to this time the producers
have had things their own way; they have been able
to present their case to the public from their own
point of view. This point of view has not been, of
course, flattering to the exhibitor. So Mr. Bahn, by
writing articles that present your side to the public,
deserves your thanks.
MAKE HIM A MEMBER OF THE
ANANIAS CLUB!
The figures given out by the Rialto Theatre, a
United Artists house (formerly Famous Players-
Lasky) as to the amount of money “My Best Girl,”
with Mary Pickford, took in the first week is S33.800.
The person that gave out these figures certainly
deserves a life membership in the Ananias Club; for
the Rialto Theatre to take in so much money it must
have long ques in front of it from noon till night.
And there were lines at no time; I watched the thea-
tre closely.
190
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Night Life” — with Johnnie Harron, Eddie
Gribbon and Alice Day
( Tiffany , Nov. 1; 6,235 ft.; 72 to 89 min.)
Synopsis: The hero (Johnnie Harron) and his pal
(Eddie Gribbon), Austrians, return from the World War
to Vienna, their home town. Being unable to obtain
work, they are driven to stealing. They ply their trade
successfully. The heroine, hungry, dips her fingers into
the hero’s vest pocket. The hero catches her in time
to save his watch. She tells him she has never done
such a thing, and that she was driven to it by hunger.
The hero takes her to a restaurant, feeds her, and then
leads her to his home. In time they fall in love. He
finds her a job in a beer garden. One day she sees the
hero stealing a jewel from a woman and is heartbroken;
for the first time she realizes that he is a pickpocket. She
follows him home and with tears in her eyes induces him
to give her the pewel so that she might return it to the
owner. The hero’s pal, who resented her coming between
them, follows her and asks her to hand him the jewel.
Upon her refusal, he gives her away to the authorities,
telling them that it was she that had stolen it. She is
arrested. He returns home and tells the hero that he was
foolish to entrust a woman with a jewel, expressing the
belief that she had run away with it. The truth, however,
soon becomes known. The hero decides to go to the au-
thorities and tell them the truth. But his pal goes there
first, and takes the blame, bringing about the liberation
of the heroine.
Criticism : There are many things in favor of this
picture. The good acting, for example, as a result of the
good direction. The story, too, is not trite ; it has unusual
twists, keeping the interest of the spectator alive from
start to finish. The characters appear as real human
beings. As a result the illusion created is perfect — one
feels as if present before a real-life occurence.
But the story is not pleasant, and the characters do not
awaken sympathy. The hero and his pal are shown turn-
ing into thieves. And one cannot sympathize with thieves.
The heroine, too, though a good girl, is introduced into
the story in an act of stealing. It is true that she was
driven to it by want but we are not convinced of it ; the
author merely says so ; she was not shown in action forced
to do it. And in drama, not what the others say about
a character, not even what the character says about him-
self, but what is shown in action is what counts. The
hero’s pal is shown as a contemptible creature ; his selfish-
ness makes him tell a heinous lie, causing the unjust
arrest of the heroine. It is true that he does an act of
self-sacrifice in the end, but this cannot square things
up. Had he been shown doing the self-sacrificing act
without the lie, he would have aroused considerable sym-
pathy. Such a change can still be brought about with
proper editing.
The picture, which has been directed by George Arch-
ainbaud, should interest very well non-critical spectators.
“Good Time Charley” — with Warner Oland
and Helene Costello
( Warner Bros., Nov. 12; 6,302 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
A human interest story of stage life, in which the hero,
an actor, loses his wife, and goes through life believing
that she had been struck by a drop curtain, when in truth
she had fallen from the stairway while trying to get away
from the villain, who had assaulted her. The most most
pathetic scenes in the picture are those at the end, where
the heroine, who had gained fame in Europe as an actress,
finds her father in a poor actors’ home, blind ; he had never
told her of his misfortune ; on the contrary, he had made
her believe that he was doing well. The sacrifices of the
father for his motherless daughter move one. The father’s
misfortunes arouse one’s sympathy for him. Warner
Oland makes an excellent father. In view of the fact
that he has taken mostly villainous parts, his ability to
win one’s sympathy in a non-villainous part speaks well
for his acting. Helene Costello does well as the orphaned
daughter. Clyde Cook, as the father’s inseparable com-
panion and friend wins a good share of the spectator’s
sympathy. Montagu Love makes a good villain. The
plot has been founded on the story by Darryl Francis
Zanuck ; it has been directed well by Michael Curtis, from
a scenario by Anthony Coldeway and Owen Francis.
It should appeal well everywhere.
November 26, 1927
“Sorrell and Son” — with H. B. Warner,
Mickey McBan and Anna Q. Nilsson
( United Artists, Nov. 12; 9,000 ft.; 104 to 128 min.)
Few pictures have moved a picture-goer as “Sorrell
and Son” moves him. The unselfish sacrifice of a father
for his little son is shown in so pathetic a manner that it
will be difficult for the average person to keep his eyes
dry. The scenes where the father finds himself broke and
unable to obtain work, and reveals his plight to his son,
telling him that he can no longer keep up appearances
and that he would hold no more secrets from him, but tell
him everything, are moving. The scenes at the inn,
where he is shown doing the lowest kind of menial work,
but happy at the thought that he could obtain any work at
all, and thus be able to help himself and his little son,
are other scenes that move one. Pathetic are also the
scenes at the hotel, where he is shown working as an
assistant porter. But the most pathetic of them all are
those in the operating room, where the son, who had be-
come a surgeon, is about to perform a difficult operation,
and the father sitting among the doctor spectators, watch-
ing him. The scenes where the father is shown in agony
from an incurable malady, arousing the pity of the son to
such an extent that he gives him an overdose of mor-
phine to end his agonies by death, too, are deeply pathetic.
This part has been handled well.
The plot has been founded on the famous book by
Warwick Deeping ; it has been directed by Herbert Bren-
non most skillfully. H. B. Warner portrays the role of
the father with sincerity. Mickey McBan makes a love-
able little son. Nils Asher takes the part of the grown
son fairly well ; he is a nice-looking boy, but he is too
young to be the most famous surgeon in England. Anna
Q. Nilsson takes the part of the hero’s wife; she is
shown leaving him for a wealthy man. Paul McAllister
takes very well the part of the surgeon under whom the
young hero had studied. Every one in the supporting cast,
too, does good work. There are some faults in the con-
tinuity and in the action here and there but the human in-
terest is so deep that these will undoubtedly be overlooked.
The age of the hero, for example, could not have been
more than twenty; he looked about twelve Immediately
after the world war had ended. And it would be incon-
ceivable for a boy to have finished his studies, let alone
to have become a famous surgeon by 1927.
Note : “Sorrell and Son” is drawing well at the Rivoli,
where it is now playing. The fame of the book, and the
good quality of the picture no doubt are the cause of it.
But it is problematical how it will be received in small
towns, because of the daring twist in it, of the fact that
a son kills his father, even though it is done extremely
well. But small-town exhibitors will, no doubt, have an
opportunity to know how it will take before they buy it.
“Man Crazy” — with Dorothy Mackaill and
Jack Mulhall
( First National, Nov. 27; 5,542 ft.; 64 to 79 min.)
A pleasing romance, with a surprise twist in the closing
scenes. The action is not as fast as that of a melodrama,
but it manages to hold one’s interest well from the be-
ginning to the end, and to hold one in a happy frame of
mind. The love affair is supposed to be between a wealthy
heroine, who poses as a waitress, and a poor hero, driver
of a modern truck ; but when the hero learns that the girl
he loved was not a waitress but the daughter of a promi-
nent wealthy family, he lets the heroine and her folk
know that he, too, is the son of a prominent wealthy
family, and that he had been driving a truck to keep him-
self occupied. There is one situation that offers some
mild thrills ; it is where the hero is shown waylaid by
bootleggers and held up, the object of the bootleggers
being to use the hero’s truck to transport liquor with.
But the heroine, who had overheard their conversation,
had taken a gun, and driven to the place where they were
to waylay the hero, and when they held up the hero she
shoots and frightens the bootleggers away, making them
think that prohibition officers were after them. The plot
has been founded on the Saturday Evening Post story
“Clarissa and the Post Road,” by Grace Sartwell Mason ;
it has been directed skillfully by John Francis Dillon.
Mr. Mulhall makes a pleasing hero, and Miss Mackaill a
charming heroine. Edythe Chapman makes a good growl-
ing grandmother. Phillips Smalley, Walter McGrail, and
Ray Haller fill their parts well.
A good entertainment at any time, in any house.
1927 HARRISON'S REPORTS
“Xhe Last Waltz” — with a cast of German
players
(Param.-Ufa, Nov. 26; 6,940 ft.; 80 to 99 min.)
It is excellently produced, but it is^hardly an enter-
tainment for American consumption. The scenes in the
first part where the Crown Prince is shown on top of tne
woman in bed, kissing her, should shock the family patron-
age. For the good of the business Paramount should
eliminate this scene. The theme is bad enough, as it is.
The hero awakens some sympathy, but what stands m
the foreground is the villainous acts of the crown prince.
He is presented as a person of loose morals, about to be
betrothed to a princess of another kingdom, whom he had
never seen. The princess plays a joke on the prince and
exchanges identities with a Duchess, who is one of the
ladies in waiting. While the two are driving in the coun-
try, a blizzard arises. They are compelled to seek refuge
in an inn nearby. This happens to be the inn where the
prince had been holding his revelries with the officers ot
his guard. He takes her upto his room. When she tells him
that” she is not the princess, then the prince changes man-
ners and decides to treat her just as lie had been treating
other women of loose morals. But the hero, who had met
the Duchess by accident and fallen in love with her, his
sentiment being reciprocated by the Duchess, arrives in
the inn, just in time to save the Duchess from unpleasant
consequences. Because the hero had drawn sword against
the prince, the prince has him court-martialed and sen-
tenced to be shot. . ' '
The story ends with the hero escaping the shooting
and marrying the heroine.
The title is taken from the fact that the hero, as a
last request, dances with the heroine a waltz supposedly
the last.
The picture has been produced in Germany under the
supervision of Charles A. Whitaker.
“Breakfast at Sunrise” — with Constance
Talmadge
( First National, Oct. 23; 6,222 ft.; / 2 to 88 min.)
At the Strand, where I saw this picture Sunday after-
noon, people were yawning. There was a laughter ripple
now and then, but this could not offset the general ten-
dency of the spectators to yawn. It is a French farce-
comedy, in which the chief doings are the heroine’s marry-
ing the young hero so that she might spite the man she
was about to marry, and he, to spite the girl whom he
wanted to marry but who had thrown him down because
he did not have any money. In the development of the
story, the two are shown eventually as falling in love
and becoming husband and wife, not only in name but in
fact. None of the situations are “naughty,” and if there
were they would not offend anybody, because nobody
would stay awake to be offended. The plot has been
founded on the play by Andre Birabeau ; it has been
directed by Malcolm St. Clair.
You may double-feature it if you have it bought.
Note : I saw this picture at the Strand Sunday after-
noon, the second day of the engagement, and the house
was not full. On Friday evening at 7 :30, the seventh
and last day of the engagement, the house was about one-
fourth full, and at 9:30, just before the first evening show
let out, the house was about two-thirds full. In other
days, Constance Talmadge used to make people stand up
almost at any time of the day. But times have changed.
Manifestly she has done well to go with United Artists.
“In Old Kentucky” — with James Murray
and Helene Costello
( Metro-Gold ., Oct. 29; 6,646 ft.; 77 to 95 min.)
Whoever is responsible for the final shaping of the
story of this picture, deserves the prize for lack of good
taste. How in the world he expected the average picture-
goer to feel sympathy with a hero that all of a sudden
turns into a cad is beyond comprehension. The hero, a
Southerner, is shown engaged to the heroine, also a
Southerner. Each loves the other. He goes to the war,
and, for causes explained by dialogue but not shown in
action, comes back a drunkard and a gambler ; he had
also lost his moral character. In one scene, he is shown
making a dishonorable proposal to the heroine. During
the action he shows disrespect to his parents, and lets
them suffer from want. His transformation is illogical :
seeing in hock a loving cup, a prize won by one of his
father’s racing horses, he comes to the realization that
191
his parents are in dire want. He learns that his father
had no money with which to pay the entry fee for Queen
Bess, goes to the Jockey Club, pays it, and exacts a prom-
ise from the president of the club not to tell his father
who paid it. But all these acts are illogical for the reason
that a person that will make a dishonorable proposal to
the girl who loved him and with whom he had been in
love, and that will leave home, letting his parents suffer,
will hardly change into a good son just because he had
seen, while in an intoxicated condition, a loving cup of
his father’s pawned, particularly when such person had
turned into a gambler and a drunkard. Even if such a
person would act that way in real life, he is surely not
fit for a hero in a picture. The heroine does not get much
sympathy, either ; one cannot feel much sympathy for a
picture-heroine that will marry a man that had insulted
her.
The sad part about it is the fact that the material in
the story was good enough to have made a good horse-
racing medodrama had it been handled well. Marshall
Neilan made a good picture with the same story before,
about eight years ago, for First National. One cannot
blame director Stahl for it, for he has already proved his
ability. Perhaps one could not blame the scenarist either
when one realizes that pictures at the Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer lot are made by the factory method. The plot has
been suggested by the Charles Dazey play. Wesley Barry,
Edward Martindale, Dorothy Cummings, Nick Cogley and
others appear in the supporting cast.
“She’s a Sheik” — with Bebe Daniels
( Paramount , Nov. 12; 6,015 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
Just fair. While it has fast action in the beginning
and at the end, it sags in the middle, with the result that
the spectator, if not bored, is made to interest himself in
the proceedings only mildly. Miss Daniels assumes a male
“Mark of Zoro” role, and by the way she handles it one
may be sure that she can supplant Douglas Fairbanks
anywhere. She seems to be an expert fencer, if one is
to judge by the manner she keeps her feet while fencing.
The picture unfolds in Africa, in the desert, and the hero-
ine takes the part of an Arabian uncontrollable maid,
daughter of a Moor (a Mohammedan J and of a Spanish
mother. She is wanted by a notorious brigand for a
wife ; he threatens her father with dire consequences if he
should object. The father laughs instead of becoming
frightened, for he knows his daughter’s ability with the
sword. This she proves when she suddenly appears. She
has a duel with the brigand chief, during which she cuts
one after another all his garments, these dropping from
his body, leaving him only with a B. V. D. on. The novel
situation is that in which the heroine is shown frightening
the Arabs, who had revolted and had surrounded the little
city, by having two Americans, whom the heroine had res-
cued once from the hands of the brigands, throw on the
sands a picture with a picture machine showing French
troops charging. The Arabs shoot the shadows, but when
they see that none were falling they become frightened and
run away. The heroine’s love affair is with a young
officer of the French Army post, whom she had abducted.
He was to be court martialed and shot but for the fact
that she took the blame for his disappearance. Her put-
ting the brigand armies in flight earned for her the right
to save the life of the man she loved.
The plot has been founded on a story by the well known
screen writer, John McDermott. It has been directed by
Clarence Badger. Richard Arlen takes the part of the
hero. William Powell, Josephine Dunn, James Bradbury,
Jr., Billy Franeym, Paul McAllister and A1 Fremont ap-
pear in the supporting cast.
THE NEW THEATRE
Easton, Md.
November 2, 1927.
Mr. P. S. Harrison,
New York City.
Dear Mr. Harrison;
I am returning Mr. Shannahan’s letter.
Many thanks for your interest and co-operation.
You have been a veritable God-send to the exhibitor.
I attribute much of the concession on the part of the
producer to your activity. In fact all of it.
With high personal regards, I am,
Yours cordially,
E. A. PLUMMER.
192
HARRISON’S REPORTS
PIN THIS ON YOUR HAT!
Last week I told you that the pictures are no longer
“the thing”; that they are used merely as “chasers.”
Just look at the bills of the Strand, Capitol, Para-
mount, and Roxy for the week beginning November
12, and you will be convinced of the fact:
ROXY : Russell E. Markert’s 16 American Rockets
in “Dance of the Skeletons,” the best trained girl-
dancing number in the world. “Festival of Bagdad,”
with 250 people in the scene. Roxy Symphony Or-
chestra of 110. Chorus of 100 voices. Roxy Ballet
Corps. Colorful Russian Corale, Russian Cathedral
Choir. Russian Quartette. Divertissements, with
Maria Cambarelli. Movietone News Reels, and “Two
Girls Wanted,” with Janet Gaynor.
CAPITOL: Vincent Lopez and his Casa Lopez
orchestra in an elaborate Revue featuring the famous
radio entertainers, Happiness Boys — Ernest Hare and
Billy Jones; Chester Hale girls and an assisting group
of well known entertainers. Capitol Grand Orchestra,
and “The Garden of Allah.” (N. B. — Those who may
not know the exact value of Vincent Lopez may be
told that he is a big drawing card, and a highly paid
one.)
PARAMOUNT: Murray Anderson’s sunshiny
radio revue, “Listen In,” with New York’s original
stage orchestra and the premier appearance of Kos-
loff. Also Jesse Crawford. Also Carlos and Inez,
Jerome Mann, Herman and Seamon, Irmanette, the
Ada Kaufman girls, Dolores and Eddy, and “The
Last Waltz.”
STRAND: Nathaniel Shilkret and his augmented
Victor Salon Orchestra presenting “Inspirations,”
and his regular weekly musical novelty. Sofia del
Campo, sensational Victor Record Artists. Ukulele
Ike. The Eight Cocktails. The Liebling Singers —
Mark Strand male chorus. Elaborate Finale “Shuf-
fling the Deck,” with Veronica with entire ensemble,
and Constance Talmadge in “Breakfast at Sunrise.”
Any wonder that the neighborhood theatres and the
theatres of the surrounding territory are starving?
People go to one of these theatres once in one week,
and they have had enough amusement for an entire
week, both from a satisfaction as well as from an
expenditure point of view. It costs the family any-
where from two to five dollars. And when they spend
so much money at a “crack,” they have no money left
to go to their neighborhood show.
Pin this on your hat and let the first salesman that
will tell you how much his pictures are doing read it.
Perhaps he will not talk about high film rentals again.
SOME THOUGHTS AROUSED BY A
CHANGE OF A TITLE
As stated in last week’s issue of this publication,
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer has changed the title “Annie
Laurie” to “Ladies From Hell,” on the ground that
the words Annie Laurie convey the thought that the
picture is a costume play. It is to this that Metro-
Goldwyn-Mayer attributes the picture’s failure to
draw.
Since “Annie Laurie” IS a costume play, the act of
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer in changing it to “Ladies
From Hell” is an effort to mislead the public and
cause you, too, to mislead it.
As Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer admit, by their act, that
costume plays do not draw, it is well for you, in mak-
ing up your mind whether you should buy “Quality
Street” or not and how much you should pay for it
if you should decide to buy it, to remember that it is
a costume play, and that it is not setting the world
afire at the Embassy, where it is showing now.
Its failure to draw may be owed to the fact that it
is a costume play, or to the fact that two-dollar prices
are charged. Whatever the cause, however, the truth
of the matter is that the picture is not making a good
showing, even though its quality is excellent, and
Marion Davies does as good a bit of acting as she did
in “Little Old New York.” If its failure to draw is
owed to the high admission prices charged, I hope
that the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer executives and the
executives of all the other companies will some of
these days wake up to realize that every good picture
they may make is not a two-dollar picture, and that
the two-dollar pictures do not grow on trees. But I
November 26,1927
am inclined to believe that its failure to draw is owed
to both, the fact that it is a costume play and that
high admission prices are charged for it.
In reference to the new title of “Annie Laurie,” let
me remind you that at the Trade Practice Conference
the producers offered a resolution, which was accepted
by the exhibitors unanimously, promising to avoid
certain things in pictures. The resolution consisted of
23 Points.
One of the points, Point No. 1, read as follows:
.“Pointed profanity — by either title or lip — this in-
cludes the words God, Lord, Jesus, Christ (unless
they be used reverently in connection with proper re-
ligious ceremonies), Hell, damn, Gawd, and every
other profane and vulgar expression however it may
be spelled.”
The resolution was introduced by Louis B. Mayer,
who was acting as chairman of the producer commit-
tee on resolutions. So by including the word “Hell”
in the new title for “Annie Laurie,” Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer is the first company to violate that resolution.
The excuse they may give is that “Ladies From
Hell” is a nickname given to the Highlanders during
the World War. If so, then the offense is doubly
strong, for, in addition to using a profane word,
Metro-Go ldwyn resort to misrepresentation; the
World War has happened two centuries after the
period depicted by the action of the picture.
Another thing for you to remember is the fact that
“Lady From Hell,” which is similar to the title
“Ladies From Hell,” was the title of a cheap “Asso-
ciated Exhibitors” picture, with Roy Stewart, re-
leased two years ago.
“CALLAHANS AND MURPHYS”
WITHDRAWN
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer has withdrawn “The Calla-
hans and the Murphys” from the market entirely, as
a result of a protest from Cardinal Dougherty, Arch-
bishop of Philadelphia.
It is difficult to compute in dollars and cents how
much Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer has lost in good will by
not having withdrawn this picture earlier, and still
more difficult how much harm its strong-headedness
will cause the entire motion picture industry. One of
the results is the McGee Bill, which is before the
aldermen of this city. If this Bill should be enacted,
there is the fear that similar bills will be introduced
in other city councils and state legislatures.
HARRISON’S REPORTS feels a great deal of
gratification in having enlightened the Irish and other
Catholics that the independent theatre owners had
nothing to do with the production of such pictures as
"The Callahans and the Murphys” and “The Garden
of Allah.” In one occasion I appeared before a body
consisting of the heads of almost all Irish organi-
zations and explained to them how you buy film.
The opposition against “The Garden of Allah” has
not been withdrawn because of the withdrawal of
“The Callahans and the Murphys.” And you will do
well to think it seriously before you show this picture.
THE NEW “BREVITY” A GEM
The December “Brevity” is funnier than that of
any other month so far. It is one laugh after an-
other.
The exhibitor that will miss reading “Menkis at
the Federal Trade Conference,” will miss the greatest
fun of his life. The article is witty, and full of subtle
meaning. Jack Miller, Charles L. O’Reilly, Robert
H. Cochrane, Pete Woodhull, Leo Brecher and others
come in for considerable “kidding.”
In another page, HARRISON’S REPORTS comes
in for considerable good-natured “kidding.” I thought
that when David Barrist put in the October issue of
“Brevity” a cartoon representing the producers giving
me a dinner was the funniest thing in filmdom; but
Dave has surpassed it this week in his burlesqueing
of HARRISON’S REPORTS. Some of the subjects
in this burlesque are, an “Analysis of the New Uni-
form Contract,” Louis B. Mayer, reviews, and substi-
tutions.
There are a hundred laughs in every page. Get it
and read it. You’ll get two dollars’ worth of laughs
out of every page.
Entered aa seoond-class matter January i, 1921, at the ilost office at New York, New York, under the aet of March 3, 1*79,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions . 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weehdy by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1928
No. 6
THOSE “CANNED” PETITIONS
Some one in New York City reproduced the press-
sheet on the Brookhart Bill, which I sent out to four-
teen thousand exhibitors, superimposing the follow-
ing wording: “The Reason You Are Receiving These
‘Canned’ letters," and sent a copy to every member of
Congress. He reproduced also the blue blank slip,
which I had sent along with the press-sheet, asking
you to furnish me with the names of other exhibitors
so that I might write to them and induce them to sup-
port the bill. The following is the wording that he
superimposed on it: “A Novel Way to Secure Pros-
pects to Solicit for Subscriptions at $10 Per Year.”
There was no mark on the envelope to indicate who
sent them. Only the post mark on the envelopes gave
away the city from which they were mailed.
As you see from the superimposed wording, the
object of the sender was to show to the Congressmen
that their receiving of letters urging them to vote for
the Brookhart Bill is the result of propaganda on the
part of “P. S. Harrison,” and not of any genuine
demand on the part of theatre owners; and that the
reason why I am asking for these names is, not to help
the Brookhart Bill, but to secure names for the pur-
pose of soliciting subscriptions.
These reproductions were undoubtedly sent by the
producers’ side. I don’t know who sent them, and,
although I can easily guess the author of them, as can
you, I am not going to do it, because I don’t like to
do guessing. But I do know one thing, that this act
has had the opposite effect intended, as I have been
informed from Washington, because no decent per-
son, let alone a public servant, has any respect for the
sender of anonymous communications. It is natural
for a Congressman to say to himself: “If there was
any merit to this attack, the attacker would certainly
have put his name to it so that we might know who
he is.”
One of the lowest, vilest human traits is the sending
of anonymous communications. The weak may be ex-
cused, thought not justified, in doing it; but when the
strong do it there is no words in the dictionary to
characterize the act with.
But while they condemn our “canned” letters, what
do they do? They are circulating “canned” petitions,
against the bill, not only among their own employees
but also among the exhibitors, asking them to sign
them and to send them to their Congressmen. They
have even gone so far as to frame the petitions in such
a way as to lead the exhibitors to believe that they
favor the bill.
In other words, it is legitimate for them to secure
“canned” petitions, but it is sinful for me to send to
you model letters.
I sent out the press-sheets, because I felt that some-
thing ought to be done quickly to educate the exhibi-
tor. We have no national organization, whose business
is to do this; or, to be exact, our national organization
is tied to the coat tails of Mr. Hays, and therefore we
cannot expect any help from it.
I say that something ought to be done quickly, be-
cause I realized that the producers, with nearly fifteen
hundred film salesmen coming in contact with you
daily, and with a million and a half dollars, which is
the budget of the Hays organization, at their disposal,
to spend as much of it in propaganda as they think
necessary, we would not have any chance at a fair ex-
pression of sentiment if we delayed. (A good reason-
ing, if we are to judge by the results that we have so
tar got at Washington.)
The producers must, indeed, be desperate when
they resort to anonymous communications. But don’t
let that worry you; we are going to see the Brookhart
Bill become a law because right is on our side. Just
keep on working. See the head of every civic organi-
zation you can, the head of every fraternal organiza-
tion, the head of the Boy Scouts, your minister, your
editor, your chamber of commerce; in fact, every one
that you can see, to enlist his aid. And don’t forget to
keep your slide on your screen, asking your public’s
support. You are fighting with your hacks against
the wall. Remember this; three years ago there were
more independent exhibitors than there are today; two
years ago there were more; one year ago there were
more; six months ago there were more. The indepen-
dent exhibitors are getting fewer and fewer every
month; they are compelled either to close down or to
sell to the producer circuits. If the Brookhart Bill
does not become a law, you will be the next one that
will be either absorbed by a circuit or driven out of
business. They are talking about government control.
We are all controlled by the Government. Don’t we
have to obey the laws that are framed by the Govern-
ment? And where would we be without obeying the
laws? You have always been controlled by the Gov-
ernment! Don’t you have to get a license before you
open your theatre? Don’t you have to obey the fire
regulations, the police regulations and one thousand
and one other things? On the other hand the pro-
ducers have had thiags their own way. They want no
laws!
As I said before, the Brookhart Bill does not mean
Government regulation. But if it did mean that, it
should be your joy to be regulated by the Government
in business than to be regulated by the producers out
of business.
P. S. HARRISON.
ANOTHER POWERFUL ARGUMENT IN
FAVOR OF THE BROOKHART BILL
One other exhibitor that made a strong argument
in favor of the Brookhart Bill at the recent T. O.
C. C. rally at the Hotel Astor was Billy Brandt.
Billy said that a five hundred seat “bootleg” theatre
was built in his zone in Brooklyn where there are
eight theatres, and was turned over to the Keith inter-
ests without a cent investment. That house imme-
diately became a first-run house, and none of the eight
can now buy a first-run for love or money. In
other words, a five hundred seat house, delivered to a
big circuit, scrapped the investments of eight other
exhibitors.
This is another reason why the Brookhart Bill
should go through. And it is up to you to get busy
if you have not already done so. If you do not, your
turn will come next.
SEND IN ALL CLIPPINGS
In order for this paper to keep informed as to what
is going on in the country in reference to the Brook-
hart Bill, you are requested to send all newspaper clip-
pings that refer to it to this office. You should send
also any literature that has been put out by you in-
tendcd_ to educate your public.
Don’t fail to send to this office also the names of
other exhibitors, to whom I might write in an effort
to induce them to take an active p_art in support of the
Brookhart Bill.
22
“The Gateway of the Moon” — with
Dolores Del Rio
(Fox, Jan. 1; 5,038 ft.; 58 to 72 min.)
Not much to it! It is a jungle story, in which the
most noteworthy thing that happens is the effort of
the heroine’s uncle to have the hero killed, because
he was told too much about his crooked work in pad-
ding expense accounts and in altering the books to
cover up thefts. The title is derived from the fact
that the story unfolds in a place near the upper reaches
of the Amazon, which is called by the Indians by that
name, because of a tradition that those of girls that
called their lovers during a moonlight in that spot
usually saw their lovers come to them soon. Mr.
Pidgeon takes the part of the hero, who shuns women,
and who always repulsed the heroine, daughter of a
white man and a woman of Spanish blood. Eventually,
however, he succumbs.
The plot has been founded on the story by Clifford
Bax; it has been directed by John Griffith Wray, from
a scenario by Bradley King. Anders Randolph takes
the part of the heroine’s uncle; Ted McNamara, Leslie
Fenton, and others appear in the supporting cast.
“Phantom of the Range” — with Tom Tyler,
Duane Thompson and Frankie Darro
(F. B. 0., April 22; 4,871 ft.; 55 to 68 min.)
An unusually interesting western melodrama of the
program variety, having been made so by the good
construction of the plot, the direction and the acting.
The action is fast all the way through — there is some-
thing doing all the time. The plotting and counter-
plotting is well carried out. The chief doings are the
villain’s efforts to make the heroine’s father sell his
ranch for a “song,” although he knew that the prop-
erty was worth a great deal of money; and of the
hero to prevent the villain for intimidating the her-
oine’s father into giving in. The hero wins, of course,
in the end.
The plot has been founded on the story by Oliver
Drake; it has been directed by James Dugan, from a
continuity by Frank Howard Clark. Tom Tyler makes
a good western hero, as usually. Duane Thompson
makes a good heroine. Little Frankie Darro, that
charming little actor, does his bit towards making the
picture entertaining.
Small town exhibitors would do well to book it on
a Saturday,, if Saturday is their biggest day and if
they cater to many children.
“The Pioneer Scout” — with Fred Thompson
( Paramount , Jan. 21; 6,118 ft.; 71 to 87 min.)
An interesting and thrilling story of the frontier
days, in which Mr. Thompson takes the role of a man
that can shoot straight and ride a horse better than
anybody else. He protects the weak and always tries
to discover the man who is back of the massacres of
small trains of emigrants. The suspense is tense all
the way through, particularly in the beginning where
there is shown a covered wagon race, and in the end,
where Mr. Thompson, as the hero, trails the arch-
villain to his lair. The villain had a way of getting
rid of his victims that was at once ingenious and
cruel: his right hand was missing and he had a hook
on it, which he employed as a hand where he could.
He kept the end of the hook sharp, so that, when any
one of his victims would come under the hole of the
floor above, the unsuspecting victim was “hooked”
and dragged up. An exception was made for the
hero when he traced the villain’s hiding place: The
villain ordered his men not to shoot or in any way
to harm the hero because he wanted to handle him
himself. So he allows him to climb up the ladder and
to enter the cabin. Then a struggle ensues. But the
hero, instead of getting the worst of it, as the villain
and his men had expected, gets the best of it; he had
made the villain unconscious from beating and, stand-
ing him up near the door, used the unconscious vil-
lain’s “hook” arm to nod the other outlaws to enter
the cabin. He slugged each one as he entered, until
he fell them all. He then delivered them to his men,
who, led by the hero’s intelligent horse, had followed
and found him.
The part of the picture that shows the hero fell-
ing the outlaws with the unconscious villain’s “hook”
hand will, no doubt, be laughed at by the spectators;
February 11, 1928
it is too far-fetched. But the rest of the action is
convincing.
There is a love affair, too, between the hero and
the heroine, daughter of one of the emigrants.
The plot has been founded on a story by Frank M.
Clifton; it has been directed by Lloyd Ingram and
Alfred L. Werker. Mr. Thompson does good work
as the hero. Nora Lane is a charming heroine. Tom
Wilson makes a vicious and cruel villain; one can
hardly recognize under his make-up the genial Tom
Wilson, who has contributed no few laughs in many
pictures.
“Lady Raffles” — with Estelle Taylor,
Roland Drew and Lilyan Tashman
( Columbia-Regional , Feb. 6; 5,471 ft.; 63 to 78 min.)
This is a high-class crook and detective mystery
melodrama of the Arsen Lupin variety. The story
is interesting; it has been put into scenario form so
intelligently, and has been directed and acted so
skillfully, that it holds the spectator in tense suspense
all the way through. None will guess that the heroine
is a Scotland Yard detective until just before the end.
The scenes in the hero’s home, where the heroine
enters supposedly to escape from the pursuing police
and becomes accidentally a maid, having been pressed
into service by the butler, who mistook her for a maid
that was to work there, are full of suspense; one fears
lest she be detected. Suspense is worked up also in
the situations where the crooks make an effort to get
hold of a precious jewel, eventually succeeding. The
closing scenes, where the heroine is snown entering
the apartment of the thieves for the purpose of re-
covering the valuable jewel, are the most suspensive of
them all: The arch-crook calls up the police for the
purpose of having the heroine arrested. The heroine,
pretending that she is frightened, backs up outside
the room and, after disappearing, shoots her pistol.
The crooks think that she had commited suicide. The
police arrive but when they seek the body they cannot
find it. The crooks become frightened and decide to
take the jewel out of its hiding place and to go away.
The heroine, however, appears suddenly and at the
point of her pistol spoils their plans. She then de-
livers them to the police, informing them that she is
a Scotland Yard detective. The hero, who up to that
time had thought her a crook, but who had told her
that he loved her, no matter what her past was, and
wanted to marry her, opens his eyes wide from joy.
The plot has been founded on the story by Jack
Jungmeyer and Fred Stanley; it has been directed
with intelligence by R. William Neil, from a con-
tinuity by Earl Hudson. A1 Boasberg wrote the
titles. The cast do good work. ,
It is a first class melodrama, and can be shown
anywhere where melodramas are liked.
“That Certain Thing” — with Viola Dana
( Columbia-Regional , Jan. 1; 6,047 ft:; 70 to 86 min.)
The first part is an interesting romance, of the
Cinderella type, with a great deal of light comedy; the
middle part falls down considerably for a short
stetch; but the last part picks up again and interests
the spectator if not as much as the first part, at least
nearly as much. The part that falls down shows the
hero, a young man born with a gold spoon in his
mouth, disinherited by his father because he had
married a girl whom the father thought a mere gold-
digger and as having obtained a job as a ditch digger;
it is too much for one to expect the spectator to be-
lieve that the son of a millionaire would have accepted
such an employment. Yet this part of the story is nec-
essary to furnish the motive of the subsequent action,
for it is while the hero is near the ditches, after he had
been discharged for incompetence, that the idea comes
to his head to start a sandwich factory in which he is
shown later as having made a sucess and as having
proved to his father that not only did he make good
but also that his wife was a hard working young girl,
who made his success possible, instead of a gold-dig-
ger. On these grounds one can excuse the “flatness” of
the action for a short stretch. The story has been writ-
ten by Elmer Harris. It has been directed by Frank
Capra well. Viola Dana makes a good heroine, and
Ralhp Graves a good hero. Burr McIntosh, Aggie
Herring, Carl . Gerard and Sydney Crossley appear in
the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
HARRISON’S REPORTS
23
February 11, 1928
“Buck Privates”— with Lya De Putti,
Malcolm McGregor, Eddie Gribbon
and Zasu Pitts
{ Univ -Jewel, June ii (1928) ; 6,914 ft-d 80 to 98 min.)
Pictures of the “Buck Private” quality build up
business instead of driving picture-goers away. It is
not a pretentious offering, and most of it is illogical;
but it is funny. And that is what, after all, counts. It
is a post-war comedy, its action unfolding in Luxem-
burg, where American troops in passing through it,
were billeted in a small town. The comedy comes
chiefly from the pranks one soldier plays on another,
and from the manners of the heroine’s austere father.
He was a pacifist through and through, and he would
not allowany soldiers to be billeted in his house. Every-
time one would innocently walk into the house, the
spectator would see him roll out like a bundle. There
are thrills, too, these being caused towards the end by
the usual chases: The Purity League, consisting of old
men, in order to put an end to the young women’s
staying out late with the soldiers, decree that all girls
that would fraternize with soldiers should have their
hair bobbed. The heroine is caught at a time when the
hero’s pal was stealing a kiss from her. As a result,
they clip her hair. A complaint is made to the com-
manding officer and the hero’s pal is forced to marry
the heroine. The heroine’s maid, however, who loved
the hero’s pal, brings a soldier’s clothes to the heroine
and makes her don them. She then dresses as a bride,
covering her head with a veil. She is recognized but
during the ceremony the hero, thinking that it was the
heroine whom his pal was marrying, abducts her.
Then there is a chase. Everything is cleared up in the
end; the hero’s pal marries the heroine’s maid, and the
hero the heroine.
This is the first time that Miss Putti has taken an
ingenue part; she has done very well. Malcolm Mc-
Gregor makes a good hero. Eddie Gribbon and Zasu
Pitts liven up the picture with their comical acting.
Good for any theatre.
“Sadie Thompson” — with Gloria Swanson
( United Artists, Released in February; 8,700 ft.)
Considering the fact that the story was one of the
hardest to film, one must take one’s hat off to director
Allan Dwan, to Gloria Swanson, and to whomever has
had anything to do with the making of this picture;
for it has turned out to be a first-class entertainment.
Miss Swanson has never, in fact, done better work
in her screen career. There was much outcry against
the making into a picture of the story upon which
the play “Rain” was founded, because everybody
feared that it would offend religious people. But the
main character, who in the play as well as in the
story was a minister, has been made a professional
reformer in the picture. There is pathos almost all
the way through the picture. Miss Swanson, as the
heroine, wins the spectator’s sympathy. This effect is
brought about by the persecution by the man, who,
under the name of religion, tortures her mentally, in
the end proving that he himself was not free from
temptation. The picture conveys a good moral; it
teaches tolerance. Nothing is shown that would offend
even the strictly religious; the kind of woman the
heroine was is conveyed subtly by implication. But
the fact that she wanted to remain straight but that
the hypocritical reformer wanted to send her back to
San Francisco, where jail awaited her for a crime she
had not commited, arouses one’s sympathy for her,
and consequent antipathy for the reformer.
The plot has been founded on the story by W. Som-
erset Maugham. Lionel Barrymore takes the part of
the reformer. Blanch Friederici, Charles Lane, Flor-
ence Midgley, James A. Marcus, Sophia Artega, Will
Stanton and others are in the cast; all do good work.
“Woman Wise” — with William Russell,
June Collyer and Walter Pidgeon
{Fox, Jan. 15; 5,050 ft.; 58 to 12 min.)
A light comedy; it unfolds in Persia, and shows the
American consul as the hero, and the consul’s secre-
tary as the heroine. The hero’s friend comes from no-
where and things start. He has an eye for pretty
faces, in contrast with the hero, who is a confirmed
woman hater. Eventually, however, he falls under the
spell of the beautiful heroine. But he, thinking that
she loves not him but his friend, decides to go away.
The friend, however, at the last moment, finds out that
she loves not him but the hero, and goes to the hero
and convinces him of the fact.
There is much comedy all the way through, this
being caused by Mr. Russell’s care-free way. Comedy
is caused also in the scenes where Walter Pidgeon
punches William Russell between the eyes just to
show him how much he thought of him, and in the
last scenes where William Russell reciprocates, with
the same motive, by punching Walter Pidgeon in the
jaw; he had found out that only by such a punch
could he convince him that the heroine loved him,
Walter Pidgeon. There is some mild comedy created
by the appearance of the Persian soldiers in their
peculiar costume.
The plot has been founded on the story by Donald
McGibney and J. K. McGuiness; it has been directed
with skill by Albert Ray, from a scenario by Randall
H. Faye. Theodore Kosloff, Raoul Paoli, Ernest
Shields, and Duke Kahanamoku appear in the sup-
porting cast.
February 4th, 1928.
Dear Air. Harrison:
I am writing you to let you know that the Film Ex-
changes of this territory are circulating a petition
among the exhibitors and Film Exchange employees
against the Brookhart Bill.
1 do not care to have my name mentioned or the
theatre I own, as I do not think it would do me any
good.
A few days ago I went into an exchange to book
some pictures and an employee of the exchange set a
petition down in front of me and asked me if I would
sign it. I asked him what it was all about and he
said it was a petition against the Brookhart Bill. I
told him that all I had read of the bill I had read in
HARRISON’S REPORTS. That I thought it was
a good thing and refused to sign the petition.
He laughed when I mentioned HARRISON’S RE-
PORTS. He asked me if I believed the stuff you
were handing out. I told him that I did and further
that I thought you were putting up a good fight for
the exhibitor. This gave him another laugh and he
intimated and tried to create the impression that you
were not on the square with the exhibitors.
I told him that I thought you were on the level
with the exhibitors and that I thought you could not
afford to be any other way, because it was from the
exhibitors that you were getting your three squares
a day. He said, “That’s what you think.”
After he saw that I was thoroughly sold on you and
your views he said that the stand that you were now-
taking would be your finish. He then came ^t me
with the argument about what would happen to the
business under government control, that film would
cost considerable more and that it would drive the
small theatre owner out of business. I told him that
at the rate things were going at present, that it looked
like it wouldn’t be long before we were out of busi-
ness anyhow, and that I for one would sink or swim
with you and your views. He then referred me to a
bulletin board that is up in the exchange on which
was an article by ARTFIUR JAMES, entitled “PETE
THE POISONER.”
The article is one of excerpts from your past issues
in which Arthur James took plenty of healthy cuts
at you.
i want you to know that you have these big fellows
worried plenty. They know your word carries a lot
of weight with the exhibitors and they are by in-
nuendo trying to discredit you in every possible way
for the stand you are taking on the Brookhart Bill.
Just one last word. I don’t think that Arthur James
could have selected a more appropriate title for his
article than “Pete The Poisoner” because, I’ll tell the
cock-eyed world that you have been POISON to the
big fellows of this industry who have tried to get
away with shady deals and tricky contracts. More
power to you Pete.
Very truly yours,
A Theatre Owner.
("Editor’s Note: The name of this exhibitor has been
given to Senator Brookhart in confidence.)
HARRISON’S REPORTS February 11, 1928
24
PETE WOODHULL
Alter six years of investigation of Famous Players-
Lasky, the Federal Trade Commission issued an order
directing them to stop block-booking. . .
Famous Player's-Lasky answered to the Commission:
“Why do you pick on us when everybody has been
doing it?” „ . . ,
“Very well,” the Commission replied, let us have
a conference with representatives of producers, dis-
tributors, and of affiliated as well as unaffiliated ex-
hibitors, to see if we can’t correct the block-booking
evil and the other evils.
And so the Trade Practice Conference was called on
October 10.
At the Conference, the independent exhibitor dele-
gates selected Pete Woodhull as chairman.
The Conference was not a success. As a result, the
Brookhart Bill was introduced in the Senate to correct
the evils by law.
Everything the Brookhart Bill aims at has been de-
manded by the exhibitors at the Conference. Every
exhibitor resolution was voted on unanimously by the
exhibitor delegates, over whom Pete Woodhull pre-
sided. Pete Woodhull was, therefore, honor bound to
support the bill.
But how has he acted ever since? He went to Wash-
ington and called on Senator Brookhart. He came
back and issued a statement telling the world that
Senator Brookhart told him, when his attention was
called to Section Seven of his bill, that he wanted
Government regulation of the motion picture industry.
(The Senator has denied this statement of Wood-
hull’s, stating that he had been misquoted by him.)
At the “Rally” of the T. O. C. C. the week before
last, Pete Woodhull stood up and fought with C. C.
Pettijohn.
Now, Charlie Pettijohn tells us that the reason why
he is with the producer side is not because he believes
that they are right but because you would not pay him
for fighting for you whereas the producers are paying
him well. Yet Pete Woodhull stood up with Petti-
john and fought against the Brookhart Bill. It is
true that he said he was in favor of the bill “if it did
not place the industry under the control of the Gov-
ernment.” But that is all applesauce in my opinion; he
was told that the Brookhart Bill did not mean Govern-
ment regulation but he was unwilling to accept that
interpretation; he cited Senator Brookhart, who, he
said, admitted to him that it meant Government regu-
lation. But the Senator’s denial of it has not changed
his mind; he is still on the other side of the fence.
Up to this time I thought that Pete Woodhull was
a monologuist; I have not found out that he is an
acrobat; he can make a “back somersault” prettier
than any real acrobat that I have ever seen.
But why shouldn’t he feel that way? He is not a
theatre owner, and therefore cannot feel the problems
of the independent exhibitor as he feels them! Not long
ago he sold his theatre to the Stanley interests, and is
now without a theatre. Even his being president of
M. P. T. O. A- is against the rules and regulations
of the constitution of that organization; as I remem-
ber, at Washington a constitution was adopted ex-
cluding from the presidency any one that is not an
exhibitor. And I have never heard that it has been
changed.
Pete Woodhull should not be allowed to represent
independent exhibitors not only because he is not an
exhibitor, but because he does not feel as an indepen-
dent exhibitor feels. The way he has acted in the
last several months rt leads one to believe as if the
other side could never have found a more faithful
worker for their interests. Last fall he went on the
road with C. C. Pettijohn. They visited several state
organization conventions. Out of those that they
visited, Indiana and Ohio were not influenced; the
leaders of the exhibitor organizations in those states
are with us one hundred per cent in this fight. But
Spearman of Oklahoma, Lichtman of Arkansas, Wil-
liams of Nebraska, and Piquet of North Carolina,
lined up with Pettijohn; I have repeatedly tried to get
an expression of sentiment from them in reference
to the Brookhart Bill, but so far I have not been able
to; it seems as if they were lined up with the Hays
crowd by Pettijohn and Woodhull and they stayed
“put.”
Pete Woodhull, in my way of thinking, is working
against the real interests of the independent exhibitors.
But let that not worry you, for without a national or-
ganization to link up the efforts of the various state
units that are working for the bill, the results have
been admirable just the same. Washington has been
buried under an avalanche of letters from constituents.
My files are full of letters, from, exhibitors informing
me of the steps they have taken to gain public sup-
port for the bill. And whenever they find out that
something is being concocted to defeat the bill, they
write or wire, or call me up on long distance to tell
me about it. Last week, for example, I had a tele-
phone call early in the morning from an up-state ex-
hibitor telling me about the petition the producers are
circulating among the exhibitors. Others have in-
formed me of the petition they circulated among the
employees at the exchanges. (This came to my own
attention last week, when I was at an exchange’s poster
window to get a press-sheet; I saw the petition being
signed.)
All this proves that the exhibitors, though scattered
all over creation, can act in unison just the same, if
they are led properly. In a state where the organi1
zation is with us, the organization takes care of the
publicity in the main; but I am concentrating my ef-
forts in the states where the leaders are lined up with
the other side. And the results are wonderful. This
proves that we do not need the aid of the national or-
ganization; not, at least, as it is presently constituted.
M. P. T. O. A. is no longer an independent exhibitor
organization. I do not know where they get their
revenue from. Connecticut has not sent them a cent,
and will not do so. Pittsburgh will not send them a
penny. Philadelphia told Pete Woodhull plainly at
the meeting last fall, where I was an invited guest,
and where he came uninvited, that he need not expect
a penny. I don’t know whether or not Kansas, Okla-
homa, Arkansas, Nebraska, North Carolina, the presi-
dents of which organizations seem to be opposed to
the Brookhart Bill, have sent them any money or not.
If you are a member of any of these organizations,
you should find out. Object to any contributions to
the national organization while the present complexion
continues. If your president should “dodge” answer-
ing you, then it is your duty to stop paying dues. Re-
member that every dollar you contribute to the na-
tional organization, either directly or indirectly, you
contribute it to be used against you. If Mr. Hays
needs the M. P. T. O. A., or what is left of it, let him
support it.
WHY SAN FRANCISCO IS AGAINST US
I wrote to Van Osten, of Allied Amusements, San
Francisco, to let me know whether his organization
is for or against the Brookhart Bill. Mr. Van Osten
wrote me that his organization was opposed to any
Government interference in the motion picture in-
dustry.
I wrote to a friend of mine in that zone to get the
low down. Here is what he replied:
“The Allied Amusements Industries is composed of
members largely from the circuits such as The West
Coast Theatres, the Golden State Theatres, Ackerman-
Harris Circuit, the T. & D., Jr., the Beach-Krahn
Amusement Company, and a few independent theatre
owners.
“As an organization, I cannot see where it can
fairly represent the views of independent theatre
owners, for all except one of these circuits is con-
nected with producer-distributors.
“Allied Amusement Industries has always been
looked upon as a defensive organization in local mat-
ters, such as censorship, unions, and legislation. Mr.
Van Osten is an estimable gentleman, and personally
I hold a high regard for him, but due to the powers
that be I cannot see where he could have taken a dif-
ferent stand; he is not always permitted to follow the
dictates of his own conscience.”
I am investigating other organizations with a view
to finding out why they are opposed to the bill.
But you may be sure that there is something back of
it. You need not worry, however, for the individual
exhibitors work for the bill just the same.
There is one thing that you can say about the
Brookhart Bill; if it will do nothing else, it will serve
to separate the goat from the sheep. Another thing
it has done is to unite the independent exhibitors;
right now they are united as they have never been
united. It shows that when there is a matter of na-
tional interest, they will all fight together — if they are
properly led.
Mntered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at tbe^ost oflice at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 187!k
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published WeeHy by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel.: Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, FEBRUA RY 18, 1928
No. 7
LOOK AHEAD!
Let us turn part of our attention away from the
Brookhart Bill this week and concentrate it on an-
other problem, equally important.
The time when the producers put out campaign
books and other literature for a new season’s product
is near and it is necessary for you to study the busi-
ness conditions, what they are at present and what
they will probably be during the 1928-29 season, so
that you, fortified with such knowledge, may deter-
mine how much you should pay for the new product.
The campaign books this year will, no doubt, be as
attractive as they have been in former years; there-
fore, it is necessary that you possess the information
that will enable you to resist their lure as well as the
lure of the producer-distributor oratory.
* * *
Roger Babson, the well known economist, speaking
at the annual business conference, which was held at
Wesley Hills, Massachusetts, last September, said in
part:
“A condition exists in the business world today that
has never before existed since statistics on business
conditions have been available. I refer to the fact
that we are in a period of declining interest rates,
which heretofore has never been followed by a panic;
and at the same time are in a period of declining com-
modity prices, which heretofore has never been fol-
lowed by good times. That is, economic history shows
that it has always needed high interest rates to bring
on a panic, that it has always needed increasing com-
modity prices to bring on prosperity, and the two fac-
tors have never before existed simultaneously. Yet
today we have the paradox of low interest rates and
declining commodity prices.
“The reason for this unusual situation is that there
is today in the United States an excess of every-
thing . . .
“There is an excess of gold, which is the basic
cause of present dangerous inflation; there is an ex-
cess of manufacturing capacity, which is the cause of
present severe competition; there is an excess of cop-
per, lumber, oil, coal, rubber and other raw materials
which is upsetting commodity markets.
“The volume of business today is good, but com-
petition is so severe and efficiency so low that profits
are small. Statistics indicate that this same condition
will extend into 1928 . . .
“I see no reason why there should be any wage in-
creases during 1928 . . .
“We are in a period when wise manufacturers, mer-
chants and investors will get out of debt and store up
resources. If enough will do this, normal conditions
could continue and such readjustment as is necessary
could be so spread out over a long period as to do no
one any harm.”
* * *
Mr. Claude G. Bowers, of the New York Evening
World, in decrying all talk of prosperity in a speech
of his last January, said that:
One million men are out of employment and three
million working part time.
In the centres of population the employment agen-
cies are overcrowded.
Hundreds of thousands of farmers have been dis-
possessed by mortgages and taxes, and have been
driven to bankruptcy and despair.
* * *
On February 7 the newspapers announced that Gov-
ernor Smith, of New York State, requested Mr. James
A. Hamilton, Industrial Commissioner, to inform him
about the unemployment situation. His letter to the
commissioner reads as follows:
“There have been brought to my attention reports
of a serious condition of unemployment affecting the
City and State of New York at the present time. I
UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THIS IS
CAUSED BY THE DRIFTING INTO NEW
YORK OF MEN FROM OTHER PARTS OF
THE COUNTRY, WHERE UNEMPLOYMENT
IS ALSO MAKING ITSELF FELT [the capitals
are ours]. Whatever the cause, there is, I believe,
considerable suffering as a result.
“I should like to be fully informed on these condi-
tions at the earliest possible moment. I would ask,
therefore, that you have the division of employment of
your department provide me at the earliest possible
moment with a report of the present situation as re-
flected in the employment bureaus under your depart-
ment and any other sources of information which you
may have.
“I would ask you also that you make a rapid sur-
vey of conditions in New York City, utilizing the
sources of information there available.
“My purpose in asking for this is to determine
whether the State of New York, with its large public
works program, or in any other way, can do some-
thing toward relief of this situation.”
* * *
Last week I had a talk with a prominent banker
who told me that there is a depression on, and ex-
pressed the opinion that relief would not come until
well towards the winter; perhaps not before January,
1929.
In former years at this time of the year the clerks
of wholesale stores could not spare time even for
lunch. This year they have all the time they want;
the buyers from out of town go into the stores and
take their time in making purchases.
The printing trade, which is as a rule the barometer
of business conditions, because of the fact that print-
ing is the first thing required in any thriving business,
is at a standstill.
The clothing business is shot to pieces; people are
not buying, and the stores are stacked up with the
dying season’s goods.
Unemployment is on the increase; the Pennsylvania
Railroad has just laid off 25,000 employees.
My barber told me last week that every one he
shaves “kicks” about business. And barbers come in
contact with persons from a variety of trades and of
professions.
The show business is “rotten,” if I may use the
word that the exhibitors give when they are asked:
“How’s business?” One prominent exhibitor told me
last week that fifty per cent, of the exhibitors are on
the verge of bankruptcy, not only in this zone, but in
every zone.
The high rate of interest, which Mr. Babson de-
scribed as the forerunner of panics, is here; on Janu-
ary 25 the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago raised
the rate from 2>l/2 per cent, to 4 per cent. The Fed-
eral Reserve Bank of New York followed suit shortly
afterwards. While no one expects a panic because of
this, every one expects hard times, the result of just
a natural reaction.
I could go on describing conditions in many other
businesses, but I don’t think it is necessary.
( Continued on last Page)
26 HARRISON’S REPORTS February 18, 1928
“The Legion of the Condemned” — with
Gary Cooper and Fay Wray
( Paramount , March 10; 7,415 ft.; 86 to 106 min.)
A powerful aviation melodrama, similar to “Wings.”
Though "Wings” is much more spectacular than
“The Legion of the Condemned,” a great many of
the situations in the latter picture are more dramatic
than those in “Wings.” The Legion of the Con-
demned is supposed to be a corps of aviators whose
past had been so spotful that they seek death to
forget. So any time there is a difficult mission they
fight one another as to who should be the one to
accept it. The scenes that show the first young
aviator caught by the Germans while he was making
an effort to land a spy behind the lines are powerful,
particularly the ones that show him lined up against
the wall to be shot; he did not weaken, but died
smiling. But the most powerful scenes are those
that show the heroine, who had fallen in the hands of
the enemy after being left into German territory by
the hero, forced by the Germans to signal the hero
at the appointed time to take her away, the hero
lands and is caught. The fact that the heroine was
an allied spy then was verified, and both were sent-
enced by a court-martial to be shot. The scenes that
follow, which show the hero’s comrades swooping
down upon the Germans and saving them, are thrill-
ing in the extreme. The picture grips one’s interest
in the beginning and holds it until the last scenes.
The plot has been founded on the story by John
Monk Saunders, author of “Wings.” The picture has
been directed by William Wellman, who directed
“Wings.” Garj- Cooper makes a good hero, and Fay
Wray a good heroine. Barry Norton, Francis Mc-
Donald, Lane Chandler, E. H. Calvert and others are
in the supporting cast: —
At an Embassy Ball in Washington the hero finds
the heroine, fiancee of his, in the arms of a German
officer, attache of the German Embassy. He is so
shocked and becomes so heart-broken that he goes
to France and joins the Legion of the Condemned,
seeking death so that he might forget. No mission
was too dangerous for him; he sought it and fought
for an opportunity to get it. He is ordered to land
a spy behind the German lines. What is his surprise
when he finds out that the person he was to take
along was the heroine herself! She then explains to
him that her allowing herself to be taken by the
German officer in his lap was part of her duty. The
hero is disconsolate that he should have doubted her.
After being landed, she is caught and court-martialed.
But as doubt existed as to her being a spy, they de-
cide to adjourn the court-martial until they found
out whether the hero would come for her She suc-
ceeds in sending a message, but it arrived too late;
the hero had already left to go take her away. The
hero’s chums, realizing the situation, take their aero-
planes, swoop down upon the Germans, and rescue
them.
“Satan and the Woman” — with
Claire Windsor
( Excellent-Regional , Jan. 20; 6,400 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
A fairly human interest story, which has made a
pretty fair program picture. Most of the sympathy
for the heroine is aroused by her aunt’s persecution;
her father had been killed before she was born and
her aunt, from her mother’s side, would not acknowl-
edge her. As^a result, she had been reared by a kind-
hearted woman. But the town folk had always looked
down upon her as a “nameless” creature, even though
her father and her mother had been married. The
kind-hearted foster-mother hoped that in time the
aunt’s heart would soften. With this end in view,
she sends the heroine to her aunt’s home to take
some clothes to her aunt. When the aunt sees her
she becomes furious. The heroine noticed a picture
on the wall that was her exact image. This made
her suspect that she was in some way related to the
picture on the wall. While in the garden, her aunt's
nephew (an adopted child) noticed her and became
attracted by her beauty. This started a friendship
that eventually ripened into love.
The story ends with the heroine as the victor; with
her ways she eventually made her aunt’s heart soften,
to such an extent that her aunt, before her death,
willed all her fortune to her. The heroine, because
the hero just before her aunt’s death had asked her
to become his wife, thought that the hero knew that
the fortune had been willed to her and therefore be-
lieved that his asking her to become his wife had
been prompted by mercenary motives. This re-
sulted in a break between them. In time, however,
she realized how unjust her suspicions had been and
made restitution; she married the hero.
The plot has been founded on the Young's Maga-
zine story “Courage,” by Mary Lanier Magruder.
The picture has been directed by Burton King, from
an adaptation by Adrian Johnson.
“Her Wild Oat” — with Colleen Moore
( First National, Dec. 25; 6,118 ft.; 71 to 87 min.)
A first-class entertainment! There is everything
in it that is necessary to make people laugh; not all
situations are according to Hoyle, but they make one
laugh; and that is what is, after all, needed. The
comedy comes from the situations, from the sub-
titles, and from Miss Moore’s acting. At times one
is at a loss to decide which makes him laugh the
most, Miss Moore’s acting or the clever subtitles.
The story is different from any other story that
has been given her in the past. This time Miss
Moore is a lunch wagon proprietress, but she is ele-
vated to the social position of being a duchess; at
least she impersonates one, until she is found out.
The scenes that show the heroine meeting the real
Duke, whose name she took up, which she had seen
on a bill of fare, are laugh provoking; to escape from
the pursuing detective she enters a taxicab and orders
the driver to drive away fast just as the Duke was
entering the taxicab from the other side. When he
tells her his name and asks her where she wants him
to let her off, the heroine nearly faints. When she
arrives back at the hotel and the awaiting hero, son
of the Duke, who knew that she was impersonating his
step-mother, calls her “mother,” she is petrified, and
the spectator is made to laugh heartily.
The plot has been founded on a story by Howard
Irving Young; it has been directed by Marshal!
Neilan with skill. Miss Moore looks charming.
Larry Kent makes a good hero. Hallam Cooley,
Gwen Lee, Martha Mattox, Charles Giblin, and others
are in the supporting cast.
“The Siren” — with Tom Moore and
Dorothy Revier
( Columbia , Dec. 20; 5,996 ft.; 70 to 85 min.)
People that like mobid pictures should like this
one to their hearts’ content; the last minutes of an
innocent person condemned to hang by the neck
until dead are shown impressively. What makes this
picture more morbid than other pictures of this type,
however, is the fact that the condemned person is a
woman.
The early part of the story is not bad; it shows the
circumstances under which hero and heroine had be-
come acquainted. It was during a rainy night that
the heroine, while driving, is compelled to seek refuge.
She breaks into a hunting lodge. Soon the hero ap-
pears and surprises her. He treats her with deference.
In the morning the heroine goes away. In a few
days they meet again. The villain, a high-class
crook, by using cleverly the heroine’s social position
and her friendship, was fleecing her guests. He
fleeced the hero, too, but the heroine catches him
taking cards from the discard and exposes him. She
orders him out of the house. Soon he returns for a
show-down. The hero and he grapple. The place is
set afire. The villain was about to kill the uncon-
scious hero but the heroine shoots and fells him.
The butler, who was in league with the villain, carries
the villain out. The villain recovers, but his face
becomes disfigured. To revenge himself, he has the
butler tell the authorities that the heroine had shot
and killed him, who was thought dead, because
she did not want him to expose to the hero their
supposed intimate relations. The heroine is tried,
convicted and sentenced to hang. She is saved,
however, by the timely discovery of the truth.
The story is by Harold Shumate. The picture
has been directed by Byron Haskin. Norman Trevor
takes the part of the villain.
February 18, 1928
27
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Chicago After Midnight” — with Ralph
Ince, Jola Mendez and Boh Seiter
(F. B. 0., March 4; 6,249 ft.; 72 to 89 min. )
A powerful melodrama of the underworld. While
the story is interesting, because it has been treated
from a somewhat new angle, it is the direction and the
acting that make it so powerful. Mr. Ince proves to
be a great director, and a very good actor besides,
for he, besides directing it, has taken the part of the
“heavy.” Some of the scenes hold one breathless.
Some of them are where the hero-villian (Ralph
Ince), after serving his fifteen year term, comes out
of the penitentiary and goes' in search of the squealer,
finding him conducting a cabaret. The scenes toward
the end, where the young heroine is trapped by the
hero-villain and his gang, are the most suspensive of
them all: The hero-villain did not know that the hero-
ine was his own daughter, and gives orders that she be
mistreated for having tried to get “the goods” on
them; he did not know that the reason why she was
trying to get something on them was her desire to
have set free her young sweetheart (hero), who had
been arrested for a murder he had not committed.
The scenes that show the hero-villain’s friend rushing
to him to tell him that the girl was his own daughter
are extremely suspensive, too: the friend had been
taken to police headquarters and was asked to
wait there. He was nervous because every moment
lost was precious. Finally he finds an opportunity to
escape, and rushes to the hero-villain, just in time to
tell him of his discovery and to give him an oppor-
tunity to rescue his daughter from the hands of the
gang-leader, to whom he had delivered her. The scenes
of the struggle are suspensive as well as thrilling.
It is hard to say what part of the film holds the
honor for direction. All has been masterfully di-
rected. The scenes that show the young hero just re-
gaining consciousness after a severe blow on the head
with a bottle is a piece of art; young Bob Seiter
could not have acted more realistically had he re-
ceived a real blow. The scenes that show the hero-
villain’s friend at police headquarters, nervous be-
cause of his desire to let the hero know of his dis-
covery, with the detectives playing checkers, looking
unconcerned, is another piece of direction that stands
out. The young heroine’s acting while the hero-vil-
lain (her father) fell on the gangster like a tiger to
rescue her from his hands is another noteworthy piece
of direction. The picture is, in fact, full of similar ar-
tistic pieces of direction and acting.
The plot has been founded on an original story by
Charles K. Harris. Every one in the cast acts well.
“The Wife's Relations” — with
Shirley Mason
( Columbia , Jan. 13; 5,508 ft.; 64 to 78 min.)
An enjoyable comedy romance between a poor
hero and a millionaire heroine. The comedy is
caused by Ben Turpin and three other chums of the
hero; they posed as servants to the hero for the
purpose of impressing the heroine’s father and mother
with the fact that the hero is a wealthy man. One
of the chums impersonates a woman. Most of the
comedy is caused in the scenes where the hero’s
chums are serving dinner to the heroine’s parents,
particularly in the ones where the chums, including
Ben Turpin, are making every effort to prevent the
owner of the house whom they had tied on a chair,
from making his presence known and from exposing
their hoax. Ben Turpin’s antics cause most of the
comedy. The plot has been founded on the story by
Stephen Cooper. The picture has been directed by
Maurice Marshall well, under the supervision of
Harry Cohen. Shirley Mason does good work as
the fieroine. Gaston Glass is an acceptable hero.
Besides Ben Turpin, the following players are in the
supporting cast: Flora Finch, Lionel Belmore, Ar-
mand Kaliz, Maurice Ryan, James Harrison and
others.
The story deals with a millionaire’s daughter, whom
her mother tries to force to marry a nobleman, whom
she does not love. To escape the detestable marriage,
she leaves fashionable Palm Beach and returns to
New York, where she obtains a position as an ele-
vator woman. She accidentally becomes acquainted
with the hero, a promising young chemist, tempo-
rarily a butler for the nobleman who wanted the hero-
ine as a wite. Their friendship ripens into love
and marriage. They live in the employer’s house,
where the hero’s chums made their headquarters dur-
ing the employer’s absence. The heroine telegraphs
the news ol her marriage to her parents, who take
the train back to New York to look over the husband.
Hero and heroine decide to “put on” a good front.
They make the hero’s chums impersonate cooks,
butlers, chamber-maids and everything. While serv-
ing dinner, the owner of the house appears. But
before lie had an opportunity to make his presence
known the hero’s chums make him a prisoner in the
cellar. Everything, however, ends well; the heroine’s
parents liked the hero, and the father paid him a big
sum of money for an invention of his.
It should please well everywhere.
“The Cohens and the Kellys in Paris” —
with George Sidney and J.
Farrell McDonald
( Univ.-Jeivel , Jan. 15; 7,481 ft.; 87 to 106 min.)
Almost as funny as “The Cohens and the Kellys.”
Besides, it has many thrilling situations, of the
“Safety Last” type. These occur toward the end,
where the two heroes cling to the wings of an aero-
plane in mid air; the spectator holds his breath for
fear lest they lose their grip and fall.
Most of the comedy occurs in the cabaret, in Paris,
where the two fathers went. to find Paulette, a dancer,
to induce her to convince the daughter of one of
them (of Cohen) that, while she was posing as a
model in the studio of the son of the other (of
Kelly), their relations were only for business. The
two heroes had gone to Paris, each bent upon pre-
venting a marriage between their children; they did
not know that the young folk had already been mar-
ried. But when they find it out and learn that the
young woman was going to divorce her young hus-
band, the two fathers decide to prevent it. The two
fathers are shocked when they find out that their
wives had gone there, too. It is then that the fun
starts. Most of the comedy is contributed by Kate
Price, who takes the part of a strong woman, who
beat any one that tried to molest either her husband
or her husband’s partner.
The picture has been directed with great skill by
William Beaudine, from a scenario and adaptation by
A1 Cohen. George Sidney and J. Farrell McDonald
make a good pair of partners (friendly enemies).
Vera Gordon and Kate Price make good wives. Sue
Carrol, Gertrude Astor and Charles Delaney are the
other principal characters.
It should go well everywhere.
“South Sea Love” — with Patsy Ruth Miller
(/’. B. 0., Dec. 10; 6,388 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
Not much to it; although it has been handled by
an experienced director, the story material is weak.
The story unfolds chiefly in the South Sea Islands,
and the principal doings are an attempt on the part of
a villainous young man to make the heroine, with
whom he was infatuated, marry him, even though she
was in love with some one else, to whom she was
engaged. In the South Sea Islands, where his half-
crazed mind carried him with the purpose of murder-
ing the hero, he is stricken with malaria fever. The
hero, who had found him delirious, did not know
who he was; but he nursed him back to health just
the same. During his convalescence, they exchange
confessions. As a result, both feeling that they
had been the victim of the same woman (heroine),
become fast friends. The hero tricks the heroine to
the Islands with the purpose of making her suffer.
But the perfidy of his supposed-friend soon becomes
known. The hero asks the heroine's forgiveness.
She marries him and decides to stay with him in the
South Sea Islands.
The scenes that show the heroine in the South
Sea Islands, dressed in the latest Fifth Avenue styles,
should make many a spectator laugh “kiddingly.”
The plot has been founded on the George Surdez
story that appeared in the “Adventure” magazine:
it has been directed by Ralph Ince. Lee Shumway
takes the part of the hero, and Harry Crocker that
of the villain.
28
HARRISON’S REPORTS
In giving you this information my motive is not to
discourage you, but to convince you that it is necessary
for you to formulate your plans for the future,
strengthening you to resist the lure of attractive cam-
paign books, convincing literature and eloquent ora-
tory.
♦ * *
This information should prove beneficial also to the
producers, for it is yet time enough for them to slash
the cost of production to such an extent as to be
enabled to sell their pictures next season at a price
that will leave them a profit. You will not pay next
season as much as you paid this season — that is sure.
You did not pay as much this season as you paid last
season, despite the producer-distributors’ efforts to
make you believe the contrary. Last July’s “Buyers’
Strike” campaign proved most effective. Pettijohn
admitted it, by implication, at Oklahoma City, last
Fall, when during his speech at the exhibitors’ con-
vention, he condemned me for that campaign as hav-
ing given an opportunity to the circuits to buy up all
the good pictures while you were listening to my
harangues. You know that the circuits have never
given you an opportunity to buy pictures first, and
they would not have given it to you this year either,
whether there was a buyers’ strike campaign on or
not. Pettijohn’s assault, therefore, was caused, you
may rest assured, by a desire on his part to cause you
to loosen up the “grip” and thus to help his employers.
Besides this indirect admission that you did not pay
as much this season as you paid last season, there is
also a direct admission, made to me by executives of
three different film companies. So the producer-dis-
tributors might just as well stop fooling themselves
and take it for granted that you are not going to pay
next season even seventy-five per cent, of what you
paid this season, and so make their plans accordingly.
They are whistling to keep up their courage. But
that won’t help them. They should make big slashes
in the cost of production by cutting out waste. And
one of the means by which waste could be cut out is
for them to drive all relatives and friends of the rela-
tives away from the studios and place production in
competent hands. If they do not take such steps, they
will find themselves out of luck next season, for this
paper is thinking seriously of calling next May one of
the biggest exhibitor meetings that has ever been
held, the main object of which will be to give you
an opportunity to make decisions as to how much less
all exhibitors should pay for film for the new product.
As for you, all you have to do is to read the signs
of the times. We are in for a depression that will
last well into 1929. As a result, you will not be able
to pay for the new product the prices you paid for
this season’s product. You will not be able to take in
even the money you will have paid for film, if you do.
Look ahead, and make your plans accordingly.
ABOUT THE BROOKHART BILL
One of the best cures for the prevailing depression
in the moving picture business will be the Brookhart
Bill. If this bill became a law, you would be enabled
to buy only pictures that would bring in customers,
instead of buying up everything — good, bad and indif-
ferent. And when only good pictures will sell, the
producers will be compelled to make good pictures.
Do not listen to every Tom, Dick and Harry telling
that film prices will go up, because the cost of sell-
ing will go up on account of the fact that you will
not be able to buy more than one picture at a time.
The bill will do nothing of the kind. You will be able
to buy as many as you are buying now.
The opponents of the bill give such an interpreta-
tion to Section 4 of the bill because the sale price for
each film will have to be indicated on it. Does the
same thing happen today? When the salesman comes
to you and tells you that he wants four thousand dol-
lars for his forty pictures, he has arrived at such a
sum by adding the rental prices of all the pictures
which prices he has marked opposite the pictures. It
is only when you offer, say, three thousand dollars for
the entire group, and the salesman accepts your fig-
ures, that there is an allocation of prices. It is really
a re-allocation; the exchangeman must readjust the
prices so that the total may not exceed the sum he
and you agreed upon.
February 18, 1928
As to the argument that Section 5 (which prohibits
the sale of films before they are made), is bound to
make the cost of production go up, that, too, is apple-
sauce; when the producers know that they must pro-
duce a picture before they can sell it, they will be
compelled to eliminate waste. At present those fel-
lows on the Coast are drunk with money; easy comes,
easy goes. When it does not come easy it will not
go easy.
Do not relax your efforts. Keep on working for the
bill! Never mind about the producer-distributor pro-
paganda. You cannot stop them from making an ef-
fort to kill the bill. They have the money and they
are going to use it. The Hays organization has, as I
have been informed, a budget of one and one-half
million dollars. And they can use as much of it for
propaganda as they feel like, and more. So forget
them and concentrate all your energies to getting as
much more support as you can. Mr. G. W. Erdmann,
Secretary of Cleveland Motion Picture Exhibitors As-
sociation, of Cleveland, Ohio, appeared before the
Operators’ Union at one of their meetings and ad-
dressed them, pointing out the fact that if the Brook-
hart Bill did not pass, the Independent Theatre In-
terests would be in jeopardy, and that if the Inde-
pendents were forced out of business it would throw
out of employment seventy-five per cent, of their
members. They sat up and took notice of what Mr.
Erdmann said, and took immediate action. They sent
official letters to their national representatives asking
that help be given to the independent theatre owners.
He has informed me that he is now working on the
Musicians and on the Stage Hands Unions. You can
do the same.
Colorado has informed this office that they have
gone in favor of the Brookhart Bill, except Section 5,
which they consider impractical. But that is one of
the most important points of the bill, because it will
make it impossible for the producers to sell a modern
society drama and to deliver a Spanish blood-and-
thunder melodrama of the 14th Century.
In my past articles, I failed to mention the fact
that, according to a letter sent to T. O. C. C. by their
secretary, M. P. T. O. of Maryland is one hundred
per cent, for the Brookhart Bill.
HONEST-TO-GOODNESS JOURNALISM
In answer to a questionnaire sent to several ex-
hibitors by “Exhibitors Herald and Moving Picture
World,” as to what they would do if they were to
start over today, Mr. J. C. McCarthy, of Belle and
Regent Theatres, Belleville, Canada, replied as fol-
lows :
“If I were to start over today as an exhibitor I
would first subscribe to HARRISON’S REPORTS.
In view of the reluctance of some trade papers to
mention HARRISON’S REPORTS even in cases
when journalistic honesty demands it, it is refreshing
to note the broad-mindedness of Mr. Martin J. Quig-
ley, who did not hesitate to print Mr. McCarthy’s
statement without suppressing any part of it.
Exception to this criticism of trade journals should
be made of Mr. David Barrist, editor of the Phila-
delphia “Exhibitor,” and of that gem, “Brevity.” Mr.
Barrist has never hesitated to mention HARRISON’S
REPORTS and P. S. Harrison. On the contrary,
often he has gone out of his way to mention it, even
at the risk of incurring the ill-will of the powers
that be.
In the February “Brevity,” for example, he had a
cartoon showing the producers’ lawyers scrambling to
grab the new issues of HARRISON’S REPORTS.
And believe me, there is truth in that; they do ex-
amine this paper closely with the hope of finding some
chance for a libel suit.
His article about my having taken the long journey
and having appeared before St. Peter, having me
throw down my wings and ask St. Peter to send me
to the “other” place when I was told by St. Peter
that Louis B. Mayer would have charge of the picture
show in Heaven, is another article; and it is a scream.
(I don’t know whether Louis B. Mayer has enough
sense of humor to appreciate the “kidding.” If he
had, he ought to send Dave a fifty-page insert.)
Examples of such journalistic honesty and broad-
mindedness make journalism stand high.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
Entered as second-class ffiatter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of Mar«h 3, ldW.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.60
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing- Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1928
No. 8
NEWS ABOUT THE
The opposition is working desperately to create senti-
ment against the Brookhart Bill.
To begin with, they took a subordinate feature of the
bill and tried to concentrate attention on it so that you
might forget the important features.
For instance, they tried to frighten you by calling your
attention to Section Seven, which authorizes the Federal
Trade Commission to fix the differentials in case an af-
filiated exhibitor wanted the entire group of a producer’s
pictures. They told you that this meant government
control.
After failing to accomplish their object, because you
told them that, although the bill does not mean Federal
control, you would prefer it to being put out of business
by the producers, they tried to make you believe that, if
the Brookhart Bill became a law, the prices for film
would go up, because it would be too expensive to a pro-
ducer to sell you one picture at a time ; also because a
producer could not find enough money to make twenty or
thirty pictures before being permitted by law to sell
them.
But again they failed to make an impression on you for
the reason that you know that the bill does not make
it unlawful for you to buy as many pictures under it as
you bought before; and that in the matter of finding
capital for the production of so many pictures in advance,
a way will be found. So they are now telling you that
the bill is unconstitutional.
If the Brookhart Bill is unconstitutional, why are they
fighting it? They should let it become a law and then
attack it in the courts. Isn’t it a proof that, by fighting
it, they lead us to believe that they are not so sure about
its unconstitutionality ?
What has made many exhibitors laugh, however, is the
great solicitude they have shown for the “little” exhibi-
tor ; they feel sorry for him because he will have to pay
more for film if the Brookhart Bill should become a law.
Piffle ! If the Brookhart Bill could make it possible
for them to get more money from you, they would be
for it.
We are breaking their ranks by the constant pounding
and they are desperate. Last week I had a talk with two
general sales managers of local exchanges working for
two of the major concerns; both told me that they are
in favor of the bill and are quietly working for it. “Any-
body with a grain of sense ought to be for it,” they said.
I have also had a talk with a few film salesmen, and was
told by them that ninety per cent, of the salesmen are
for the bill. One of them urged at least fifty exhibitors
to write to their Senators and Representatives in favor
of the bill, and has advised other salesmen to do like-
wise. One of them, after getting exhibitors to sign a
petition against the bill, returned and advised them to
recant.
The Hays organization knows of such cases and is
incapable of preventing them. To offset their harmful
effect, they are making desperate efforts to win over the
presidents of as many exhibitor organizations as they can.
They are sending C. G Pettijohn, the wrecker of ex-
hibitor organizations, to conventions to win over the
exhibitors.
They have won over some presidents but they have not
won the majority of the members. These are working
ioc the bill. I get letters every day from territories the
BROOKHART BILL
Hays organization is supposed to have gained control
over by gaining control of the organizations. I have letters
from the State of Kansas, the writers stating that they
are working for the bill, in spite of the fact that Dick
Biechele is “riding along” with Will H. Hays.
There may be a conscientious objector here and there;
an exhibitor that sincerely thinks that the Brookhart Bill
will wo-k again:/, the interests of the independent exhibi-
tors. But these are very, very few ; ninety-nine per cent,
of the unaffiliated exhibitors are FOR the Brookhart
Bill.
The letters that I have received in the last two weeks
showing the work some exhibitors are doing to gain sup-
port for the bill are, indeed, inspiring. Some exhibitors
have gone so far as to send postal cards to other exhibi-
tors at their own expense. They are lining up their
patrons, too, either through advertisements in the news-
papers or through appeals printed in their house organs
or in specially written pamphlets.
* * *
And by the way, Philadelphia is for the Brookhart
Bill ; due to some misunderstanding I did not receive
notice of the fact before.
Salt Lake City voted in favor of the bill.
Wisconsin is for the Bill IOO per cent.
I understand that at a district meeting of the M. P.
T. O. of Washington, at Spokane, the Bill was endorsed.
Seattle was to vote on it on February 12 ; but as yet I
have not received advices as to what was done there.
One by one the organizations are lining up with us.
And by the way, have you read the editorial and article
in the Christian Science Monitor, issue of February 2?
They are “pippins.” The February 2 issue of the same
paper had another article, in the “In the Wake of the
News” column, which also is a “pippin."
It will require too much space for me to give all the
articles that have appeared in the newspapers in favor of
the bill.
* * *
One of the latest gags of the opposition to make you
lose heart by telling you that we have no chance, that
our efforts are being wasted. I know that the opposition
has millions, and that they will not stop at spending
money for propaganda in an effort to defeat the bill.
But we are in a better position even without funds ; we
can reach the public, the voters. If every state organiza-
tion should work as Ohio has been working and as
Michigan is working, we could put through one hundred
Brookhart Bills.
Keep on working for the bill. Do not pay attention to
any producer propaganda. Do not let them make you
think that, if we should lose this fight, we are sunk. Such
is not the case ! Whether we win or lose, we shall be
the winners, for in two months’ time we have been able
to destroy years of producer propaganda, which had made
the public believe that you were the cause of the poor
films. The public now knows who is responsible for such
films. So no matter what will happen, we shall come
out winners just the same. But we are not going to lose ;
the Brookhart Bill will go through, for our cause is just.
If the Brookhart Bill does not go through, we are go-
ing to have a congressional investigation that will rock
the foundations of the motion picture industry. Let the
producers pin this on their hats!
P. S. Harrison,
30
HARRISON’S REPORTS
February 25, 1928
“Love Me and the World Is Mine — with
Mary Philbin and Norman Kerry
{Univ.- Jewel, Feb. 11; 6,813 ft.; 79 to 97 min.)
Evidently Universal’s object in producing this picture
was to duplicate the success of “Merry-Go-Round,” for
the action of this one, too, unfolds in Vienna, and the
hero is an officer of the Austrian Army, just as was the
hero in “Merry-Go-Round.” But it is not as good an
entertainment ; in fact it falls short considerably.
It is the story of a young Austrian country girl, whose
beauty impresses an Austrian officer. Her uncle dies and
her aunt makes life so miserable for her that she decides to
go to Vienna to a cousin of hers. The hero goes back to
the country town to find the heroine and is heart-broken
to learn that she had gone away. Shortly afterwards he
happens to meet her in Vienna and, learning where she
lives, calls on her. By chance of circumstances her
cousin is a girl the hero had known all along and with
whom he had had intimate relations. The cousin tries to
tell the heroine that officers of the Austrian Army do not
marry poor girls, and that the hero’s object was to treat
her as he had treated her (the cousin.). A wealthy man
meets the heroine accidentally and takes such an interest
in her that he offers to marry her. He takes her to his
home, buys her everything she needs, and makes ready for
their wedding. At the last minute, however, the heroine
refuses to go through with the marriage; she loves the
hero. The hero was in town on furlough. His regiment
receives orders to return to the front. The heroine rushes
to the railroad station but the train had already started.
The hero happens to see her and asks his commander to
let him have a leave of absence so as to marry her. The
commander gives him the leave and the hero jumps from
the train and reaches the heroine.
About the best part is where the heroine is shown run-
ning after the train and calling the hero. This situation
remainds one of the scene in “The Pig Parade.”
The plot has been founded on a storj by Rudolph
Hans Bartsch ; it has been directed by E. A. Dupont.
Betty Compson takes the part of the heroine’s cousin,
and Henry B. Walthall that of the wealthy man.
It is not a bad picture to show, but it will not set the
world afire.
“The Crowd” — with Eleanor Boardman
and James Murray
( Metro-Goldwyn , Mar. 3; 8,548 ft.; 99 to 122 min.)
The first part is a little tiresome; it is more scenic
than dramatic. But the subsequent part makes up for that
deficiency. There are laughs and tears 'throughout.
It is the story of a young man who is full of ambition,
but who fails to rise beyond the position of an ordinary
clerk in an insurance company ; he simply didn’t have the
goods in him. As a result, his loyal little wife, who bore
him two children, is compelled to suffer. But she bears
her sufferings with fortitude. As if that wasn’t all, the
hero is so domineering that he finds fault with every-
thing, even though most of the times the fault was his.
The heroine’s two brothers urge the heroine to leave
hirn, but she will not do it, until she comes to realize that
there was no hope that he would ever get up from the rut
in which he had sunk. Her loss of her little daughter,
who had been run over by a truck, helps her to make up
her mind to leave him. But her spirit of self-sacrifice
and her love for him was so strong that she changes her
mind again, and stays with him ; he proves to her that he
is a changed man, and that he will battle for success.
The story of this couple is no different from the story
of any couple one meets in life. The joys and the disap-
pointments of such couples; their little quarrels; the over-
bearing wgys of some husbands — all are depicted with
realism. But the picture is not what one would expect
from King Vidor. In one part the direction is so ama-
teurish that one wonders why he should let the picture go
out that way. It is where the hero, his spirit gone be-
cause failure after failure had been his lot, leaves home.
His little son follows him. The son, in his childish way,
talks to him. The father, moved by the faith his little
son had shown in him, is inspired to exert his best efforts
to obtain a job, no matter what. He lands one — that of
a clown, to juggle balls in the street for the purpose of
advertising a firm’s goods. In the evening he returns
home with his son. And yet the mother was not dis-
tracted by the absence of her child. When he reaches
home, he enters to tell his wife that he had found em-
ployment and that he was determined to make good. The
child, instead of following the father, as a child would do
under such circumstances in real life, does not enter.
Later, when the heroine listens to her brothers to go
with them, leaving the hero, the child is shown outside the
house. The acts of the child and of the mother are not
what would have been in real life.
The situation that deals with the running down of the
little girl by the truck is too cruel to be put in an enter-
tainment; although a necessary part of this story, it is
too harrowing.
The plot has been founded on the story by King Vidor
himself and by V. A. Weaver. Eleanor Boardman makes
a loveable little wife. James Murray is good as the
worthless husband. Freddie Burke Frederick is a lovable
little child. So is little Alice Mildred Puter, as the little
daughter.
“Sporting Goods” — with Richard Bix
( Paramount , Feb. 11; 5,951 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
A commonplace story, but it has been treated so well
that it has made a good entertainment. The comedy is
caused by the situations, by the subtitles, and by Mr.
Dix’s acting. The situation in the beginning, where the
hero is shown driving through the water pool and and
disappearing in a hole are laugh-provoking; the story
shows Mr. Dix as driving through the pool in an effort
to show to some strangers that it was only a shallow
water pool. The scenes later in the picture where Mr.
Dix is shown in an expensive suite of rooms in a hotel
in Los Angeles and using his wits to keep the fact that
he was penniless from becoming known is comedy pro-
voking. The scenes where the golf suit he was wearing,
a sample of his goods, is shown lengthening after becom-
ing wet in the driving rain, too, are comedy provoking.
So are the scenes where Ford Sterling is chasing him
with the purpose of buying a large number of suits from
him ; all the while the hero thought that Ford Sterling was
trying to force him to pay the money for the suits back.
There are other such scenes all the way through.
The plot has been founded on a story by Tom Crizer
and Ray Harris ; it has been directed by Malcolm St.
Clair. A love affair is shown, the heroine’s part having
been taken by Gertrude Olmstead, who acts well. Philip
Strange, Myrtle Stedman, Wade Boteler, Claude King
and Maude Turner Gordon are in the cast.
It should please everywhere.
“Beyond London’s Lights” — with a
Special Cast
(F. O. B., March 18; 5,583 ft.; 64 to 79 min.)
Just fair.
It is the story of a young British nobleman’s love for
a poor girl, whom he wanted to marry against his moth-
er’s will ; she wanted him to marry a titled young woman.
Mother and prospective daughter-in-law conspire to break
up the love affair. The mother has the young heroine
hired to work as a servant at a reception so as to humili-
ate her. The heroine sees the hero in the garden kiss the
titled woman. Heart-broken she goes away. She does
not return home, however, where her uncle had made
things unpleasant for her ; she decides to go to London.
She is offered a “lift” by a stranger, and because he had
acted so gentlemanly she accepts his offer. In London
the stranger helps her to find a job, and in time he falls
in love with her. It develops that the stranger is a friend
of the hero. This comes to light when the hero and the
girl his mother wanted him to marry come to London for
the girl to buy her trousseau, and they call on him.
The story closes with the heroine’s marriage to the
hero’s friend ; she realized that she loved him rather than
the unsteady hero. This she finds out when the hero’s
friend rushes to rescue her from an attempted assault by
a former employee of the hero, who wanted her as a
wife, but who had been repeatedly repulsed by her.
The action unfolds in England. The plot has been
founded on the story, “Kitty Carstairs,” by J. J. Bell. It
has been directed by Tom Terris. Lee Shumway, God-
don Elliot, Herbert Evans, Jacqueline Gadsden and others
compose the cast.
February 25, 1928
31
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Rose-Marie” — with Joan Crawford,
House Peters and James Murray
{Metro-Goldwyn^ Feb. 11; 7,745 ft.; 90 to 110 min.)
Not much to it. None of the characters arouses very
much sympathy, and the action at no time makes one sit
up and take notice. 1 he best part of the pictures is in the
beginning, where are shown a few shots of fur traders
racing their canoes in a lake up north, where the picture
has been photographed. The most dramatic part unfolds
in a cabin in the woods, where the villain, a murderer,
sought by the hero, a Canadian mounted policeman, is
shown taking the gun out of the hero’s holster, which the
hero stupidly had left on the chair. The villain is thus
enabled to hold up the hero, the heroine, and the heroine’s
husband, who was dying from a broken neck. But the
situation is illogical, tor no mounted policeman would in
real life unbuckle the holster and leave it where a mur-
derer could get hold of it.
1 he plot has been founded on the musical comedy of the
same name; it has been directed by Lucien Hubbard.
House Peters takes the part of the Canadian Policeman ;
Joan Crawford that of the heroine, James Murray that of
the hero, and Creighton Hale that of the man whom the
heroine had been forced to marry. George Cooper, Polly
Moran, Lionel Belmore, William Orlamond and others
appear in the supporting cast.
It is the story of a French Canadian girl (heroine)
who loves one man (hero) but who is forced by her father
to marry another. And to complicate matters further, a
mounted policeman loves her. When the mounted police-
man tinds out that she had married another man, he is
heart-broken.
The story ends with the heroine marrying the hero;
her husband had died.
“That’s My Daddy” — with Reginald Denny
{Univ. -Jewel, Feb. 5; 6,073 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
This is a better Reginald Denny comedy than any one
of those he has been in since he produced those five gems
in the 1925-26 season. It is full of laughs, caused by
original situations. Mr. Denny, who takes the part of a
young man about to be married to an impoverished soci-
ety girl, who wanted his money, is shown as becoming
the involuntary father of a youngster, a little girl. The
laughs are caused by the hero’s efforts to hide the baby,
from fear that his fiancee might think that he had had a
secret affair with some woman. The more the child calls
him “daddy,” the more embarrassed he feels. Comedy
is provoked also by the answers the hero gave to ques-
tions, these answers being such as only an absent-minded
person, or a first-class fib-teller, would give.
Little Jane La Verne, not over four years old, certainly
acts as a veteran actress. She is a sweet little child and
adds greatly to the success of the picture. The scenes
where she is shown managing to reach the hero’s yacht
and calling him “Daddy 1” just as the marriage ceremony
was being performed are suspensive, thrilling and com-
edy-provoking. The suspense and thrills are caused by
her falling overboard and by the hero’s diving and rescu-
ing her. The love affair between the hero and the sister
of the good-hearted policeman, who had taken his sister
to the hero’s home so tjjat she might nurse the hero’s
“child,” is charming.
The plot has been founded on a story by Mr. Denny
himself. All the complications in it arise when the hero,
a wealthy young man, tells the policeman that had ar-
rested him for speeding that he was speeding to the
hospital to see his child, who had been hurt. The police-
man, being a father of six children himself, felt sorry for
the hero. The hero is thus compelled to invent stories
so as to make his tale convincing. The policeman takes
the hero to the children’s hospital. By chance, a child
that had been run over by a truck but that had not been
hurt is found and the hero is compelled to tell that it is his
child. The child, an orphan, calls him “daddy,” and the
fun begins. The story closes with the hero marrying the
policeman’s sister and adopting the child.
The picture has been directed by Fred Newmeyer. Mr.
Denny does good work. Miss Barbara Kent is good as
the heroine. Lillian Rich, Tom O’Brien, Armand Kalitz
and others are in the supporting cast.
Good for any theatre.
“A Girl in Every Port” — with Victor
McLaglen and Louise Brooks
{Fox, Jan. 29; 5,882 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
An enjoyable comedy. It is the life of a sailor, who, at
every port, he has a duce of a time with the girls. He
finds a girl in every port. But what is his dismay in find-
ing that, every girl he befriends, is stamped with the “in-
signia' of another sailor, who had been there before himl
This insignia consisted of an anchor, which the girl wore
either on her garter, or on her arm. So he is determined
to find this person and to give him a good beating. The
two accidentally meet in a port, and then the fun begins.
The two, instead of having it out between themselves,
join hands and give the policemen the beating of their
lives. Toward the end, however, the hero falls desperately
in love with a girl. The hero’s chum knows that girl is
no good, but he also knows that it would be useless for
him to tell about her to the love-struck hero ; he knows
that he would not believe her and his attempt at telling
him would result in the loss of their friendship. The girl,
however, failing to revive the old interest of the hero’s
chum in her, makes the hero believe that he had made a
dishonorable proposal to her. The hero, with fire spitting
from his eyes, seeks and finds him chum and fells him
with one blow. But when his anger cools off, he gets to
thinking if her weren’t, after all, unjust to his chum. He
asks him to tell him the truth, and the hero gives him the
facts. The hero feels sorry; he begs his chum’s for-
giveness and swears that he will never again let anything
come between them.
The story is not untrue to life; it is characteristic of
almost every sailor. Yet it has been handled so wrell that
no broad-minded person could be offended by what is
either shown or implied. There is comedy all the way
through.
The plot has been founded on the story by J. B.
McGuinnes. The picture has been directed skillfully by
Howard Hawks. Victor McLaglen makes an excellent
hero, and Robert Armstrong a chum of the hero. Louise
Brooks takes her part well. Maria Casajuana, Natalie
Joyce, Dorothy Mathews, Elena Jurado, Sally Rand,
Gretel Yoltz, Natalie Kingston, Caryl Lincoln, Felix
Valle, and Phalba Morgan are the other pretty girls of
the picture.
““Wickedness Preferred” — with Lew Cody,
and Aileen Pringle
{Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Jan. 28; 5,011 ft.; 58 to 71 min.)
Fairly amusing! It is a farce comedy, but the story
is weak. Some of the comedy is caused by the breezy
sub-titles, some by the situations.
Lew Cody is the flirty author-explorer. Aileen Pringle
is his efficient wife, who knows that her husband is not
serious but who keeps an eye on him so that he may not
get into too much mischief. Mary McAllester is the im-
pressionable wife of the hero’s friend. George K. Arthur
is the stuttering “mama’s boy,” who seems to spy and
keep the gossipers informed about everybody.
The author (hero) and his wife (heroine) go to a
fashionable seaside resort that he might rest his nerves
and prepare for his next novel. She meets an old friend,
a fat mam and his romantic wife, who had just finished
reading the hero’s latest heart-throb novel. She immedi-
ately falls in love with him. She gets herself locked out
on the balcony in her efforts to get into his room to in-
duce him to run away with her. To cure them both, the
heroine allows the hero to sail away with the infatuated
woman. With no food other than a box of chocolates,
they are marooned on rocks when their sail boat is
wrecked. When they don gunny sacks in order to allow
their clothes to dry, the impressionable woman finds that
her hero is not the he-man he wrote about in his novel.
They quarrel and become disgusted with each other. In
the meantime, the heroine and her friend’s husband are
pursuing them in a launch for the purpose of tantalizing
them. They eat delicious picnic lunch in a cove opposite
them on the rocks and carry on a “violent” flirtation.
This makes the elopers angry. They object and decide
that they want to go back, each to his own mate.
Nothing wicked but the title. It was directed well by
Hobart Henley from an original story by Florence Ryer-
son and Colin Clement.
3 2
HARRISON’S REPORTS
BENT UPON COMMITTING SUICIDE
Sincere, well enough. And honest. But mistaken.
I worked for him and I know.
I am referring to W. A. Johnston, of Motion Picture
News, who is out and against the Brookhart Bill, be-
cause, as he puts it, it is “unjustified Governmental inter-
terence with private business and class legislation of the
menacing sort.’’ "It is Government regulation of the
motion picture industry,” he says. And he believes that
there ought to be brains enough in this industry to solve
its problems without outside interference.
On the other side of this editorial, Mr. Johnston prints
an article under the caption, “The Industry on Trial,” in
which he takes the producers to task for entering into an
agreement to cut down advertising.
“The time has come, it would seem,” says Mr. John-
ston, “when this industry’s relations with its trade press
should be as impersonal, intelligent and dignified as befits
an industry with some fifty million regular consumers and
some sixty thousand public stockholders.
“It appears that, about a year ago, representatives of
most of the film companies formed a committee on trade
paper advertising. An allotment was agreed upon of so
many advertising pages per picture. . . .
“Just at present the film companies are crying out
against the Brookhart Bill, because it would impose gov-
ernment commission rule upon this business. Yet they
are endeavoring, by just such committees as the one cited,
to govern themselves by commission rule of thumb. . . .”
After condemning this agreement, demanding recogni-
tion for the trade papers, in the form of advertising in-
sertions, Mr. Johnston continues :
“If they [the trade papers] are not to have this recog-
nition THEN THERE IS, I SINCERELY BELIEVE,
LITTLE TO BE SAID IN BEHALF OF THIS IN-
DUSTRY’S PRESENT INTELLIGENCE AND FU-
TURE STABILITY . . .” (the capitals are ours).
* * *
Conditions have not changed in the least since Mr.
Johnston wrote this article; the trade papers receive just
as little advertising as they did before, not because “there
is very little intelligence in this business,” as Mr. Johnston
puts it, but because there is very little good will ; there is
too much selfishness.
Yet Mr. Johnston asks us to stop looking for relief
from the only source relief can be obtained from — the
United States Congress.
Mr. Johnston asks us once again to trust those who in
the past failed to prove worthy of our trust. But let me
say to Mr. Johnston that if he will continue trusting
them himself, he will eventually be out of the trade paper
business. It is not Right that rules in this industry ; it
is personal interest.
Let Mr. Johnston trust them! We will not! We
prefer to have the government back of us !
* * *
All the trade paper editors, when you point out how
dark is their future, admit it. But they still keep on
fighting you on the only chance you have ever had to get
relief
They have come out against the Brookhart Bill, some
of them not because they sincerely believe that it will in
any way harm the moving picture industry but because
they hope to get some advertising by proving to the ad-
vertisers how loyal they have been in the hour of their,
the producer-distributors’, need.
It is really tragic ; for despite this “show” of loyalty,
their efforts will be in vain ; the producers bow only be-
fore one thing — superior force ; persuasion is of no avail,
as Mr. Johnston’s editorial has conclusively proved.
Let the trade papers keep on fighting us by attacking
the Brookhart Bill ! We cannot help it if they are bent
upon committing suicide !
PICTURES METRO-GOLDWYN OWE
YOU
In the last four weeks I received several inquiries from
exhibitors as to when Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer will deliver
some pictures that they owe them from the 1926-27 con-
tract.
Some of those inquiries concern the three Novarro pro-
ductions :
“Romance” was delivered as production No. I.
“Lovers” (646) has been delivered as Novarro No. 3.
“Forbidden Hours” (730), which will be released on
February 25, 1928
March io, is, I believe, the Novarro production which
they have designated as No. 2. At least I know of one
case where they have furnished play dates for it as such.
In reference to “A Certain Young Man,” which they
scheduled for release once but which they withdrew af-
terwards, let me say that I have received private infor-
mation to the effect that it is so poor that Metro-Gold-
wyn-Mayer have decided not to release it. So those of
exhibitors that have a Novarro picture coming to them
will do well to accept any other Novarro picture they
may be offered. Remember that when the contract speci-
fies a particular star’s picture by the name of the star
and no stories are given, the distributor has the right to
deliver them any pictures of that star he sees fit.
Fairness demands, of course, that a star’s picture be
delivered in the order in which they have been produced.
But you will be looking for needles in a haystack if you
should expect fairness from Metro-Goldwyn.
They have been owing you a Fred Niblo production
for a long time. If they were fair about it they would
give it to you ; for they have one. They have, in fact,
had several made, any one of which could have been deliv-
ered to you for the purpose of paying this debt, but they
have not delivered any one of them, perhaps hoping that
you will forget all about it.
Why don’t you ask them to deliver “The Enemy”?
That is a Fred Niblo production. If they refuse to give
it to you, then, when they come around to sell you the
1928-29 program, ask them to give you a Fred Niblo
picture before you will sign up for the new product.
“The Mysterious Island” (642) has, if my information
is correct, been abandoned; they wasted so much money
when they started to make it two years ago (about $500,-
000) on account of blunders in the supervision of it, that
they have decided not to make it now.
“How Dare You” (635) has not been made. And you
cannot force a producer-distributor to deliver something
that he has not made. That is, at least, what the con-
tract specifies.
1927-28 SUBSTITUTIONS
Many exhibitors have asked me to inform them if the
Fox “Gateway of the Moon” is the same picture as
“Luna Park.” It is not ; for “Luna Park” was, according
to the Work Sheet New Form S-4-5M, 6-3-27A, to be
“A colorful story of carnival life with Victor McLaglen,
Greta Nissen, Charles Farrell,” with Victor McLaglen
in a role “second only to that remarkable characterization
of Captain Flagg in 'What Price Glory,’ to be directed
by Howard Hawks,” whereas “Gateway of the Moon,”
as said in the review, which was printed on February
11, page 12, is a South American Jungle story, and it was
directed by John Wray Griffith.
COLOME THEATRE
COLO ME, SOUTH DAKOTA
Dear Mr. Harrison :
I have written to all of the Senators and Congressmen
from South Dakota regarding the Brookhart Bill, and
have had several others write to them and am getting
more every day.
Mr. Harrison ! You are rendering a great service to
the independent exhibitors, who should show enough hu-
man interest and enough intelligence to help themselves
in matters like the Brookhart Bill. It is a fine chance
for us to lick the giants, and if we don’t take advantage
of this situation it is only because we lack ambition. It
doesn’t cost much; only a little effort.
This is not your fight, but Mr. Harrison I wish to say
frankly that I consider your aid to the independent ex-
hibitors worth far more than all the exhibitors’ organiza-
tions that have ever existed, because you are the fir,st to
serve us with helpful and intelligent information. You
have your thumb on the pulse of the film trust at all times
and the minute they get irregular we know* it through
your REPORTS.
Your paper is very irritating to the giants.
I am wratching with interest to see if Mr. Will H.
Hays will reply to your question in last week’s RE-
PORTS as to where he stood on the Brookhart Bill.
The less he says the less stench there will be. And no
doubt he will remain silent.
My fondest hopes are that you may be spared many
years to keep on with this good work.
Very truly yours,
F. J. Lewis.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Vol. X
- — = —
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1928
Partial Index No. 1— Pages 1 to 28
No. 8
Baby Mine— Metro-Golffwyn
Bare Knees — Gotham-Lumas-Regional
Beau Sabreur — Paramount
Beware <?f Married Men— Warner Bros
Branded Sombrero, The — Fox
Buck Privates — Universal-Jewel
Chicago After Midnight — F. B. O
Chinese Parrot, The — Universal-Jewel
Circus, The — United Artists
Cohens and the Kellys, The — Universal-Jewel
Come to My House — Fox
Coney Island — F. B. O
Daredevil’s Reward, A — Fox
Divine Woman, The — Metro-Goldwyn
Dove, The — United Artists
Drums of Love — Griffith-United Artists
Enemy, The — Metro-Goldwyn
Fangs of the Wild — F. B. O
Finnegan’s Ball — First Division
Fortune Hunter, The — Warner Bros
Freckles — F. B. O
Gateway of the Moon, The — Fox
Gentlemen Prefer Blondes — Paramount
Haunted Ship, The — Tiffany
Her Summer Hero — F. B. O
Her Wild Oat — First National
Husbands for Rent — Warner Bros
Lady Raffles — Columbia-Reg
Last Command, The — Paramount
Legion of the Condemned, The — Paramount..
Let ’Er Go, Gallagher — Pathe-deMille
Love and Learn — Paramount
Love Mart, The — First National
Mother Machree — Fox
Noose, The — First National
On Your Toes — Universal-Jewel
Perfect Gentleman, A — Pathe
Phantom of the Range — F. B. O
Pinto Kid, The — F. B. Q
Pioneer Scout, The — Paramount
Race for Life, A — Warner Bros
Rush Hour, The — Pathe-deMille
Sadie Thompson — United Artists
Sailors’ Wives — First National
Satan and the Woman — Excellent-Regional...
Sharpshooters — Fox
Shepherd of the Hills — First National
Silk Legs — Fox
Siren, The — Columbia
South Sea Love — F. B. O
Thanks for the Buggy Ride — Universal-Jewel
That Certain Thing — Columbia-Reg
13 Washington Square — Universal-Jewel
Two Flaming Youths — Paramount
W arning, The — Columbia-Regional
West Point — Metro-Goldwyn
Wife Savers — Paramount
Wife s Relations, The — Columbia
Woman Wise — Fox
443 The Prince of Headwaiters — July 17 9O0,O0OB
413 White Pants Willie — 'July 24 800,00QB
7 FIRST NATIONAL PICTURE
14 EXHIBITION VALUES
15
14 377 The Sunset Derby — June 3 700,00GB — 700, COOP
g 407 Dance Magic — June 12 9OO,O0OB — 800,000 P
23 404 Framed — June 19 950,OOOB — 950.000P
^-391 Naughty But Nice — June 26 1,300,000B
27' 385 Lonesome Ladies — July 3 700.000B
2 422 The Devil’s Saddle— July 10 ' 500.000B
7
27
11 409 For the Love of Mike — July 31 900.000B
2 548 Poor Nut— Aug. 7 1,000,QOOB
432 The Stolen Bride— Aug. 14 1,100.000B
405 Hard Boiled Haggerty — Aug. 21 950,Q0QB
428 Three’s a Crowd — Aug. 28 l,000,00OB
368 Camille — Sept. 4 Special
465 The Red Raiders — Sept. 4 70O,0OOB
450 Smile, Brother, Smile — Sept. 11 900.000B
453 The Life of Riley— Sept. 18 1,100,OOOB
400 The Drop Kick— Sept. 25 1,100,000b
545 Rose of the Golden West — Oct. 2 Special
433 American Beauty — Oct. 9 1,100,00GB
379 The Crystal Cup — Oct. 16 900.000B
319 Breakfast at Sunrise — Oct. 23 Special
457 No Place to Go— Oct. 30 800.000B
10
10
2
18
, 3
11
. 7
7
14
22
10
15 469 Gun Gospel — Nov. 6 $600.000B
6 547 The Gorilla — Nov. 13 Special
26 462 Home Made — Nov. 20 800,000B
2 452 Man Crazy — Nov. 27 90O,00OB
*2 549 A Texas Steer — Dec. 4 Special
^ 441 Valley of the Giants — Dec. 11 960.000B
544 The Love Mart — Dec. 18 Special
,, 393 Her Wild Oat— Dec. 24 1,300, 000B
546 Shepherd of the Hills' — Jan. 1 Special
542 Helen of Troy — Jan. 8 Special
446 French Dressing — Jan. 15 900.000B
459 Sailors’ Wives — Jan. 22 800.000B
437 The Noose— Jan. 29 l,10O,000B
445 The Whip Woman— Feb. 5 900.000B
426 The Chaser— Feb. 12 1,000, 000B
464 The Wagon Show — Feb. 19 600.000B
22 455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 l,100,00OB
447 Mad Hour — Mar. 4
440 Burning Daylight — Mar. 11 95O,0OOB
434 Heart of a Follies Girl — Mar. 18
448 The Big Noise — Mar. 25
436 The Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — Apr. 8. .
451 Ladies’ Night in a Turkish Bath — Apr. 1.1,000,OOOB
22
18
19
2/
11
26
18
, 6
3
26
27
14
.22
18
3
/461 Chinatown Charlie — Apr. 15
541 Lilac Time — Apr. 22
460 Three-Ring Marriage — Apr. 29
468 Canyon of Adventure — Apr. 29
FEATURE PICTURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Columbia Features
Nov. 26 — “The Warning” .Jack Holt
Fashion Madness — Qaire Windsor Dec. 8
6 Dec. 20 — “The Siren” Dorothy Revier
3 That Certain Thing— Viola Dana Jan. 1
10 Wife’s Relations — Shirley Mason Jan. 13
_7 / J2ady Raffles — Estelle Taylor Jan. 25
So This Is Love — S. Mason- Win. Collier, Jr.. Feb. 6
23 A Woman’s Way— W. Baxter-M. Livingston. .Feb. 18
Sat., Feb. 25, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Partial Index No. 1
Excellent Features
6100 "Back to Liberty” — George Walsh Dec. 1
Satan and the Woman — Windsor- Keefe Jan. 20
The Stronger Will — P. Marmont-R. Carewe..Feb. 20
Women Who Dare — Helene Chadwick Mar. 20
F. B. O. Features
8233 Driftin’ Sands — Bob Steele Jan. 1
8207 Coney Island — Lois Moran Jan. 13
8215 Dead Man’s Curve — D. Fairbanks, Jr Jan. 15
8243 Wizard of the Saddle — Buzz Barton Jan. 22
8209 Little Mickey Grogan — Frankie Darro Jan. 30
8294 Fangs of the Wild.. Ranger the Dog... Feb. 5
82111 Her Summer Hero — Blane-Trevor Feb. 12
82012 Wallflowers — Trevor-Scott Feb. 16
8234 Riding Renegade — Bob Steele Feb. 19
8224 Texas Tornado — Tom Tyler Feb. 26
82011 Chicago After Midnight— Eddy-Ince. .Mar. 4
8244 The Little Buckaroo — Buzz Barton ... Mar. 11
82110 Beyond London Lights — Shumway. . . .Mar. 18
82015 Freckles — Fox-Bosworth-Darro Mar. 21
8235 Breed of the Sunsets — Bob Steele Apr. 1
8295 Law of Fear — Ranger, the Dog Apr. 8
82016 Crooks Can’t Win — Lewis-Hill Apr. 7
8218 Red Riders of Canada— Patsy R. Miller.Apr. 15
8225 Phantom of the Range — Tom Taylor.. Apr. 22
82014 The Little Yellow House Apr. 24
8245 The Pinto Kid — Buzz Barton Apr. 29
Fox Features
Wolf Fangs — Chas. Morton Nov. 27
The Wizard — Ed. Lowe-L. Hyams Dec. 11
Silk Legs — Madge Bellamy Dec. 18
Come to My House — A. Moreno-Olive Borden.. Dec. 25
Gateway of the Moon Jan. 1
Woman Wise — Wm. Russell-June Collyer Jan. 8
The Branded Sombrero — Buck Jones Jan. 8
Sharpshooters — Geo. O’Brien- L. Moran Jan. 15
$5,000 Reward — Tom Mix Jan. 15
A Girl in Every Port — Victor McLaglen Jan. 29
Gotham Features
San Francisco Nights — Percy Marmont Jan. 1
Bare Knees — Virginia Lee Corbin Feb. 1
Turn Back the Hours — Myrna Loy Mar. 1
The Chorus Kid Apr. 1
The Head of the Family May 1
Hell Ship Bronson — Mrs. W. Reid May 1
The Man Higher Up June 1
United States Smith — (Special) June 1
Thru the Breakers July 1
Paramount Features
Jan. 7 — 2772 — “Beau Sabreur” ..Gary Cooper
2705 Wife Savers — Beery-Hatton Jan. 7
2741 Love and Learn — E. Ralston-L. Chandler. .Jan, 14
Jan. 21 — 2713 — “The Pioneer Scout” Fred Thomson
2785 The Last Command — E. Jannings Jan. 21
2784 Gentlemen Prefer Blondes — Taylor- White. .Jan. 28
2751 Peaks of Destiny — U. F. A Jan. 28
2754 Under the Tonto Rim — Arlen-Brian Feb. 4
2745 The Secret Hour — Negri-Hersholt Feb. 11
2717 Sporting Goods — R. Dix Feb. 11
2737 Doomsday — F. Vidor Feb. 18
2761 The Showdown — Geo. Bancroft-E. Brent.Feb. 25
2727 Feel My Pulse — B. Daniels Feb. 25
2786 Old Ironsides — W. Beery-E. Ralston. . .Mar. 3
2783 Tillie’s Punctured Romance — Fields. .. .Mar. 3
2708 Red Hair — Clara Bow Mar. 10
2787 The Legion of the Condemned — Cooper. Mar. 10
2703 Partners in Crime — Beery-Hatton Mar. 17
2742 Something Always Happens — Ralston. .Mar. 24
2750 Adventure Mad — U. F. A. Prod Mar. 31
2789 Speedy — Harold Lloyd Apr. 7
2733 4th Menjou Apr. 7
2714 Sunset Legion — Fred Thomson Apr. 14
2746 Three Sinners — Pola Negri Apr. 14
2718 Easy Come, Easy Go — R. Dix Apr. 21
2728 She Wouldn’t Say Yes — B. Daniels Apr. 28
2788 Behind the German Lines (Tent) Apr. 28
2723 3rd Meighan Apr. 28
Pathe Features
1178 Laddie Be Good — Bill Cody Jan. 1
1191 The Ballyhoo Buster — Buffalo Bill, Jr Jan. 8
1199 Desperate Courage — Wally Wales Jan. 15
1230 A Perfect Gentleman — Monty Banks Jan. 15
1183 What Price Beauty — Nita Naldi Jan. 22
1208 Boss of the Rustler’s Roost — Don Coleman. Jan. 22
1251 The Cowboy Cavalier — Buddy Roosevelt Jan. 29
1234 Crashing Thru — Jack Padjan Feb. 5
1206 The Apache Raider — Leo Maloney Feb.
1192 Valley of Hunted Man — Buffalo Bill, Jr.Feb.
1209 The Bronc Stomper — Don Coleman. .. .Feb.
1224 Marlie the Man-Killer — Dog Picture. ... Mar.
1200 Saddle Mates — Wally Wales Mar.
1217 The Bullet Mark — Jack Donovan Mar.
1210 The Black Ace — Don Coleman Apr.
1225 The Law’s Lash — Dog Picture Apr.
12
19
26
4
11
25
8
15
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Features
853 Love — Garbo-Gilbert Jan. 2
817 West Point — Haines-Crawford Jan. 7
832 Divine Woman — Garbo-Hanson Jan. 14
812 Baby Mine — Arthur-Dane Jan. 21
846 Law of the Range — McCoy-Crawford Jan. 21
805 Wickedness Preferred — Cody-Pringle ....Jan. 28
854 Student Prince — Novarro-Shearer Jan. 30
825 Latest From Paris — Shearer-Forbes Feb. 4
843 Rose Marie — Crawford-Murray Feb. 11
839 The Big City — Chaney-Compson Feb. 18
855 The Enemy — Gish-Forbes Feb. 18
816 Smart Set — Haines-Day Feb. 25
841 The Crowd — Boardman-Murray Mar. 3
730 Forbidden Hours — Novarro-Adoree ....Mar. 10
828 The Patsy — Davies-Caldwell Mar. 17
819 Bringing Up Father — McDonald-Moran. .Mar. 24
848 Wyoming — McCoy-Sebastian Mar. 24
840 Laugh, Clown, Laugh — Chaney-Murphy . Apr. 7
842 The Cossacks — Adoree-Gilbert Apr. 14
802 Under the Black Eagle — R. Forbes Apr. 21
Pathe-de Mille Features
320 On to Reno — Maiie Prevost Jan. 1
314 Let ’er Go Gallagher — Jr. Coghlan Jan. 16
304 The Leopard Lady — Jacqueline Logan Jan. 25
323 The Night Flyer — William Boyd Feb. 5
321 Stand and Deliver — Rod LaRocque Feb. 20
325 A Blonde for a Night — Marie Prevost. .. .Feb. 27
336 Chicago — Haver-Varconi Mar. 5
334 The Blue Danube — Leatrice Joy Mar. 12
324 Midnight Madness — Logan-Brooks Mar. 26
309 The Sky Scraper — William Boyd Apr. 9
317 His Country — R. Schildkraut Apr. 23
Rayart Features
Casey Jones — Lewis-St. John-Price Jan.
The Heart of Broadway — Garon-Agnew Jan.
You Can’t Beat the Law — Lee-Keefe Feb.
My Home Town — Brockwell-Glass Feb.
The Phantom of the Turf — Costello-Lease Mar.
Gypsy of the North — Hale-Gordon Mar.
Tiffany Features
Jan. 1 — “A Woman Against the World”. .Harrison Ford
The Tragedy of Youth — W. Baxter-R. Miller. .. .Jan. 15
Their Hour — D. Sebastian-J. Harron Feb. 1
Sterling Features
Burning Up Broadway — H. Costello-R. Frazer.. Jan. 30
Marry the Girl — B. Bedford-Bob Ellis Mar. 1
Partial Index No. 1
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Sat., Feb. 25, 1928
Universal Features
Jan. 22 — A5719 — “Alias the Deacon,”
Hersholt-Marlowe-Graves
Jan. 29— A5697— “The Rawhide Kid” Hoot Gibson
A5702 Finders Keepers— L. LaPlante Feb. 5
A 5698 The Shield of Honor— All Star Feb. 19
A5701 Midnight Rose— DePutti-Harlan Feb. 26
A5705 Surrender — Philbin-Mosjukine Mar. 4
A5707 Stop That Man!— All Star Mar. 11
A5703 A Trick of Hearts— Hoot Gibson Mar. 18
A5712 Thanks for the Buggy Ride— LaPlante.Apr. 1
A5714 13 Washington Square — All Star Apr. 8
A5715 We Americans— All Star Apr. 22
United Artists Features
The Devil Dancer— Gilda Gray Dec.
The Dove — Norma Talmadge Jan.
Drums of Love — M. Philbin-L. Barrymore f’eb.
Ramona — Dolores Del Rio Mar.
Tempest — John Barrymore Apr.
Steamboat Bill, Jr. — Buster Keaton Apr.
The Passionate Adventure (Tent).. — Colman . . . . Apr.
Hell’s Angels— J. Hall-Ben Lyon none set
Warner Bros. Features
217 The Silver Slave— Irene Rich Nov. 19
196 Ginsberg the Great — Geo. Jessel Nov. 26
207 Brass Knuckles — Monte Blue Dec. 3
215 If I Were Single — May McAvoy Dec. 17
199 Husbands for Rent — Moore-Costello Dec. 31
200 Beware of Married Men — Irene Rich Jan. 14
216 A Race for Life — Rin-Tin-Tin Jan. 26
206 The Little Snob — May McAvoy Feb. 11
193 Across the Atlantic — Monte Blue Feb. 25
192 Powder My Back — Irene Rich Mar. 10
RELEASE SCHEDULE FOR
COMEDIES
Educational — Two Reels
Jan. 1 — There It Is Charley Bowers
Jan. 1 — Dummies Larry Semon
Jan. 8 — Racing Mad Al. St. John-Mermaid
Jan. 15 — Cutie Dorothy Devore
Jan. 22 — Wildcat Valley Johnny Arthur-Tuxedo
Jan. 29 — High Strung Jerry Drew-Mermaid
Always a Gentleman — Lloyd Hamilton Feb. 5
Sword Points — Lupino Lane Feb. 12
A Simple Sap — Larry Semon Feb. 12
Chilly Days — Bib Boy — Juvenile Feb. 19
His Maiden Voyage — Davis-Mermaid Feb. 26
Visitors Welcome — Arthur-Tuxedo Mar. 4
Indiscreet Pete — Drew-Mermaid Mar. 11
Between Jobs — Lloyd Hamilton Mar. 18
What a Girl — Lupino Lane Mar. 25
Circus Blues — Dorothy Devore Mar. 25
Educational — One Reel
Wedding Slips — Collins-Cameo Jan. 1
The Smoke Scream — Felix the Cat Jan. 8
All Set — Lupino-Cameo Jan. 15
Draggin’ the Dragon — Felix the Cat Jan. 22
Running Ragged — Sargent-Cameo Jan. 29
The Oily Bird — Felix the Cat Feb. 5
A Mysterious Night — Collins-Cameo Feb. 12
Ohm Sweet Ohm — Felix the Cat Feb. 19
Pretty Baby — Collins-Cameo Feb. 26
In Japanicky — Felix the Cat Mar. 4
Count Me Out — -Helium-Cameo Mar. 11
In Polly-tics — Felix the Cat Mar. 18
Spring Has Come — Collins-Cameo Mar. 25
Fox — Two Reel Comedies
Jan. 1 — Hot House Hazel Van Bibber
Jan. 18 — Hold Your Hat Imperial
Jan. 29 — The Kiss Doctor Van Bibber
F. B. O. — Two Reels
Jan. 2 — Mickey’s Parade Mickey McGuire Series
Jan. 9 — A Social Error Karnival Komedies
Jan. 9 — Panting Papas Standard Comedy
Jan. 23 — All Washed Out Karnival Komedies
Mickey in School — Mickey McGuire Feb. 6
Rah Rah Rexie — Karnival Feb. 6
Oui Oui Heidelburg — -Standard Feb. 13
Too Many Hisses — Karnival Feb. 20
Mickey’s Nine— Mickey McGuire Mar. 5
Top Hats — Karnival Mar. 5
The Happy Trio — Standard Mar. 12
Are Husbands People? — Karnival Mar. 19
Mickey’s Little Eva — Mickey McGuire Apr. 2
My Kingdom for a Hearse — Karnival Apr. 2
All Alike — Standard Apr. 9
After the Squall Is Over — Karnival .....Apr. 16
Restless Bachelors — Karnival Apr. 30
Metro-Goldwyn-Msyer — Two Reels
Jan. 7 — Pass the Gravy Davidson
Jan. 14 — Spook-Spoofing Our Gang
Jan. 21 — Lady of Victories (tech) ’. Events
Jan. 21 — All for Nothing Chase
Jan. 28 — Leave ’Em Laughing All Star
Dumb Daddies — Davidson Feb. 4
Rainy Days — Gang Feb. II
The Family Group — Chase Feb. 18
The Finishing Touch — Stars Feb. 25
Came the Dawn- — -Davidson Mar. 3
Edison, Marconi & Co. — Gang Mar. 10
The Czarina’s Secret — Events Mar. 17
Aching Youths — Chase Mar. 17
From Soup to Nuts — Stars Mar. 24
Blow by Blow — Davidson Mar. 31
Barnum & Ringling, Inc. — Gang Apr. 7
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
Perfume and Nicotine — Oddity Jan. 14
Jungle Round-Up — Oddity Jan. 28
Children of the Sun — Oddity Feb. 11
Secrets of the Sun — Oddity Feb. 25
Amazing Lovers — Oddity Mar. 10
Monarch of the Glen — Oddity Mar. 24
Wicked Kasamir — Oddity Apr. 7
Primitive Housekeeping — Oddity Apr. 21
Paramount — Two Reel*
Jan. 7 — Dad’s Choice Horton
Jan. 14 — Frenzy Novelty
Jan. 21 — Fighting Fanny Christie
Jan. 28 — Save the Pieces Vernon
Water Bugs — Dooley Feb. 4
Holy Mackerel — Adams Feb. 11
Just the Type — Christie-Burns Feb. 18
Adoration — Novelty Feb. 25
Behind the Counter — Horton Mar. 3
Sweeties — Vernon Mar. 10
Long Hose — Christie-Duffy Mar. 17
Love Shy — Adams Mar. 24
Knights of the Air — Novelty Mar. 31
Campus Cuties — Dooley Apr. 7
Halfback Hannah — Christie Apr. 14
Bugs My Dear — Vernon Apr. 21
Goofy Ghosts — Adams Apr. 28
Paramount — One Reel
Koko's Kink — Inkwell Imps Jan. 7
Pig Styles — Krazy Kat Jan. 14
Koko’s Kozy Corner — Inkwell Imps Jan. 21
Sjiadow Theory — Krazy Kat Jan. 28
Koko’s Jerm Jam — Inkwell Imps Feb. 4
Ice Boxed — Krazy Kat Feb. 11
Koko’s Bawth — Inkwell Imps Feb. 18
A Hunger Stroke — Krazy Kat Feb. 25
Koko’s Smoke — Inkwell Imps Mar. 3
Wired and Fired — Krazy Kat Mar. 10
Koko’s Tattoo — Inkwell Imps M*r. ffl
Love Sunk — Krazy Kat Mar. 24
Koko’s Earth Control— Inkwell Imps Mar. 31
Tong Tied — Krazy Kat Apr. 7
Koko’s Hot Dog — Inkwell Imps Apr. 14
A Bum Steer — Krazy Kat Apr. 21
Koko’s Haunted House — Inkwell Imps Apr. 28
Pathe — Two Reel Comedies
Jaa. 1 — Playin’ Hooky Gang-Roach
Jan. 8 — Smith’s Holiday Sennett-Smith
Jan. IS — Should Tall Men Marry? Roach
Jan. 15 — Run, Girl, Run ....Sennett
Jan. 22 — The Beach Club Sennett
Jan. 29 — Love at First Flight Sennett
Smith’s Army Life — Sennett-Smith Feb. 5
Flying Elephants — Roach Feb. 12
The Best Man — Sennett Feb. 19
The Smile Wins — Gang-Roach Feb. 26
The Swim Princess — Sennett Feb. 26
Smith’s Farm Days — Smith-Sennett Mar. 4
Galloping Ghosts — Roach Mar. 11
The Bicycle Flirt — Sennett Mar. 18
Smith’s Restaurant — Smith-Sennett Apr. 1
Motor Boat Mamas — Sennett Apr. 15
Smith’s Catalina Rowboat Race — Smith Apr. 29
Pathe- — One Reel
Fighting Relatives — Roach Mar. 4
Do Monkeys Manicure?— Roach Apr. 1
Universal — Two Reels
Jan. 2 — Newlyweds’ Advice Newlyweds’ Series
Jan. 4 — Horseplay Keeping Up with the Joneses
Jan. 9 — A Case of Scotch Gumps
Jan. 11 — Buster’s Big Chance Buster Brown Series
Jan. 18 — Dates for Two Mike and Ike Series
Jan. 23 — Any Old Count Gumps
Jan. 25 — High Flyin’ George Let Geo. Do It Series
Jan. 30 — Horns & Orange Blossoms. .Puffy-Cohen Series
Start Something — Stern Bros Feb. 1
Newlywed’s Servant — Junior Jewels Feb. 6
The Cloud Buster — Gumps Feb. 6
Buster Steps Out — Stern Bros Feb. 8
The Prince and the Papa — Puffy-Cohen Feb. 13
Man of Letters — Stern Bros Feb. 15
A Damp Day — Gumps Feb. 20
What a Party — Stern Bros Feb. 22
All Balled Up — Puffy-Cohen Feb. 27
George’s False Alarm — Stern Bros Feb. 29
Newlywed’s Success — Junior Jewels Mar. 5
Indoor Golf — Stern Bros Mar. 7
His Inlaws — Puffy-Cohen Mar. 12
Buster Shows Off — Stern Bros Mar. 14
No Blondes Allowed — Stern Bros Mar. 21
Some Babies — Puffy-Cohen Mar. 26
Watch George — Stern Bros Mar. 28
Newlywed’s Imagination — Junior Jewels ....Apr. 2
Her Only Husband — Stern Bros Apr. 4
Married Bachelors — Puffy-Cohen ■ Apr. 9
That’s That — Stern Bros Apr. 11
Taking the Count — Stern Bros Apr. 18
When George Hops — Stern Bros Apr. 25
Universal — One Reel
Some Pets — Lake-Drugstore Cowboy Jan. 2
Harem Scarem — Oswald Cartoon Jan. 9
So This Is Sap Center — Hall-Highbrow Jan. 16
Neck ’N Neck — Oswald Cartoon Jan. 23
By Correspondence — Lake-Drugstore Cowboy.Jan. 30
The Ole Swimmin’ Ole — Oswald Cartoon. ... Feb. 6
Mistakes Will Happen — Hall-Highbrow ....Feb. 13
Africa Before Dark — Oswald Cartoon Feb. 20
Back To Nature — Lake-Drugstore Cowboy. .. Feb. 27
Rival Romeos — Oswald Cartoon Mar. 5
Social Lions — Hall-Harold Highbrow Mar. 12
Bright Lights — Oswald Cartoon Mar. 19
Ringside Romeos — Lake-Drugstore Cowboy.. Mar. 26
Special Edition — Hall-Harold Highbrow Apr. 9
Oae Every Minute — Lake-Drugstore Cowboy.Apr. 23
Fox
38 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 4
39 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 8
40 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 11
41 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 15
42 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 18
43 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 22
44 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 25
45 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 29
46 Even Number Saturday, Mar. 3
47 Odd Number Wednesday, Mar. 7
48 Even Number Saturday, Mar. 10
49 Odd Number Wednesday, Mar. 14
International
...Saturday, Feb. 4
Wednesday, Feb. 6
...Saturday, Feb. 11
Wednesday, Feb. 15
...Saturday, Feb. 18
Wednesday, Feb. 22
...Saturday, Feb. 25
Wednesday, Feb. 29
..Saturday, Mar. 3
Wednesday, Mar. 7
. . Saturday, Mar. 10
Wednesday, Mar. 14
Kinograms
5367 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 4
5368 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 8
5369 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 11
5370 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 15
5371 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 18
5372 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 22
5373 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 25
5374 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 29
5375 Odd Number 4Saturday, Mar. 3
5376 Even Number Wednesday, Mar. 7
5377 Odd Number Saturday, Mar. 10
5378 Even Number Wednesday, Mar. 14
Pathe
13 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 4
14 Even Number Wednesday, Feb.. 8
15 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 11
16 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 15
17 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 18
18 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 22
19 Odd Number Saturday, Feb. 25
20 Even Number Wednesday, Feb. 29
21 Odd Number Saturday, Mar. 3
22 Even Number Wednesday, Mar. 7
23 Odd Number Saturday, Mar. 10
24 Even Number Wednesday, Mar. 14
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer
50 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 4
51 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 8
52 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 11
53 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 15
54 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 18
55 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 22
56 Even Number Saturday, Feb. 25
57 Odd Number Wednesday, Feb. 29
58 Even Number Saturday, Mar. 3
59 Odd Number Wednesday, Mar. 7
60 Even Number Saturday, Mar. 10
61 Odd Number Wednesday, Mar. 14
Paramount
...Saturday, Feb. 4
Wednesday, Feb. 8
...Saturday, Feb. 11
Wednesday, Feb. 15
...Saturday, Feb. 18
Wednesday, Feb. 22
...Saturday, Feb. 25
Wednesday, Feb. 29
..Saturday, Mar. 3
Wednesday, Mar. 7
..Saturday, Mar. 10
Wednesday, Mar. 14
10 Even Number
11 Odd Number
12 Even Number
13 Odd Number
14 Even Number
15 Odd Number
16 Even Number
17 Odd Number
18 Even Number
19 Odd Number
20 Even Number
21 Odd Number
55 Odd Number
56 Even Number
57 Odd Number
58 Even Number
59 Odd Number
60 Even Number
61 Odd Number
62 Even Number
63 Odd Number
64 Even Number
65 Odd Number
66 Even Number
Entered as aeeoM-efaas matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, ISTf.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MARCH 3, 1928
No. 9
There Will Be a 50% Film Rental Cut Next Season
Two weeks ago I printed the fact that Governor
Smith of New York State requested Industrial Com-
missioner Hamilton to ascertain the unemployment
situation and to make an immediate report to him.
Here is part of what Mr. Hamilton reported:
For New York City:
The Urban League had, in January, 1927, 365 ap-
plicants for every one hundred jobs whereas in Janu-
ary, 1928, 1,075. This represents an increase of
approximately 34 per cent.
The Bronx Y. M. C. A. had 568 applicants for
every 100 jobs in January, 1927, and 776 in January,
1928. This represents an increase of seven and three-
tenths per cent.
The Vocational Service for Juniors had in January,
1927, more than enough jobs to go around for minors
between the ages of 14 and 18, whereas in the same
month this year at least one-third of the minors could
not get a job.
An average of 100 veterans a day, nine out of each
ten married, sought employment according to the
American Legion of Bronx County.
One hundred per cent, is the increase of applicants
for jobs in 1928 according to two large employment
agencies.
A stream of applicants in and out all day long with
no available jobs is the report of the Sixth Avenue
agencies for hotels and restaurants.
According to the Commissioner of Licenses, in the
commercial employment bureaus the demand for
workers was ten per cent, less this winter, whereas
the number of those seeking work was ten per cent,
more.
The Employing Printers’ Association reports more
applicants for work in January, 1928, than in any
month during the last six years.
Fifteen thousand, out of a membership of forty-five
thousand, are out of work, according to the report of
the Amalgamated Clothing Workers.
For the State:
The Industrial Commissioner reports that, accord-
ing to information furnished him by the State Fed-
eration of Labor, an acute unemployment situation
exists in the entire state.
Six up-state cities with a total population of 1,258,-
683 have approximately 70,000 unemployed.
Buffalo, a city of 538,016, has between thirty-five
and forty thousand out of work. About forty per
cent, of the workers of the leading building trades
are idle, with about 8,000 unemployed. There is
also a bread line in some places. Relief agencies'
figures show that for the first time since 1921 the City
Mission has organized a bread line, feeding 200 daily.
The Erie County Lodging House for the first time
since 1921 has opened an emergency annex.
In Rochester, with a population of 316,786, the
Chamber of Commerce reported to the Commissioner
that the number of unemployed are 10,000. About
fifty per cent, of the workers in the clothing industry
are out of work, with a similar percentage of unem-
ployed among the bricklayers, masons and carpenters.
The Chief of Police reported that there have not been
so many applicants for relief since 1922.
In Syracuse, with a population of 182,003, the un-
employed are estimated to be between five and seven
thousand.
Of the two large firms in Schenectady that were
canvassed, one reported that the conditions are worse
now than they have been in 1921, and the other re-
ported that, in October, 1927, it employed 19,600 work-
ers, but now it employs 1,200 fewer, and of those that
it employs, many of them work part time.
In Utica, with a population of 101,604, about 4,500
are unemployed as against 2,500- last year; or, 51 per
cent, more unemployed this year.
An analogous situation exists in the smaller cities.
The situation throughout the country is no differ-
ent irom that which exists in this state; there are
unemployed everywhere, and the number is swelling
constantly.
* * *
Two weeks ago, in the editorial, “Look Ahead!”
in treating of the prevailing depression and suggesting
to you to make your buying plans for the future
now, I expressed the hope that the producers would
take notice of the prevailing depression and make big
cuts in the cost of production, so that they might be
able to sell their pictures next season for less; I
warned them that they should do this,- because I
believed that you would not be able to pay even sev-
enty-five per cent, of what you have paid for the cur-
rent season’s product. I now find out that I was too
late with those recommendations, for the producers
have already taken such steps; only that they did not,
for obvious reasons, make the matter known; they did
not want you to know about it so that you might
not demand a cut in the price of your film. Fortu-
nately, however, an exhibitor who has just returned
from the Coast, where he spent two months and had
an opportunity to learn much, has informed this paper
about the slash in production costs.
“I have been out to the West Coast for a couple of
months,” this exhibitor writes, “and I want to tell
you that the way they are cutting down the cost of
production should bring film rentals down. I have
been informed authoritatively that the sets for “Lon-
don After Midnight” cost less than $2,500. The di-
rector was instructed not to go over that amount and
to use stock sets. And he didn’t.
“That’s the general policy now; nothing but st'M'k
sets to be used.
“Instructions have been issued also that the scripts
be all set, the pictures to be shot at nearly the exact
footage as the finished product calls for. Instead of
shooting a scene over and over, and from several
angles, the one shot must do. And that is common
sense. . .
* * *
The producers are at last showing common sense;
they are doing now what they should have done years
ago.
Your one thought now should be to share in this
benefit; you should get your film next season for at
least fifty per cent, less than you got it the current
season. You should set your mind to it from this
very minute; don’t wait until the beautiful press-
sheets are out; they are liable to lure you into paying
more. You will be sunk if you do, for no one looks
for an improvement in business conditions until the
next winter has passed.
There is going to be a fifty per cent, cut in film
rentals next season. Paint this on the wall of your
office, in plain view, so that the callers may not have
difficulty in seeing it.
P. S. HARRISON.
34
March 3, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Finders Keepers” — with Laura La Plante
( Univ.-Jewel , Feb. 5; 6,081 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
A delightful comedy-romance, in which the laughs are
created by the heroine’s efforts to marry her soldier
sweetheart before his regiment leaves for the war front
in France. The scenes where she is shown dressed in a
soldier’s uniform, which does not fit her, with her trousers
threatening to fall all the time, are comical in the ex-
treme. Most of the comedy, in fact, is caused while Miss
La Plante masquerades as a soldier. The love interest is
fairly strong. Miss La Plante makes a good heroine;
Johnie Harron a good hero; and Eddie Phillips a good
Second Lieutenant, rival of the hero. Miss La Plante
takes the part of the daughter of the Colonel, under
whom the hero and his rival serve.
The plot has been founded on a story by Mary Roberts
Rinehart; it has been directed skillfully by Wesley
Ruggles.
It should give good satisfaction everywhere.
“Peaks of Destiny” — with a German Cast
( Paramo unt- U fa, Jan. 28; 6,940 ft.; 80 to 99 min.)
Nothing to it. There are some wonderful skiing
scenes in it and many beautiful Alpine snow scenes, but
the story is trite, and the acting amateurish. It would
have been better for Paramount to take the skii racing
scenes out and make a two-reel scenic out of it than to
attempt to deliver it as a drama of feature length. Then
those who would see it would become enthralled by it. As
it is, the poverty of the story and of the acting kills even
the effect of the beauty of the scenery and of the un-
usualness of the skii races. Some of the scenes in the
races were taken with a slow motion camera. The ef-
fect is thus striking.
The story unfolds in the Swiss Alps and is supposed
to show the frailty of a woman, who, though she is in
love with one man, to whom she is engaged, she flirts
with another, a young man, friend of her sweetheart. The
sweetheart conceives a fiendish plan to remove his friend
and rival from the way ; he invites him to a climb, and
then pushes him off the cliff. At the last moment, how-
ever, he realizes the height of his crime and holds him
hanging by the rope that was fastened to him, until help
arrives and saves them both. The story closes with the
marriage of the heroine to her sweetheart.
The picture has been produced by Ufa. Ernest Peter-
son is the hero; Leni Riefenstahl, the heroine; Louis
Trenker, the friend: and Frieda Richard, the hero’s
mother.
“Ham and Eggs at the Front” — with Tom
Wilson and Heinie Conklin
(Warner Bros., Dec. 24; 5,613 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
Pretty good war-front comedy. The first half is rather
slow, but it picks up in the second half. Most of the
comedy is caused by two soldiers, Tom Wilson and his
buddy, Heinie Conklin, who impersonate colored soldiers.
The action revolves around the doings of a colored regi-
ment. The superstition colored people have for ghosts,
too, contributes toward making the second half comical.
In the scenes where the pair is sent to explore a “haunted”
house for the purpose of detecting a German spy are
comical in the extreme ; in several scenes each of the two
heroes is shown dragging behind him a skeleton.
The plot has been written by Darryl Francis Zanuck;
it has been directed well by Roy Del Ruth.
It should give pretty good satisfaction everywhere.
“Streets of Shanghai” — with Pauline Starke
and Kenneth Harlan
(Tiffany, Dec. 18; 5,276 ft.; 61 to 75 min.)
A good melodrama, revolving around an American
marine’s love for an American Missionary, teacher of
Chinese children in Shanghai. The love interest is pretty
strong. There are some thrills, too, caused by the attempt
of Chinese bandits to shoot and kill the heroine, because
the son of a prominent Chinaman was in love with her.
The scenes where the hero, the heroine and her Chinese
servants are shown defending the mission and the bandits
setting fire to it, with the marines arriving just in time
to drive the attackers away and to rescue them, are sus-
pensive.
The story has been written by John Francis Natteford;
it has been directed well by Louis J. Gasnier. Pauline
Starke makes a good heroine; Kenneth Harlan a good
hero Eddie Gribbon furnishes no little comedy as the
hero’s pal. Jason Robards, Sojin, Anna May Wong,
Mathilde Comont and others are in the supporting cast.
It should give good satisfaction.
“Buttons” — with Jackie Coogan
(M-G-M, Dec. 24; 6,050 ft.; 70 to 86 thin.)
Better than the average Jackie Coogan picture. There
is considerable comedy all the way through, much human
interest, and not a few thrills. The comedy is caused
chiefly by young Coogan with Paul Hurst, who takes the
part of a gym instructor. The human interest is aroused
by the loyalty Jackie Coogan, an orphan, shows towards
the captain (Lars Hanson) of the ship, who had be-
friended him and had given him a chance in life after
taking him out of the streets. This interest reaches the
highest point when Jackie Coogan, while in a life boat,
swims back to the sinking ship, unwilling to desert his
friend, the captain. His diminutive size but great moral
courage wins the spectators’ admiration. The scenes
where the young hero and the captain find themselves in
the water after the ship had turned turtle are suspensive
in the extreme ; the spectator sighs with relief when the
two are rescued. The scenes of the collision with the
iceberg are suspensive, too.
The story revolves around the ficklessness of the hero-
ine, and around a young boy-hero’s efforts to serve his
benefactor, captain of a ship, by acquainting him with the
fact.
The scene showing Jackie Coogan opening the letter
the heroine’s admirer had sent to her shows lack of good
taste ; it teaches a bad moral lesson, no matter what the
motive is. Some other way should have been employed
to acquaint the boy of the fact that the heroine was faith-
less to her fiance, the captain.
George Hill wrote the story and directed the picture;
Gertrude Olmsted is the heroine ; Lars Hanson the cap-
tain; Roy D’Arcy the villain; Paul Hurst the gym in-
structor ; Polly Moran the chambermaid.
“The Showdown” — with George Bancroft
(Param., Feb. 25; 7,166 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
The work of Mr. Bancroft in this picture is as good,
his acting as impressive, as was that in “Underworld” ;
only that the story is not as strong. “The Showdown”
has no machine guns and there is no shootings and kill-
ings ; it is chiefly a revelation of character. But it is
dramatically powerful just the same. There is a fight
between the hero and the villain. This gives the picture
a melodramatic twist. But it is chiefly drama.
The story is supposed to unfold in an oil field, some-
where in the tropics, in a Latin American country, where
the hero and a partner of his, a weak young man, were
drilling for oil. The young man could no longer stand
the monotony or life there and took to drink and to
women. The young partner’s brother and his brother’s
wife (heroine) arrive; his brother had lost money be-
longing to others and went to him with the hope of re-
couping his fortune and paying back the investors. The
hero (George Bancroft) told the heroine that that was
no place for a decent white woman and that if she re-
mained there the climate would “get” her. The heroine
replied that she was well able to take care of herself, no
matter where she might find herself, because her love for
her husband strengthened her.
The story closes showing the heroine nearly “con-
quered” by the climate. The hero saved her from an at-
tempted assault by the villain. The heroine tells the
hero that his strength had at last conquered, and asked
him to take her away. Her husband’s appearance, how-
ever, gives her strength to resist the temptation; she up-
braids the hero. The hero asks the husband to cut the
cards so that it might be determined who was to leave
camp and keep the heroine. The hero loves the heroine
so truly that he purposely loses, so that the heroine might
win. He then goes back to his old “flame.”
The plot has been founded on Huston Branch’s story
“Wildcat” ; it has been directed by Victor Schertzinger.
Evelyn Brent plays the part of the heroine, Neil Hamil-
ton that of the husband, and Fred Kohler that of the
villain.
It is not, of course, a Sunday School picture, but it is
good for adults. The sex matters have been handled
delicately.
March 3, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
35
“Doomsday”— with Florence Vidor
(. Paramount , Feb. 18; 5,665 ft.; 66 to 80 min.)
Tlie second half is not quite as interesting as the first
halt, but on the whole “Doomsday” is an interesting and
appealing drama. The sight of the beautiful heroine
working from early in the morning till late at night wash-
ing clothes and doing other menial work, making a com-
fortable home for her father, arouses the spectator’s sym-
pathy for her. In the scenes where Miss Vidor is dressed
up in expensive clothes and wearing diamonds, she looks
beautiful.
The action unfolds in a small town in England. It
shows the heroine as a drudge. A wealthy old man lives
near her and every day he watches her with his field
glasses, hoping that some day he will be able to induce
her to marry him. The heroine is in love with a young
farmer, whom she had promised to marry. But she gives
him up for the wealthy man. Soon, however, she finds
out that money does not bring happiness ; she divorces
her husband and goes to the young farmer. The young
farmer, however, will not have her for the reason that
he thinks her too unsteady to let her become his wife.
But the heroine eventually proves to him that she will
make a good wife to him.
The plot has been founded on the McClure Magazine
story by Warwick Deeping, author of “Sorrell and Son.”
It has been directed with skill by Rowland V. Lee. Flor-
ence Vidor makes a good heroine; Gary Cooper a good
hero. Lawrence Grant takes the part of the wealthy man
well. Charles A. Stevens impersonates the father of the
heroine.
It is a picture suited chiefly to high-class custom.
“The Leopard Lady” — with Jacqueline
Logan
( Pathe-DcMille , Jan. 23; 6,650 ft.; 77 to 95 min.)
A strong melodrama, which unfolds around a circus
in a small town in Austria, and in which the thrills are
caused mostly by the heroine, who is an animal trainer.
The scenes where she is in the iron cage, making two
leopards perform, are the most thrilling, particularly
the moments where her whip snatches and, unable to
control them, the animals quit fighting among themselves
and one of them jumps on her. The action is suspensive
almost all the way through, the suspense being caused by
the frequent mysterious deaths, which are supposed to
be caused by an old woman, really a gorilla. The scenes
where the hero is attacked by the gorilla are thrilling.
The scenes where the heroine, suspecting the Cossack as
the cause of the murders, is shown in his quarters search-
ing his effects and finding evidence of it are extremely
suspensive ; the spectator fears lest she be detected. The
scenes that show her being attacked by the gorilla are
suspensive, too.
The plot has been founded on the play of the same
name by Edward Childs Carpenter ; it has been directed
by Rupert Julian with skill. Robert Armstrong takes the
part of the hero ; Jacqueline Logan that of the heroine ;
Alan Hale that of the villainous Cossack. James Brad-
bury, Sr., Dick Alexander, William Burt, Sylvia Ashton
and others are in the cast.
The story revolves around a leopard trainer (heroine)
who accepts a commission from the police commissioner
of Vienna to detect the criminal that murdered people.
The authorities suspected some one in a circus, and the
heroine is asked to join it. She at first refuses, but when
she is offered a substantial sum of money as a reward,
she accepts; she thus hopes to have enough money to
marry her American sweetheart (hero), a merchant ma-
rine man. She succeeds, but not until she endangered her
life and the life of her beloved.
“ihe Chaser” — with Harry Langdon
(First National, Feb. 12; 5,745 ft.; 66 to 82 min.)
Mediocre. It seems as if Mr. Langdon’s style of act-
ing is not adapted to comedies of the feature length. That
is what one may deduce from the fact that, although Mr.
Langdon lias made many a good two-reel comedy, he has
made only one good comedy of the feature length —
"Tramp, Tramp, Tramp.” There are very few laughs in
the would-be comical situations, and the interest is not
aroused to an appreciable degree. In places, the action is
monotonous and, as a result, tiresome.
The story is supposed to show Mr. Langdon as a hen-
pecked husband, whom his wife brings to court on charges
of cruelty. The judge imposes a novel sentence on him
— 'to don women’s clothes, and to keep house for a month.
The end shows the hero asserting himself and making
his wife keep her place.
Air. Langdon seems to find pleasure in low comedy. In
one scene he tries to make people laugh by putting a tin
pan against the fat part of his back while he is in a
stooping position. In other scenes he introduces a baby
chair, with pots and pans and the rest. These are the
kind of comedy attempts that were abandoned long ago.
Written and directed by Mr. Langdon.
“The Whip Woman” — with Estelle Taylor
and Antonio Moreno
(First Nat., Feb. 6; 5,107 ft.; 59 to 73 min.)
Not much to it. None of the characters does anything
noteworthy. Consequently none arouses much sympa-
thetic interest.
It is the story of a Hungarian nobleman, impoverished
by the World War, who falls in love and wants to marry
a beautiful peasant girl, whom her townfolk admire, re-
spect and fear, because she is so strong that she is able
to take care of herself against men, occasionally using
her whip to make them behave themselves. But the hero’s
mother, who objects to such a union, succeeds in bringing
about a misunderstanding between them and a consequent
separation ; she did this because she thus hoped to induce
her son to marry a wealthy titled woman. But the hero
eventually marries the peasant girl.
The story is by Forrest Halsey and Leland Hayward.
It has been directed by Joseph C. Boyle. Lowell Sher-
man, Hedda Hopper, Julanne Jonston and Loretta Young
appear in the cast.
“The Latest From Paris” — v/ith Norma
Shearer
(M-G-M, Feb. 4; 7,743 ft.; 90 to 110 min.)
Just a passable comedy romance of a saleswoman that
outwits a salesman. Each sells the same kind of arti-
cles, women’s wear. There are some mild laughs here
and there. The love interest is fairly strong : —
A salesman and a saleswoman (hero and heroine)
meet on the train in the dining car, and the hero, not
knowing that the heroine is the person that had beaten him
out of sales, vows that if “he” would ever cross his path
again he would show “him.” The heroine takes it all
“in,” and conceives a plan by which she could beat him
out of a big sale. She does so, much to the chagrin of
the hero. But in the end, finding that they love each
other, they become engaged. The heroine, however, can-
not think of marrying him until she had put her young
brother through college. This brings the first tilt be-
tween them, because the hero believed that brothers should
be kicked out and be left to shift for themselves. The
heroine returns home, but finding her brother married,
wires the hero that she is going back to him for the mar-
riage ceremony.
The picture has beer, directed well by Sam Wood,
from an original story by A. P. Younger. Ralph Forbes
is the young hero, and William Bakewell the young
brother. George Sidney is in the cast.
“'ihe Noose” — with Richard Barthelmess
This picture was reviewed on page 11. Henry Hobart
was given the credit as having directed it. Air. Hobart
calls the attention of this paper that this is an error ;
John Francis Dillon directed it.
“Sadie Thompson”- — with Gloria Swanson
In the review of this picture on page 23, it was stated
through a typographical error that Allan Dwan directed
it. Raoul Walsh has directed it.
LAST AIINUTE NEWS
This is written Tuesday morning before going to press.
The hearing for the Brookhart Bill started yesterday,
is continued today and perhaps will not close until to-
morrow.
A telephone message from Air. Sol Raives, President
of T. O. C. C., stated that the exhibitors that gathered
in Washington for the hearing, organized themselves into
a body to take care of Congressional legislative matters,
elected a Steering Committee and immediately drafted
Air. Charles L. O’Reilly as chairman. This action means
the death of M. P. T. O. A.
36
March 3, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
FLOPS AND HITS
“The Dove,” a United Artists picture with Norma
Talmadge, has made a failure in New York City and it is
conjectured that it will make a failure in the rest of the
country; the story is weak.
"Gaucho,” a United Artists picture, with Douglas Fair-
banks, is an excellently produced big picture, but it has
not drawn in this city and it is doubtful if it will draw
anywhere else. The fact that one of the characters is a
person that is stricken by an incurable disease makes the
picture repulsive.
“The Devil Dancer" has not done any "killing” in this
city. It is a well produced picture but it will no doubt
interest chiefly the cultured picture-goers, who are limited
in numbers.
“Drums of Love,” the United Artists picture that has
been produced by D. W. Griffith, is “dying a natural
death” in this city ; it is extremely artistic but too heavy
for general consumption ; it is tragedy.
“Chicago,” Pathe DeMille, has made a failure in this
city. It is hardly a small-town picture.
“The Enemy,” Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, has proved to
be a good-sized flop in this city.
“Sunrise” has been given a forced run in this city. It
is reported that in Newark, at the Fox Terminal, it drew
big crowds ; but it is “dying” in Detroit. It is an ex-
tremely artistic production but it will no doubt appeal to
a limited number ; the rank-and-file will hardly care for it.
“Four Sons,” the Fox Superspecial, has just opened up
in this city ; it is drawing big crowds.
“Love,” the Metro-Goldwyn picture, with John Gilbert
and Greta Garbo, is drawing well.
“Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” the Universal Superspecial, has
made a good, though not extra, showing in this city. But
it is a picture that everyone who sees it raves about it.
In the smaller towns it ought to go extremely well.
“Sadie Thompson,” the United Artists picture, with
Gloria Swanson, is drawing big at the Rivoli, this city.
“Sorrell and Son,” the Herbert Brenon-United Artists
picture, drew big crowds at the Rivoli, and according to
the exhibitors that have played it, it has proved the best
money-maker of the season.
“My Best Girl,” United Artists, with Mary Pickford,
proved a flop.
“Quality Street,” the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer-Cosmo-
politan picture, with Marion Davies, was a flop in New
York City and may prove a flop elsewhere.
“The Private Life of Helen of Troy,” First National,
is drawing fairly well in tire smaller towns.
“The Circus,” the latest Charlie Chaplin picture, drew
big crowds at the Strand, this city, and it is predicted
that it will draw big crowds everywhere.
“Mother Machree,” the Fox superspecial, which will
open in this city next week, should draw big crowds.
“Wings,” the Paramount Superspecial, is drawing well
in this city.
JUST TO MAKE SOME THINGS CLEAR
“Exhibitors Plerald and Moving Picture World,” in
its issue of February 18, printed a letter from Mr.
N. L. Royster, Secretary of M. P. T. O. of N. Car.,
dealing with the Brookhart Bill.
Among other things, Mr. Royster said:
“The exhibitors I have talked to so far are about
50-50 regarding the Brookhart Bill, and just because
Mr. Harrison or some one else wants our endorse-
ment in the matter is no reason why I should give it
without the backing of our state organization.”
This statement is wrong and is liable to mislead
those that have read it. I have not asked the North
Carolina organization or any other to endorse the
Brookhart Bill against the will of the majority. What
I did was to ask Mr. Royster and Mr. Picquet to state
their attitude in the matter. Mr. Royster replied that
he was for it but that he did not want to assume the
responsibility of committing his organization in so
important a matter without authorization. Mr. Pic-
quet failed to reply.
Mr. Royster’s attitude was proper; no leader should
commit his organization in any matter of importance
without a meeting or of a referendum. The trouble,
however, is that there has been held neither a meeting
nor a referendum in that state, so far as I have been
able Jo ascertain. Consequently, an entire organiza-
tion is committed against the bill just because some
of its executives are opposed to it. This is neither
just nor fair. Such an attitude puts us in ■ position
where we can attribute ulterior motives to the leaders
of that organization. And no one can blame us for it.
Messrs, rjcquet and Royster must realize one thing,
that as leaders of an organization they have assumed
certain obligations. One of such obligations is to
carry out the will of the majority. But how can they
say that in the question of the Brookhart Bill they
are carrying out the wishes of the majority when they
have failed to ascertain it by accepted methods?
Meeting some exhibitors in the street and asking them
to express their sentiment is not the accepted method
of ascertaining the sentiment of the majority of the
members.
Messrs. Royster and Picquet have, of course, the
right to feel the way they want to in any question;
this is a free country and they are entitled to their
opinion. But what they are not entitled to is to stifle
the opinion of others. And that is what they are
doing by failing either to call a state-wide meeting
or to hold a referendum.
This goes for the other state organization leaders
that have acted in the same way, too.
And by the way, I have just been informed by Secre-
tary Hone, that the unaffiliated exhibitors of Washing-
ton went on record in favor of the Brookhart Bill. The
Washington organization consists of both affiliated and
unaffiliated exhibitors. But the affiliated exhibitors with-
drew when the motion for the endorsing resolution was
made.
I have been also informed that the Kansas exhibi-
tors are bitterly opposed to the attitude of Dick
Biechele toward the Brookhart Bill; the majority of
the members are disgusted with the policy of the
organization and they are not paying dues.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
I have received the following letter from a Pittsburgh
exhibitor :
“Charging 25c admission till 6 o’clock, no theatre in
Pittsburgh can compete with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer or
with United Artists subjects played at Loew’s Penn
Theatre. Next year we won’t buy them.
“Roxy broadcasted requests for letters regarding
whether the residents of Pittsburgh wanted a Roxy. If
they do, we won’t play Fox.”
“Will the exhibitors continue to popularize, to their
detriment, pictures made by producers and played in pro-
ducer theatres?
“Will the exhibitors continue to popularize brands of
pictures so that the producers may play them at their own
theatres later and reap a harvest?”
* * *
This is not the only trouble with Pittsburgh and
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. Metro is showing “Love” at the
Embassy, this city, at two dollar top admission prices.
But in Pittsburgh they have shown it in a Loew house at
25c part of the matinee, 35c the other part, and 60c in
the evening. The bill includes vaudeville.
Of course, Harrison’s Reports is for low prices of ad-
mission in picture theatres. But the Loew organization
is not charging low prices in Pittsburgh because they
want to benefit the public.
They are killing the neighborhood houses in that* city,
and the neighborhood houses of Pittsburgh ought to make
up their minds now whether they are going to stand for
such a condition.
THIS ONE DESERVES THE “BOOBY”
PRIZE
The trade papers of January 21 carried a Metro-Gold-
wy-Mayer ad in which there was a picture of two men
drinking cocktails. Over this picture there were the
words: “We Can Afford to Get Good and Boiled. Busi-
ness is Great !”
For lack of good taste this ad should certainly win the
prize. It puts the moving picture industry in the class
of breweries and saloons, and those engaged in it in the
class of brewers and saloonkeepers.
I don’t know who conceived this ad, but he should cer-
tainly be sent to write ads for brewers and saloonkeepers ;
he should not be allowed to write ads for moving pictures.
Will IT Hays may keep on banning books and plays;
so long as there are persons in this industry that lack
ordinary sense of propriety, his efforts will be useless;
for what he may build in one year some one will destroy
in one day.
J3nt6t“ed as second-ctass matter January 4, 1921, at the pest office at New iork. New iork, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States ?10.00
U. S. Inaular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
TeL: Pennsylvania 76 49
Cable Address :
Harreports
( Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MARCH 10, J.928
No. 10
THE CASE OF IOWA
You know, of course, that the exhibitors of Iowa, the
home state of Senator Brookhart, have supposedly gone on
record as opposing the Brookhart Bill.
On Wednesday, February 29, C. C. Pettijohn, repre-
senting the Hays organization, took the stand before the
Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce, which was
holding a hearing on the Brookhart Bill, and spoke against
the bill. He gave the committee the names of the exhibi-
tors ot tne different states that are supposeoiy in favor 01
the present system of arbitration. When he mentioned
the name of E. P. Smith, President of the Iowa exhibi-
tors, Senator Brookhart interrupted him and asked him
questions as to what took place before the memorable
resolution against the bill was adopted. The Senator was
trying to prove that it was due to the machinations of
C. C. Pettijohn that the exhibitors passed that resolution.
C. C. Pettijohn denied that he used any undue influence
on the Iowa exhibitors to oppose his bill, stating that he
merely talked to them and pointed out to them how in-
jurious the Brookhart bill would be to the interests of the
independent exhibitors.
Senator Brookhart then read into the record the fol-
lowing letter, which was sent to me by Mr. Smith a
month before the meeting:
Des Moines, Iowa, January 12, 1928.
Mr. P. S. Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
Dear Mr. Harrison:
I wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 7th, for-
warded to me from Newton, Iowa, causing a few days’ delay.
I am glad you have pointed your finger out our way, because
Senator Brookhart is from Iowa and we surely ought to be doing
something to back him up. It looks to me as if he has hit the
nail on the head with his bill. Just how he ever learned so much
about the motion picture business is more than I can figure, but
it sounds O. K. to me.
It seems to me that he has incorporated in his bill the essence
of the trade commission parley. Every independent theater owner
should write his Congressman and Senators to vote for the bill
and to get their friends to do so as well.
I happen to know Senator Brookhart quite well. He has fought
some hard battles in Iowa, but there is nothing he likes any bet-
ter. If he is really interested in this matter of ours he will not
give it up easily. The producers are probably working quietly
and effectively through the Hays organization and because of the
political influence of Will Hays our Senator may find a lot of
opposition.
Our weakness, of course, is our lack of organization. On paper
we have a fair state association. In reality it does not amount
to much. I have been either the president, secretary or business
manager since 1922. Working without salary. Going to Chicago,
New York, Columbus, each year, or some other place and spend-
ing a good deal of my own money. I do not see that I have ac-
complished a great deal. If sre had something to tie our state
organization to we might make some permanent growth, but it
seems to me right now that our National body is just about NIL.
I like the leaders personally. But what do we do when we get
together? Nothing but argue. Not more than two men can agree
exactly on the same thing. When I left the Columbus convention
last June I was of the opinion that I had wasted a lot of my time
and money trying to be a part of the theater owners organization.
I doubt if it is ever any different. The rank and file do not
have confidence in the leaders and the leaders want to hold some
prominent office and get their names in the trade papers. I am
sure that the average independent exhibitor has more confidence in
Pete Harrison than he does in any of the state or National leaders.
And I can not blame him because I seem to have that feeling my-
self. I guess it will finally be up to you, Pete, to “lead us out
of the wilderness.”
From where we sit, out here in the sticks, it looks as if it was
not worlh while to make the effort. Of course we will support
Senator Brookhart. We have called a general meeting of all Iowa
theater owners at Des Moines, January 23. We have also asked
them all to write their Congressman and each of the Senators. I
feel qu te sure the Iowa delegation will support the bill. Senator
Steck is not friendly to Brookhart, but think we can show him
that he should support us on this matter.
I-et me say this in closing. Call on me anytime for anything.
I believe your publication is more widely read and more carefully
read by theater owners and exchange men than anything else that’s
printed. I don’t know just how you do it, but you sure know
how to make ’em like it. They believe you are honest and most
of them know you are telling the truth. You can’t give them any
too much hell to suit me. I would like to know you better and
hope to some of these days.
Kindly correct my address for your files. I am permanently
located at Des Moines and am looking after all Iowa M. P. T. O.
business and correspondence at the address given below.
Wishing you every success in your work and hoping that I may
in some way be permitted to assist you in your wonderful work
for the good of the industry, I am,
Sincerely yours,
E P Smit st
E. P. Smith,
1 517 - 42nd Street,
De3 Moines, Iowa.
♦ * *
When Senator Brookhart finished reading this letter,
Pettijohn took the floor to assure the Committee that
Mr. Hays has never read the Brookhart Bill, he has not
discussed it with him, and that he has not used any
political influence to kill it. He then assured the Senator
that Mr. Smith changed his mind legitimately, after hear-
ing him (Pettijohn) point out the dangers of the Bill.
“Mr. Smith was, in fact, the last man to change his mind
on Sunday when we met,” Pettijohn said. (These are not
the exact words, but it is what he said. When I get the
transcript of his speech I shall give it to you word for
word.)
When Pettijohn finished speaking, the Senator read the
following letter into the record :
* 4= *
Des Moines, Iowa, February 6, 1928.
Thomas Arthur,
Mason City, Iowa.
Dear Tom:
We are all expecting you here for the 13th Tom, and
that is not all, we would like for you to come down Sun-
day if you can. There is a lot of discussion of the
Brookhart Bill. Pettijohn is going to be here Sunday and
has asked to meet fifteen of us at 3 P. M., Sunday after-
noon. Hope you can come Sunday and positively must
have you Monday.
At the meeting Sunday we want to draw up some reso-
lutions and have them to present Monday, so we can get
somewhere.
We will also elect officers and do a lot of other busi-
ness. Hope you can come in for Sunday for the 3 P. M.
meeting with Pettijohn. If you find it absolutely impos-
sible to come at all will you drop me a line, Tom, but
are surely going to expect you.
Sincerely,
E. P. Smith.
* * *
The reading of this letter stunned Pettijohn, for he
did not know that the Senator had such a document in
his hands; he was worrying lest I appear at the hearing
myself, well enough, bringing with me the letter Mr.
Smith had sent me, because I was told that the day be-
fore some one among the Hays forces spoke about some
letter that I had in my possession and the supposition is
that he referred to the Smith letter to me. But he, Petti-
john, did not dream that one of Smith’s letters trying to
“fix” the passing of the resolution against the Bill would
have fallen into the hands of Senator Brookhart.
Mark that Pettijohn said to the Committee, in answer
to interrogating by Senator Brookhart, that Smith was
the last man he won over ; but Smith wrote to Mr. Ar-
thur fully seven days before the meeting that it was
Pettijohn that had asked him to invite fifteen exhibitors
to “frame” the resolution.
Why only fifteen exhibitors?
At the meeting there were only thirty exhibitors pres-
ent. I suppose that that was the number that had been
( Concluded on last page)
38
March 10, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Burning Daylight”— with Milton Silla
( First Nat., March 1 1 ; 6,500 ft.; 75 to 92 min.)
It was said before that the Jack London stories are
literary masterpieces but do not offer material strong
enough for strong pictures. "Burning” Daylight” is not
a bad picture but it offers no extraordinary entertain-
ment. The “punch” is in the scenes where the hero is
shown holding up the two millionaires at the point of a
gun and taking away from them the three million dollars
Siat they had cheated him of by stock manipulation. But
it is a question whether it is wise to show a hero doing
such a thing. The story starts in Alaska and gets to San
Francisco, where the hero went to become wealthy by
gambling in stock, after he had sold his valuable gold
mine in the Klondike. In the first half of the picture Mr.
Sills arouses not very much sympathy, because he is shown
as showing indifference toward the heroine, who had
stuck by him and had benefited him, showing preference
to a girl from San Francisco, who had befriended him
for one purpose — to help her father and another million-
aire take his money away from him. Towards the end,
however, the hero establishes himself in the estimation
of the spectator when he marries the heroine, even
though it was after she had proved to him that she was
right when she told him not to have any confidence in the
millionaires.
Milton Sills does well in the part. Doris Kenyon is
good as the heroine. Arthur Stone, too, does good work
as one of the hero’s pals. Lawford Davidson, Stuart
Holmes, appear in the cast.
Mr. Charles Brabin has directed the picture well.
“Soft Living” — with Madge Bellamy and
John Mack Brown
(Fox, Feb. 5; 5.629 ft.) 65 to 80 min.)
Not big, but pleasing. It is a comedy-drama, with mild
laughs all the way through. The interest is kept fairly
tense.
It is the story of a good young girl, clerk to a famous
divorce lawyer, who, seeing how a famous divorcee,
friend of hers, makes a soft living by marrying wealthy
persons and then divorcing them, decides to do the same
thing herself. She meets accidentally a young man (hero)
and is attracted by him. The young man is attracted
by her, too, and, after establishing a friendship with her,
falls in love with her. Shortly before the marriage cere-
mony the hero overhears the heroine’s friend telling her
about her excellent chances of divorcing him and making
a soft living out of the alimony that she would be collect-
ing weekly. The hero is shocked because he thought that
the heroine shared her friend’s views. So he decides
upon a plan to disillusion her. After the wedding cere-
mony, instead of taking her to Honolulu, as he had
promised he would, he takes her to some distant woods
to a lumber camp he owned, making her work, by cooking
her own meals. But he soon finds out that she loved
him truly.
The plot has been founded on a story by Grace Mack ;
it has been directed by James Tingling, from a scenario
by Frances Agnew.
“Feel My Pulse” — with Bebe Daniels
( Paromount , Feb. 25; 5,889 ft.; 68 to 84 min)
Not as good as some of the late pictures in which Bebe
Daniels has appeared, but it is, nevertheless, a good
comedy. Besides laughs, there are thrills. These are
caused in the situation that shows Miss Daniels giving
battle to the bootleggers by rolling whisky barrels down
the stairway at them, her object being to rescue a young
man, whom she loved, and whom the bootleggers were
trying to get hold of so as to harm him, because they be-
lieved that he turned a squealer. The scenes that show
the characters floating in the air as a result of chloroform
the heroine had spilled are comical ; this effect is attained
by use of the slow motion camera work.
The story, which is by Keene Thompson and Nick
Barrows, shows the heroine as having inherited from her
uncle a sanitarium in a secluded island. She had been
brought up in life to fear germs, being sterilized every
time her attendant suspected the presence of a germ. She
goes to the island to take charge of the sanitarium, which,
unknown to her, had been taken charge of by bootleggers.
There she meets the hero, a newspaper reporter that had
joined the bootleggers in an effort to get a story. He
falls in love with her and she with him. The two have
the time of their lives escaping from the clutches of the
bootleggers, but help comes in the form of the police
force.
The picture has been directed by Gregory La Cava,
from a scenario by the authors themselves. Miss Daniels
does good work. Richard Arlen is good as the hero.
Melbourne MacDowell, George Irving, Charles Sellon,
Heine Conklin and William Powell are in the cast.
“The Smart Set” — with William Haines
( Metro-Goldwyn , Feb. 25; 6,476 ft. ; 75 to 92 min.)
Not as good as the last two or three William Haines
pictures but it is a good entertainment just the same. It
is a comedy-drama, in which Mr. Haines is again pre-
sented as an arrogant, self-conceited young man, who
meets a girl and becomes so persistent in paying his at-
tention to her that she eventually learns to like him and
to fall in love with him. Polo playing forms the back-
ground of the most important part of the picture, Mr.
Haines being presented as being such an egotist that he
is eventually disqualified. But he is also shown at the last
minute being given a chance to play, winning the game,
much to the joy of the heroine.
The scenes where he is shown saving a beautiful polo
horse from the burning stables are thrilling. This situ-
ation wins some sympathy for him, particularly because
he hides the fact that it was he that had saved the horse.
The sympathy of the spectator is with him when he plays
the winning polo game, because he had just previously-
shown as having realized what a fool he had made of
himself.
Mr. Haines again does good work in the leading role.
Alice Day is a charming little heroine. Jack Holt, as
the Captain of the American Polo team, wins considerable
sympathy with his manliness. Hobart Bosworth, Coy
Watson, Jr., Constance Howard, Paul Nicholson, and
Julia Swayne Gordon are in the cast. The story is by
Byron Morgan. It has been directed by Jack Conway.
The showing of the defeat of the British team may not
prove “palatable” to Britishers. If Metro-Goldwyn want
to avoid hurting English sensibilities, it will so retitle the
prints that are going to England and to the British
colonies as to show the British Team the winners.
“Square Crooks” — with Robert Armstrong,
John Mack Brown, Dorothy Dwan and
Dorothy Appleby
(Fox, March 4.)
This is the story of two young crooks who went straight
but who were hounded by a stupid detective, who wanted
to make the world believe that he was a great detective.
The chief element in it is suspense. This is caused in the
situations where the two heroes are shown about to be
entangled in a great trouble through no fault of their
own. They were working for a wealthy man, who did
not know that they had served time. The detective in-
forms their employer of it and they are discharged. The
night after their discharge, another crook had broken into
the wealthy man's home and stolen a pearl necklace.
Thinking that the police were on his trail, the crook
hides the necklace in the bosom of the little boy, who
happens to be the son of one of the two reformed crooks.
The child takes the necklace upstairs and, while the de-
tective, who went there to interrogate the two heroes, is
talking to them, puts it into the pocket of his father. The
father discovers it accidentally and is frightened. While
the detective is in one of the rooms, searching for the
necklace, the married crook makes every effort to hide it.
He eventually succeeds in hiding it in the carpet sweep-
er. This causes great suspense, because the spectator
fears all the time lest the detective find the jewel ; if he
had found it it would have been difficult, almost im-
possible, for the two heroes to prove their innocence.
More suspense is created when, after the detective had
left, the two heroes find the crook into their apartment : he
had gone there to recover the necklace. They catch him
and bind him to a chair, but while they were out of the
room, he succeeded in escaping with the help of the little
child, who had cut the rope.
The story ends with the heroes proving their innocence
and getting their old jobs back.
James P. Pudge is the author, Becky Gardiner the
scenarist, and Lew Seiler the director.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
39
March 10, 1928
“Four Sons” — with a Special Cast
(Fox Superspecial; to be released next Fall.)
From the human interest point of view, “Four Sons”
docs not take a back seat to the other war pictures that
have been released in the last four or five years. It
presents the German side. A good thought, for it was
about time that the Germans were shown as being as much
human as other people. The picture is, in spots, heart-
rendering. It could not be otherwise, for the loss of sons
in a war is just as pathetic to a German mother as it is
to any other mother. It is difficult to describe all the
pathetic scenes, but one of the most pathetic is that which
shows the son that had come to America and become an
American citizen, meeting one of his brothers dying on
the war front in France. The dying brother’s cries of
“Mucherint” which in German means “little mother,”
sends a thriil through one, and brings a tear in the eye.
The sight of the mother bent down by grief, too, brings
a tear or tv/o. The ending is cheerful ; it shows the one
son, the American, surviving and the mother going to
America to meet him. The scenes that show the mother
detained at Ellis Island, but walking out of it at night
time and wandering in the streets of New York City
seeking her son are comical. The closing scenes, which
show the son returning home and finding his child in the
arms of his sleeping mother are extremely pathetic. There
is much comedy in ail those scenes, too. There is comedy
also in the beginning, which shows the happy home of the
German mother with her four young sons surrounding
her.
One other thing that the picture shows is the arrogance
of the German military men before the war, and the bad
treatment the civilians used to receive in their hands. It
should make even Germans boil, at least those that re-
ceived bad treatment in the hands of the German officers.
Earle Fox makes a true type of a Prussian officer.
The plot has been founded on the story by I. A. R.
Wylie; it has been made into a picture intelligently by
John Ford, from a scenario by Philip Klein. James Flail
takes the part of the son that had immigrated to America.
Francis X. Bushman, Jr., George Meeker, and Charles
Morton take the part of the other sons. Margaret Mann
is superb as the mother. Albert Gran is a comical char-
acter as the letter carrier. The atmosphere is realistic all
the way through.
“Marry the Girl” — with Barbara Bedford
and Robert Ellis
( Sterling , March I ; 5,300 ft.; 61 to 75 win.)
This story is rather unusual. It starts showing the
heroine with her child going to an old man and telling
him that she is the wife of his supposedly dead son. As
the son had been disinherited by the father for a supposed
forgery, the old man accepts her. From this point on the
spectator’s interest is intrigued ; he has a desire to know
what the outcome will be, particularly since the old man’s
secretary, who is the real forger, plots to marry the girl
so that he might get the old man’s fortune. Soon the
son appears and the spectator’s interest is intrigued more,
because he is desirous to know how things will turn out,
since the son, who had kept in the background by not
letting his father know that he is back, disclaimed to the
family butler that the heroine was his wife, stating that
he had never seen the girl before.
There is much human interest all the way through,
caused by the child, whom the old man learns to love.
Freddie Fredericks, who takes the part of the child, is
so lovable that he endears himself to the spectator just
as much as he endears himself to the hero’s father.
There is a pretty good fight, too, between Robert Ellis,
who takes the part of the hero, and Allan Roscoe, who
takes the part of the villainous secretary. The story ends
with the marriage of hero and heroine ; the young hero
did not want to break his father’s heart again and mar-
ried the heroine so that his father might have the child,
whom he had become very fond of. Moreover, he had
fallen in deep love with the heroine. In the development
of the theme, it comes to light that the secretary had in-
duced the heroine to pose as the old man’s dead son ; he
had made her believe that she should do it to make the
old man happy. The heroine expiates her innocent de-
ception by exposing the hoax to the old man herself.
The picture has been directed skillfully by Phil Rosen.
Barbara Bedford does good work as the heroine, and
Robert Ellis as the hero. Florence Turner, Paul Weigel
and De Witt Jennings are among the players of the sup-
porting cast.
“Surrender” — with Mary Philbin and
Ivan Mosjukine
(Univ.—, Jewel, March 4; 8,248 ft; 95 to 103 min.)
This is purely a Jewish picture, but there is so much
human interest in it that it should please also persons of
other races and religions. It brings forward two things,
that human nature is frail and that neither racial preju-
dices nor religious teachings can form a barrier to true
love. The frailty of human nature is demonstrated in
the scenes where the Russian armies are shown as having
invaded Galicia. The commander, a prince, enraged be-
cause the heroine would not submit to him, decides to burn
to death every one of the inhabitants unless she went to
him at an appointed hour. Seeing her people boarded
in their homes, which were made ready to be set fire to,
and hearing the cries of the children, the heroine reluc-
tantly decides to go to the Prince so as to save them.
The Prince does not harm her because he loves her.
Her people, however, turn against her and throw stones
at her when they thought that she loved the Prince;
because of the fact that the daughter of a Rabbi loved
a Christian. The fact that neither race nor religion can
form a barrier to love is shown when the heroine decides
to marry the Prince, whom she loved. Some of the
scenes are deeply pathetic. One of such scenes is where
the heroine’s father is shown expiring and forgiving his
daughter.
The customs of the Jewish people are educational and
interesting. Miss Philbin does artistic work as the
daughter of the Rabbi. Ivan Mosjukine, as the Prince,
does good work. His part is unsympathetic in the be-
ginning, but turns sympathetic toward the end. Nigel de
Brullier makes a real Rabbi ; his acting is so good that
he wins warm sympathy. The plot has been founded on
the story “Lea Lyon,” by Alexandre Brody ; it has been
•directed by Edward Sloman, from a scenario by Charles
Kenyon.
THEY FORGET THE PUBLIC
S. G. How’ell, Editor of Motion Picture Journal, of
Dallas, Texas, in an editorial entitled, “Brookhart Bill
Bad Business,” tries to prove that the affiliated exhibitors
and the producer-distributors, who are opposed to the
Brookhart Bill, represent 75% or 80% of the entire in-
vestment in the motion picture industry, in studios, ex-
changes and theatres, expressing an opinion that it is bad
business to make those that have the most money invested
suffer, as would be the case if the Brookhart Bill should
become a law.
I don’t know how accurate Mr. Howell is when he says
that the producer represents 75% or 80% of the money
that is invested in this business ; personally I think he is
wrong.
But let us assume that he is right. He seems to forget
the public, for if the Brookhart Bill is a good bill and
will correct the abuses that are practiced against the
exhibitor, who represents the public, then it is a good bill
irrespective of wffiether the producers represent the biggest
part of the investment or the exhibitors.
THERE IS NO REDRESS FOR THIS
“Warners Top Off Big Year of Money Pictures
Weeks Ahead of Schedule,” says a caption in a trade
paper.
This is only half of the truth. Let these trade
papers tell you how fast Warners have been grinding
them out. A prominent exhibitor, working for a big
circuit, called me up on the telephone and told me:
“Harrison, what can we do to get relief? We bought
the Warner Bros.’ product on good faith, expecting
them to spend on each picture an amount of money
sufficient to make it possible for the directors to make
good pictures, and to exert their best efforts toward
making quality pictures. But we have been disap-
pointed; it is evident that they are grinding them out
in ten days or two weeks at the most, evidently to
save money. How can they expect to make good
pictures in such circumstances?”
I am not in a position to say whether Warner Bros,
are grinding their pictures out in ten days or two
weeks, because I don’t know; but if one is to judge
by the quality of the pictures that have been showing
for several weeks, I cannot help getting the impres-
sion that they are grinding them out like sausages.
The unforunate part about the matter is, however,
that you cannot get any redress.
40
HARRISON’S REPORTS March 10, 1928
invited. With fifteen, that is half, of the entire number
of exhibitors present opposing the Bill, it would be easy
to pass the resolution.
That is the kind of fixing Pettijohn does right along ;
he is a "Fixer,’’ and he prides himself in being one. And
he will “fix” Mr. Hays, too, if he will be near him long
enough. What do you think of a man, supposedly work-
ing for the interests of Mr. Hays, taking the floor and
telling a committee composed of intelligent men that Mr.
Hays has not read the Brookhart Bill and has not dis-
cussed it with him, Pettijohn. This makes one assume
that Mr. Hays' is either ignorant or incompetent. It
would have been just as logical for Pettijohn to have
said that Mr. Kent, Mr. Zukor, Mr. Fox, or other promi-
nent persons in the industry, have not read the Brookhart
Bill, as to say that Mr. Hays has not read it.
* * *
Mr. Arthur wrote a long letter to Senator Brookhart
about the details of the meeting. Part of that letter reads
as follows :
There were probably thirty or forty exhibitors of Iowa present
at the meeting when Mr. Pettyjohn was called in to address same.
His principal talk being against the Senate Bill 1667, of which
you are the author. Among these exhibitors present before his
address were quite a number who were for the bill, but after Mr.
Pettyjohn had told his sob story about what the bill would do to
them if it passed, how it was government control, etc., he sold a
great many of them on it. It could be plainly seen that at the
meeting which was held Sunday, he had secured the cooperation
of Mr. Smith, Mr. Eddy and others and immediately Mr. Smith
proposed that a resolution be passed condemning the bill. Ob-
jection was made to this by several of those present as they stated
they had not had sufficient time to give the bill the proper thought.
However, the resolution was passed with everyone but myself vot-
ing for same. I was the only vote in the meeting for it (Bill
1667).
I had quite a heated argument with Mr. Pettyjohn during the
meeting and was ruled out of order several times. In fact the
entire situation is simply this, that the exhibitors are a plaything
in the hands of the producers and distributors. They cry “Help,”
but won't even help themselves. Mr. Pettyjohn very generously
offered to help the organization secure memberships, which means
financing by having the salesmen of each exchange go out and sell
memberships when they were selling films to the exhibitors. I
objected to this, telling Mr. Pettyjohn that the further the exhibi-
tors kept away from the producers and distributors the better hey
were off. But the motion was carried, nevertheless, so these same
salesmen who are scouring Iowa from all Exchanges are putting
out the propaganda against Bill 1667.
I do not think there are exhibitors in Iowa against the Brook-
hart Bill, but I do think that Mr. Pettyjohn got his work in with
those present on Sunday, sold them the idea, and put the resolu-
tion through in that way. The exhibitors are largely to blame for
not having guts enough to fight for their rights. I, for one, would
rather have government control than control of that bunch who
sit in New York and dictate the policy of film distributing . . . .
* * *
I shall ask you not to judge Mr. Smith harshly. We
don’t know how much pressure Pettijohn has applied on
him to make him reverse himself. It is possible also that,
after hearing Pettijohn, he did change his mind. If the
latter assumption is correct, neither Mr. Smith nor any
other “conscientious exhibitor objector” can any longer
oppose the Bill, for Senator Brookhart said that if he can
be convinced that Section 7, which empowers the Federal
Trade Commission to fix the differentials, is objectionable
to the independent theatre owners, he will be only too
glad to have that section removed. For my part, I would
just as well see the courts determine when a producer
has violated the law as I would the Federal Trade Com-
mission.
I have written to Mr. Smith calling his attention to
Mr. Brookhart’s assurance so that in case he changed his
mind because he honestly believed that Section 7 of the
Bill would work against the interests of the exhibitors,
he may again change his mind and work for it. There is
nothing wrong in changing one’s mind.
THE CASE OF C. E. WILLIAMS OF
NEBRASKA
C. E. Williams, President of M. P. T. 0. of Nebraska,
was at the hearing, having made common cause with the
Hays forces.
He spoke against the Bill on Thursday, and made a
sorry sight of himself; instead of telling the committee
how injurious the Brookhart Bill would, in his opinion,
be to the interests of the independent exhibitors, he em-
phasized how injurious it would be to the interests of the
producers and distributors.
On Friday morning, Pettijohn told the Committee that
he would have presented Mr. Williams in rebuttal, but
he could not so by reason of the fact that Mr. Williams,
having received word that his theatre burned down, left
for home early in the morning. In the afternoon, when
our forces were returning, they saw Williams in com-
pany with Mr. Hawkins, and John Gentile, of the Hays
organization and Arthur James, of Motion Picture Today,
en route to New York. It was evident that Williams had
been in Washington all morning.
In connection with C. E. Williams’ conduct, let me
print a letter that I have received from a Nebraska ex-
hibitor, whose name I suppress for obvious reasons :
“Mr. Williams has been on the road selling film for
Pathe during the last year and at present is selling some
stateright pictures owned by a certain exchange manager
of this city. To my information the M. P. T. O. receives
a certain percentage of the film rentals so sold by Wil-
liams. Through his office (M. P. T. O.), a local News-
reel is booked when produced.
“I cannot see how C. E. Williams, being a member of
the Board of Arbitration, can represent the exhibitors
and at the same time be an employe of a producer-dis-
tributor. This, I believe, accounts for his being opposed
to the Brookhart Bill.
“Williams is, at present, in Washington to oppose the
Brookhart Bill. Who sent him there, no one seems to
know. According to Mrs. Williams, he left Omaha on
short notice, possibly called by the Hays organization.
“If Williams claims he carries out the wishes of the
majority of the exhibitors of Nebraska and Western Iowa
when he opposes the Brookhart Bill, he does so without
any authority, because no meeting was called to ascertain
the sentiment of the members.
“Who pays the bill ? Our local organization has no
funds and it is alleged that Williams is not flush with
money either. So who pays the bill?”
* * *
This exhibitor has raised a serious question, one that
bothered me for a long time. Can an exhibitor organiza-
tion president appoint arbitrators when he is also a dis-
tributor ?
In my opinion, he cannot. And any one who is sum-
moned before a board appointed by such a man can go
to a court and secure an injunction forbidding it to func-
tion on the grounds that it is improperly constituted. This
goes also for Dick Biechele, and for the President of any
other exhibitor organization that has so openly sided
with the producers. The arbitrators are supposed to be
unbiased so that they may render a just award. When
such arbitrators are appointed by a man who is biased,
they are brought under the category of “biased” arbi-
trators, because it is natural that he who appoints them
sees to it that he appoints persons that will carry out his
wishes, which, in the case of Williams and Dick Biechele,
are the wishes also of the Hays organization. On such
grounds you can, in my opinion, prevent them from func-
tioning through the courts.
I fear that even the awards that have been rendered by
arbitrators appointed by these two men may be vacated
by court action on these grounds. At any rate, you have
the right to challenge any arbitrator appointed by these
two presidents, who had so openly espoused the cause of
the producer-distributors.
BLASTED REPUTATIONS
The Brookhart Bill, even before it became a law, has
proved of great benefit to the cause of the independent
exhibitors, because it has served to separate the goat
from the sheep. It is a Bill that has proved that those
who are not with us are against us.
In connection with this, let me reprint what David
Barrist, of the Philadelphia Exhibitor, says in the March
i issue :
Leaders
Whatever other effect upon the trade that the Brookhart Bill
may exercise, it will help to smoke out those who are masquerad-
ing as leaders of the exhibitors, but who are in reality anything
but friendly or sympathetic to their best interests.
The bitter partisanship created by this measure is dividing the
industry into two camps: the exhibitors affiliated with, or friendly
to, the producers on the one side and the exhibitors who are
really independent on the other. Regardless of the merits of the
bill pro and con, there are entirely too many “leaders" whose
only service to their exhibitor constituents is a lip service. These
so-called leaders are usually without any theatre holdings or are
so affiliated that their primary interest is to serve the producers
and not the theatre owners whom they are elected or chosen to
represent.
It is these “leaders” who are responsible for much of the sus-
picion that attaches to the motives of the film men. They deceive
no one. Everybody knows that if they are not actually in the
employ of interests friendly to the film men, that their connections
are such that they cannot really represent those exhibitors whose
interests they are supposed to serve. When the producers learn
to eliminate these useless officials and deal with the exhibitors
direct, as merchant to consumer, they will disarm much of the
suspicion that now hovers over their relations with the theatremen
and will more easily reach an understanding with them.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing' Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MARCH 1 7,1928
No. 11
THE SAPIRO MOVEMENT
The co-operative exhibitor movement that was
proposed by Aaron Sapiro in this city some time
ago has become a reality. On Friday, March 9,
a large number of exhibitors signed up a contract
with him, authorizing him to buy film for them.
The Sapiro co-operative buying movement was
unavoidable after the shortsightedness the pro-
ducer-distributors have shown; they turned a deaf
ear to all suggestions for constructive reforms.
For years they have “kidded” the exhibitors with
promises, which they never kept. They brought
Mr. Hays into this industry. But he, too, proved
a “fizzle,” so far as the exhibitors are concerned.
He lulled them with his fine speeches of confi-
dence and co-operation. He loaded them with slo-
gans. It took them six years to find out that he
did not mean what he said, or, at least, he did not
have the power to carry out his promises even if
he did mean them. And the worst of it, instead
of admitting that he had no power to do anything
for them, he tried to get control of their organi-
zations, national and state, so that he might stifle
any voice of protest that might be heard against
the unbearable conditions.
But the day of awakening has at last arrived.
It was inevitable. The exhibitors could not keep
on year in and year out allowing themselves to be
fooled by unkept promises. Hence the successful
start of the Sapiro co-operative buying movement.
The exhibitors that have so far joined it are
elated. I have never, in fact, seen a more enthusi-
astic body of men as are those that have signed an
agreement with Mr. Sapiro. Aaron Sapiro is a
national figure and every one of them has. full
confidence in him. And that is where the success
of the movement will lie. And if it should be suc-
cessful here, as it is predicted that it will, it will
spread all over the country like fire.
Of course, this organization does not intend to
slash film prices. In fact, most of the members
have shown a willingness to pay more for film if
they get what they want and as early as the affili-
ated circuits. But this paper hopes that, after this
movement is well under way, Mr. Sapiro will look
into the cost of production for the purpose of
finding out why one man should be getting eight
thousand dollars a week salary, as is the case with
Louis B. Mayer, production head of M-G-M. This
adds eight thousand dollars to the cost of every
feature put out by that organization.
In the case of Paramount, it has become known
that Mr. Sidney R. Kent receives $100,000 a year
salary. He deserves it. But he also receives 5%
of the profits before any dividends are paid. It is
also said that Messrs. Zukor and Lasky receive
$400,000 a year salary each, and 7% of the prof-
its, each. Using the figures of last year’s Para-
mount earnings as a basis, which were $8,000,000,
we find that Messrs. Kent, Zukor and Lasky, in
addition to their salaries, which amount to $900,-
000, received $2,375,000. When the two items
are added, we find that these three men received
$3,275,000. This means that the seventy pictures
Paramount makes as an average each year are
burdened each with $46,785 for the salaries and
the profits of these three men. And we are not
counting other satellites, such as Messrs. Ludwig,
Wainger, Eugene Zukor, Ralph Cohen and others,
who, too, receive high salaries. Any wonder that
the pictures cost too much nowadays ?
These are a few of the things that this paper
hopes the Sapiro Co-operative movement will
correct.
AGAIN ABOUT WILLIAMS OF
NEBRASKA
I fear that, by writing too much about C. E.
Williams, President of M. P. T. O. of Nebraska,
we are giving him prominence he in no way de-
serves. But I have made it my policy to be fair
even to those who are unfair to you.
In last week’s article, “The Case of Williams of
Nebraska,” in informing you that Williams, hav-
ing been seen in company with the Hays forces on
the train en route to New York at three o’clock in
the afternoon when according to Pettijohn’s state-
ment before the Senate Committee he had already
left early that morning for home as a result of his
having received word that his theatre had burned
down. I assumed, without stating so in print,
that he, Williams, had known all along that some
damage by fire had been caused to his theatre, but
that he pretended he did not know of it until after
he delivered his speech before the Senate Com-
mittee, which speech favored the producers ; and
that Pettijohn’s statement to the compiittee that he
had left for Omaha early in the morning was a
mere excuse, the truth of the matter in my opin-
ion being that he, Petti john, feared to present him
again to the committee lest he make as sorry a
sight of himself as he made the day before. I
even telegraphed to Omaha and received advices
back that his theatre had been damaged by fire the
previous Sunday, and that it would be repaired
and made ready for opening on the eighth of
March.
I have now found out, the information having
been given to me by unimpeachable authority, that
Williams did not know up to Thursday afternoon
that there was a fire in his theatre. The telegram
from his wife had been received by Pettijohn, who
( Continued on last page )
42
HARRISON’S REPORTS
March 17, 1928
“Ladies’ Night in a Turkish Bath” — with
Dorothy Mackaill and Jack Mulhall
( First National, April i; 6,592 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
This picture should make a big hit, for the reason that,
besides having two well-known players in the principal
parts, it is comical in the extreme. It is also human.
The situations, for example, that show the young hero
meeting the young heroine and falling in love with her,
and later becoming jealous and having a fight with her
because she had gone out with another man, are true to
life. The comedy occurs chiefly in the Turkish Bath
House, where the hero and tire father of his sweetheart
(.heroine) had found themselves in escaping from a
cabaret that had been raided ; their efforts to avoid being
seen by tire women that were taking a Turkish bath, it
being a ladies’ night, should bring roars of laughter. In
those scenes the spectator should be made also to hold his
breath for fear lest the pair be discovered. These scenes
are of the same order as the scenes in the Universal pic-
ture, “What Happened to Jones,” which was produced in
the 1925-26 season, with Reginald Denny in the leading
role. Miss Mackaill and Mr. Mulhall are a good pair of
actors and they do excellent work. James Finlayson, as
"Pa” Slocum, reminds one of Chester Conklin; he is as
funny as Mr. Conklin. Sylvia Ashton, as “Ma” Slocum,
does good work, too. Harvey Clark, Reed Howes, “Big
Boy” Guinn Williams and others are in the supporting
cast.
The plot has been founded on the play by Charlton
Andrews and Avery Hapgood; it has been directed with
skill by Edward Kline.
When you play it, advertise it as a special; you will
not mislead your public by so doing, for it contains values
of a “Special” attraction.
“Dressed to Kill” — with Edmund Lowe and
Mary Astor
{Fox, March 18)
A high-class crook melodrama, in which suspense is
tense, and in which the interest is maintained strong from
the beginning to the end. The suspense is caused by the
sight of the hero being placed in danger of getting caught
by the police. The most suspensive situations are those
that show the hold-up of the fur store and the waiting of
the gangsters to deal death to the hero and to the heroine
— to the heroine, because they thought she was a squealer,
and to the hero because he had, contrary to their under-
standing, befriended a woman that threatened to prove
their undoing. Another suspensive situation is that which
shows the hero being trapped by the gangsters after his
first escape from them. The gangsters were in an auto-
mobile with guns in hand and the hero was emerging
from the heroine’s apartment with the heroine, whom he
loved, his purpose being to help her escape. He succeeds
in helping her escape but he himself is shot and killed by
his former pals.
The plot has been founded on a story by William
Conselman; it has been directed by Irving Cummings,
from a scenario by Howard Eastabrook. Mr. Lowe does
excellent work as the silk-hatted hero. Mary Astor does
well as the heroine. Ben Bard, R. O. Pennell, Robert
Perry, Joe Brown, Tom Dugan, John Kelly and Robert
E. O’Connor are in the cast: —
The heroine, a young beautiful woman, attempts to sell
a purse, supposedly stolen by her. The hero, a silk-
hatted crook, the master mind of a gang of crooks, is at-
tracted by her beauty, and invites her into the cabaret in
which he met his gang. His gang protest for his taking
in a strange woman, considering this act of his dangerous.
The hero vouches for her. He fits her up in an apart-
ment and plans the robbery of a fur store in which she
was to take a prominent part. The heroine weakens just
as the crooks were, after a successful carrying out of the
details of the plan by the hero’s men, about to take the
valuable furs away; she tells the proprietress that she
could not go through with it and that her store was being
robbed. The proprietress screams to frighten the crooks
away. When hero and heroine arrive at the heroine’s
apartment, the hero is furious and informs her of the fate
that awaited her as a squealer. She assures him that she
was not a squealer, and in proof of it she pulls out of
her bosom a newspaper clipping showing that her fiance
was in jail for a supposed theft of bonds, and that she
was sought as a suspect. The hero is moved by the
courage that had been shown by the heroine, who had
decided to save her fiance even by getting “in” with
crooks, and asks her what he could do to help her. She
then asks him to recover for her the bonds that her fiance
was supposed to have stolen. After making sure that
she told him the truth, the hero commands her to wait
for him there. He then goes to the bank and takes the
bonds out of his safe deposit box and takes them to her.
The hero’s confederates, however, had preceded him;
they went to the apartment, their intention being to take
the heroine away and deal with her as they had dealt with
squealers right along. When the hero enters he, too, is
held up at the point of a gun and is informed that the
same fate awaited him. The hero outwits the gangsters
by taking hold of a gun that he had put in a cigarette
box; he holds them up. But shortly afterwards the
gangsters again trap the hero and the heroine; it hap-
pened in front of the heroine’s apartment. The hero
manages to send the heroine away, but he is shot and
killed by the gangsters. The police, however, arrest all
the gangsters. Thus the hero atoned for his past by dying
for the woman he had loved, but whom he could not
marry because she was in love with some one else.
“The Secret Hour” — with Pola Negri
( Paramount , Feb. 11; 7,194 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
A human story, well told, this being the result of good
direction and acting. It has also the advantage of being
real and not artificial. It is, for example, natural for a
girl that is drudging to wish to get out of her environ-
ment and find some good husband, even though she may
find him in the country, so long as she is sure that she
will spend her life happy. That is what is the desire of
the heroine in this picture. Accordingly, when she re-
ceives a letter from an orange grower to go to him if she
wanted to marry him, she gladly goes. The orange
grower happens to be a middle-aged illiterate Italian.
Fearing lest the heroine would turn his marriage pro-
posal down because of the fact that he was an old man,
he puts into his letter the photograph of a young friend
of his (hero). The heroine is furious when she reaches
the country town and learns of the supposed deception.
And she blames the hero for it. But he is young and nice
looking and, despite her efforts to hate him, she dis-
covers that she loves him. He loves her, too, despite
her unjust accusations of him. In a moment of forget-
fulness, they go to the town parson and get married. The
following day they regret their hasty step and decide to
withhold the news from the farmer, who was lying in bed
with two broken legs as a result of an automobile acci-
dent that happened to him while on his way to the station
to receive the heroine, until he became well. The farmer
is happy and falls desperately in love with the heroine.
This makes it harder for them to tell him about the mar-
riage. At last the farmer gets well, and because he de-
cides no longer to postpone their marriage but asks her
to marry him that very day, the heroine is compelled to
tell him the truth. This breaks the heart of the farmer.
But he is reconciled to it and begs them not to go away
but to stay with him so that he might act as a grandfather
to their coming child.
Every act, every movement of the farmer, of the hero
and of the heroine is logical ; it is what would have hap-
pened in real life under similar circumstances. It is in
human nature for young folk to seek to mate themselves
with young folk, and the act of the heroine in falling in
love with and marrying the hero when she ' ad promised
to marry the old farmer is not blameworthy ; one under-
stands and forgives. The joy of the farmer at his good
fortune in having found the heroine for a wife is real.
And so is his disappointment when he is told by the hero-
ine that she and his friend had married. The guilt felt
by the hero for having deceived his friend, too, is real.
The plot has been founded on a story by Mr. Rowland
V. Lee, the well-known director, who also directed it.
His directorial work is of first order. Jean Hersholt,
that fine old actor, in the role of an Italian farmer, gives
further proof of his acting ability. Miss Negri does the
best work of her screen career. Kenneth Thompson is
good as the young hero.
March 17, 1928
“The Count of Ten” — with Charles Ray,
Jobyna Ralston, James Gleason and
Arthur Lake
(Universal- Jewel, July i; 6,779 ft.; 78 to 96 min.)
Unquestionably, this is one of the best pugilistic pic-
tures that have ever been produced, for two reasons : first,
because the story is ' strongly dramatic ; and secondly,
because the fight scenes are technically correct, Mr. Ray
acting as if he were an expert in the fistic art. While
none of the situations will bring tears to the eyes, several
of them will bring a gulp to the throat. So human is it.
One cannot help feeling sympathy for the hero who loves
his wife so much that he lets her spend every cent he
makes in dressing in the best of clothes and in maintain-
ing a stylish home. The incident of the brother who
forged a check for five thousand dollars and went to the
sister seeking aid to keep out of prison, and of the hero
who, having been made by the young brother to believe
that she wanted the money for the baby that was on the
way, goes into the ring with a broken hand, determined
to win the fight and so to earn the money for her, are
human in the extreme. And they are true to life. The
incident in the stadium, where the hero’s former manager
takes the towel away from the hero’s young brother-in-
law and throws it into the ring to put an end to the
murderous punishment the hero was receiving, the young
man having refused to do so, hoping that the hero might
deliver a winning blow and thus earn the money that
would keep him out of jail, also is human in the extreme;
although he was no longer the hero’s manager because
of a disagreement with the hero, nevertheless he bore no
malice and took the proper step to save the hero from
punishment. The scene toward the end where the former
manager and friend, risking punishment at the hands of
the heart-broken hero, goes and forces him to listen to
him telling him the truth about the use to which the hero-
ine wanted to put the five thousand dollars, also is human.
There are other human scenes.
The plot has been founded on a story by Charles Ray
himself ; it has been directed creditably by James Flood.
Charles Ray does the best work in his screen career.
Miss Ralston does good work, too; so does Arthur Lake,
as well as James Gleason, who takes the part of the
manager.
Although this has been sold as a regular program pic-
ture, no exhibitor can go wrong in handling it as a
special. It deserves to be handled as a special.
The Tragedy of Youth” — with Patsy Ruth
Miller, William Collier, Jr., and
Warner Baxter
( Tiffany-Stahl , March 25; 6,362 ft.; 74 to 90 min.)
This is a gem, literally and figuratively. It is so true
to life that one feels as if seeing a life occurrence. It is
the story of two young folks who marry. A short ime
afterwards, however, the husband becomes so neglectful
of his wife that she is thrown in the way of another man,
with the result that they are divorced. Most of the sym-
pathy goes to Miss Miller, who takes the part of the
young wife, for even though she is shown as having fallen
in love with one of her husband’s friends, one realizes that
the fault was of her husband’s ; he had driven her to it.
There are many situations where one’s emotions are
stirred, the strongest of them being where the heroine,
after sending the friend of her husband away telling him
that it is better that they never see each other again, goes
to her mother and gives her father a severe scolding for
howling at her mother. Her reprimand brings her father
to his senses ; he kneels down and begs his wife’s forgive-
ness. The love scenes between the heroine and the friend
of her husband’s have been done very well ; no “dirt”
is shown or even implied.
The picture is in seven reels. But the story really ends
with the sixth reel, the last scene showing the husband’s
friend in a steamboat going away, heart-broken, but full
of determination to spare the heroine, whom he loved
with all his heart, of regrets. The seventh reel intro-
duces some melodramatic scenes, by showing the boiler
of the ship as exploding, with the hero supposedly having
drowned, after giving his lifebelt to a newly married man,
telling him that he (the married man) had something to
live for whereas he had not. Later the young husband-
hero is shown revealing a despicable character, with the
result that the heroine, who had done everything to prove
43
her loyalty to him, leaves him; she goes to the wharf,
where the survivors had been brought in, to find out
whether the man whom she had sent away but whom she
still loved really perished or survived by some miracle.
She finds him and rushes up to him, telling him that she
will never again leave him. The following scenes imply
that the heroine had divorced her husband and married
the friend. This all is unnecessary, first because it of-
fends the sensibilities of millions of people who do not
believe in divorce ; secondly, because it makes the young
husband a despicable character after the spectator felt
like forgiving him; and thirdly, because it is an anti-
climax. Nothing will be lost if the seventh reel is cut out,
and much will be gained. Kven if the exchange were not
to take the seventh reel out, you may end the picture with
the six reel and you will not spoil the continuity in the
least.
The plot has been founded on a story by the well
known scenarist, Albert Shelby Le Vino, who has many
a good screen story to his credit. It has been directed
by George Archinbaud with intelligence, from a conti-
nuity by Olga Printzlau. Miss Patsy Ruth Miller has
never done better work in her screen career. Willie Col-
lier, Jr., does well as the “caddish” husband. Warner
Baxter is excellent as the husband’s friend. Claire Mc-
Dowell is very good as the heroine's mother. Harvey
Clark, as the howling husband, is excellent.
It should give one hundred per cent satisfaction every-
where, particularly if the seventh reel were eliminated.
“Alex the Great”-— with Richard “Sheets”
Gallagher and Patricia Avery
(F. B. O., Feb. 11; 5,872 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
A good comedy-romance of the program grade.
The comedy is caused by the acting of Mr Gallagher,
who takes the part of a young Vermont farmer that had
gone to New York to make a fortune, and who suc-
ceeds, even though his only assets were his gall and his
audacity. All the way through it is shown that his
braggardry helps him, not only to get where he wants, but
also to win as a wife the daughter of a wealthy man. The
scenes where he is shown bursting into the heroine’s
father’s office and, instead of coming out of it with two
black eyes, coming out with an order for a large number
of tractors, which nearly made his brother-in-law faint,
are comedy provoking. Comedy provoking are also the
scenes that show him winning the heroine away from an
aspirant for her hand, a society man. There are other
comedy-scenes all the way through.
The plot has been founded on an original story by
H. C. Witwer ; it has been directed by Dudley Murphy.
Albert Conti, Patricia Avery, Ruth Dwyer and Charles
Byer are in the cast.
“Skinner’s Big Idea” — with Bryant
Washburn and Ethel Terry Grey
(F. B. 0., May 11 ; 5,967 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
A very tame affair as compared with “Skinner’s Dress
Suit.” There is not much to the story, and there are very
few laughs, if any. The idea the hero has in mind, as
indicated by the title, is his introducing a new system in
the office of the firm, of which he was a junior member.
The two senior members, before leaving for their vaca-
tion, instruct the hero to discharge three old faithful
employees on the ground that they were too old. The
hero, however, instead of discharging them, instructs
them to have themselves tailored in the latest style and
barbered so that they might look young. He also orders
them to do more playing and less work. Accordingly,
they join a golf club. It is while playing golf with a
buyer from out of town that they are able to close a big
deal with him, much to the surprise of the senior members
of the firm, who had just returned from their vacation.
When they see that the hero’s system had brought results,
they allow him to have his way about it.
There is, of course, also a woman in the case, she being
the wife of the hero; and another, a chorus girl, with
whom the son of one of the senior members of the firm
falls in love.
The story is by Henry Irving Dodge; it has been di-
rected by Lynn Shores, from a continuity by Matt Taylor.
William Orland, Jas. Bradbury, Sr., Robert Dudley, Ole
M. Ness, Chas. Wellsley, Martha Sleeper and Hugh
Trevor are in the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
44
March 17, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
withheld it, with the permission of his, Williams’
wife, to whom he spoke over the long distance tele-
phone, and did not deliver it to him until after he,
Williams, had his dinner Thursday evening. Pet-
ti john feared lest the bad news make it impossible
for Williams to deliver as strong a denunciation
of the Brookhart Bill as he would deliver with the
sad news in his possession.
But the fact that he was unaware of the fire
does not make his offense lighter. He allowed
himself to become the tool of the producers to the
injury of your interests. In Washington he was
under the complete domination of Pettijohn. In
the committee room he sat with the producers ; he
was ostracized by the independent exhibitors. I
myself refused to go near him.
The matter would have differed if he . were a
“conscientious objector.” There is nothing wrong
in differing with others on any question, no mat-
ter how much the others should like to have you
agree with them. It is perfectly honorable. But
in the case of Williams it is altogether different.
If he were sincere, he would not have traveled
with Pettijohn and the other Hayes representa-
tives. He would have come to our camp, deter-
mined to bring us to his way of thinking. But he
was ashamed to face us.
That he is not sincere about his convictions on
the Brookhart Bill may be deduced from the fact
that he has not called a meeting in Nebraska to
ask the other independent exhibitors, members of
his organization, whether they are for or against
the bill.
Williams has proved himself unfaithful to the
unaffiliated exhibitor cause.
Up to last July C. E. Williams, according to re-
liable information, was on and off a salesman for
Pathe. He was a film salesman even while he
was President of M. P. T. O. of Nebraska. He
sells film right now, as that exhibitor letter, which
was printed last week, stated.
To the exhibitors of Nebraska and of that part
of Iowa that is attached to the Omaha zone I will
say this : Do not pay dues to the M. P. T. O. of
Nebraska or to any other exhibitor organization,
the president of which has failed to call a meeting
to ascertain the sentiment of the members towards
the Brookhart Bill ; remember that every dollar
you pay to such an organization is used against
you. Do not buy pictures from C. E. Williams
or from any other exhibitor organization presi-
dent or other executive just because he is the
president or the executive of an exhibitors’ organi-
zation, even if a percentage of the receipts goes
to the organization ; buy them on the merits of the
films themselves. In other words, if the pictures
he sells are good and are suitable for your needs,
buy them; if they are not, offer fifty cents a reel
for them. Don’t furnish to those who are antago-
nistic to your interests ammunition to annihilate
you with.
I hope that it shall not be necessary for me
again to refer to this person ; this space is too
valuable to waste it on him. But take steps to
depose him as well as any other president that has
acted as he has ; you cannot afford to let such men
appoint your arbitrators.
SHOW THIS TO THE M-G-M SALESMEN
“The Student Prince,” with Norma Sheerer;
“The Texas Steer,” with Will Rogers, and the
John Emerson and Anita Loos Paramount pic-
ture “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” were shown at
the Loew grind houses in this city one day each.
This is an admission on the part of the Loew
organization that business is poor. And don’t for-
get to call the M-G-M film salesman’s attention to
it when he comes around to sell you film.
IN THE INTEREST OF TRUTH
Under date of February 29, Jimmy Grainger,
General Sales Manager of Fox Film Corporation,
has written me as follows :
“Dear Pete :
“I telephoned you today but learned that you
were out of the city. (Editor’s note: I was in
Washington, D. C., that day, attending the hear-
ing on the Brookhart Bill.)
“In your article under the heading, ‘FLOPS
AND HITS,’ printed in the issue of March 3rd,
you say that ‘SUNRISE’ has been given a forced
run in this city.
“If you will come to my office, I will gladly
show you what ‘SUNRISE’ has done at the
Times Square Theatre in this city and in every
other city where it has played. To say that it has
been given a forced run is a wrong statement and
is not fair to the picture, and I am certain you
are the first man who would wish to correct any
error that may work an injustice.
“I am certain you will agree with me that the
Times Square Theatre is not the best location for
a motion picture on Broadway (Editor’s note: It
is on 42nd Street) and we consider that we have
done exceptionally well.
“The picture is a hit in Detroit and is doing ex-
ceptional business.
“I want you to see these figures and tell your
readers about it, as I am certain you do not want
to cause an injustice to this corporation or to any
other.
“At the Fox Terminal Theatre, in Newark, the
‘SUNRISE’ grossed over $20,000 in one week.
The average receipts for this house are from
$6,000 to $8,000.
“At Philadelphia, the picture has run six weeks
at the Locust Theatre to phenomenal business,
playing twice daily.
“I would appreciate it if you would communi-
cate with me on Saturday.”
* * *
Desiring to be fair to every one who has a
grievance against this paper because of something
that has been printed about him, I naturally called
on Mr. Grainger. He showed me the receipts for
the twenty-five weeks of the engagement at the
Times Square Theatre, in confidence, and I can
say that, while it did not make any profits, and
may show a small loss, yet it has shown good
strength when one takes into consideration the
prevailing business depression.
In Newark the picture did exceptionally well.
In Detroit it did better than “Seventh Heaven”
in the first three weeks, but showed considerable
weakness the fourth week.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the acfc of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s
Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1989
Tel. Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MARCH, 24, 1928
No. 12
THE ANACORTES CASE
Most of you remember, I am sure, the decision of the
Seattle arbitration board in the case which Warner Bros,
brought against Mr. Waldo Ives, of Empress Theatre,
Anacortes, Washington, demanding that Mr. Ives play
or pay for certain pictures, Mr. Ives refusing to accept
them on the ground that they were not what he had con-
tracted for. The arbitration board rendered an award
releasing Mr. Ives from the obligation of playing those
pictures. This matter was treated in the issue of Decem-
ber 31, 1927.
Following that decision, Warner Bros, applied to a
board constituted of different arbitrators from those that
first tried the case and succeeded in inducing them to
reopen it, despite the protest of Mr. Hone, secretary of
M. P. T. O. of Washington, and of Mr. Ives himself.
Another board tried it and rendered a decision unfav-
orable to Mr. Ives, finding that the pictures were deliv-
ered in accordance with the contract, even though such
pictures were different from those described in the Annual
Campaign Book.
Under date of February 4, Mr. Ives wrote me partly
as follows:
“The case came up January 31 and Warner Bros, were
represented by an attorney named Hazen. Their main
contention was that the board of arbitration had the right
to make awards only on the face of the contract, and that
the pictures were delivered according to the contract.
Mr. Hone handled the case in good style and I was sur-
prised beyond expression that the decision was against us.
I believe I am right in saying that also Hazen was sur-
prised. ... If you can suggest a way to get a rehearing
or grounds to take the case into court I will appreciate
your advice. ...”
Under date of February 21, Mr. J. M. Hone wrote me
partly as follows :
“You no doubt were surprised over the action of the'
arbitration board in granting a rehearing and reversing
the decision of the former board. This, however, does not
end the matter, as I am satisfied that the board that
granted the rehearing, also the one that reversed the de-
cision, had no jurisdiction over the former board’s award,
as I am unable to find any rules governing a rehearing of
a case where a board of arbitration has determined its
findings and made a final award. I will greatly appreciate
your sending me such information. ...”
Because of the importance of this case to every exhibi-
tor, I am giving you the information that I gave to Mr.
Ives as well as to Mr. Hone, so that those of you who
may find yourselves in a similar predicament and do not
know the arbitration procedure in such matters may know
how to protect your interests.
An arbitrated case cannot be reopened, even by the
board that tried it, let alone by another board, unless, of
course, both parties agree to the reopening of it. Where
one of the parties flatly refuses to consent to a reopening,
then only a court can vacate the award.
“CAHILL’S CONSOLIDATED LAWS OF NEW
WORK, 1926,” states the following:
“Motion to vacate Award : In either of the following
cases, the court specified in the submission must make an
order vacating an award upon the application of either
party to the submission. (1) Where the award was pro-
cured by corruption, fraud, or other means. (2) Where
there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitra-
tors, or either of them. (3) Where the arbitrators were
guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing
upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evi-
dence pertinent and material to the controversy; or in any
other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have
been prejudiced. (4) Where the arbitrators exceeded
their powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a
mutual, final and definite award upon the subject matter
submitted was not made.”
Notice that “new evidence” is not one of the grounds
given for the vacating of an award by the court. I am
emphasizing this because very often exchanges that lose a
case succeed in having it reopened on the ground of new
evidence. When a board reopens a case without the con-
sent of both parties, it exceeds its authority.
* * *
Let us now take up the Waner Bros.’ attorney’s con-
tention that a board must make an award guided only by
what is in the contract. The following is what I wrote to
Mr. Hone :
“The Supreme Court for the Southern District of New
York City, in the case of EQUITABLE TRIST COM-
PANY vs% THE CONTINENTAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, etal., decided that a company is responsible
for the statements made either by its salesmen or in
literature put out by them. Accordingly, Warner Bros,
must deliver the pictures in accordance with the descrip-
tion given of them in their campaign book or other litera-
ture. Otherwise, they cannot force an exhibitor to accept
them. The fact that the contract does not describe the
pictures makes no difference ; it is a trade practice to
describe them not in the contract but in separate pieces of
literature.”
Mr. Ives has secured an injunction restraining the exe-
cution of the award, on the ground that the second board
had no authority to reopen the case. According to a tele-
gram to this office from Mr. Hone, the case will be heard
in the district court in Seattle, on March 27.
* * *
The attitude of this publication towards the present
arbitration system is too well known. While I believe
that the principle of arbitration is admirable, the way it is
applied in the motion picture industry is a mockery of that
principle. The arbitration boards have been set up to
try, not every exhibitor, but only the unaffiliated exhibi-
tors. In the years that arbitration has been functioning
in this industry, with 30,000 cases brought, I doubt if
there have been ten cases against affiliated exhibitors. To
my knowledge there has not been even a single case
against the affiliated exhibitors in this zone — not one.'
From this you can see for yourself that the arbitration
system has been set up to prosecute only the unaffiliated
exhibitors.
How can an arbitration board render just awards when
its machinery is controlled by the Hays organization?
How can the arbitrators render an award in accord-
ance to equity and justice, when half the board con-
sists of representatives of companies whose interests
are so closely interwoven, and when the other half
consists of men who in most cases are appointed by
friends of the producers? Let us, for example, take
the Kansas & Western Missouri territory: Biechele,
the president of the exhibitors’ organization there, has
told Mr. Hays that he prefers to “ride along with
him.” He has also accepted aid from the exchanges
to build up his organization: film salesmen, when they
call on the exhibitors to sell them film, solicit also
( Continued on last page)
46
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Bringing Up Father” — with Special Cast
( Metro-Goldwyn , March 17; 6,344 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
A very good comedy. It seems as if “The Callahans
and the Murphys” has taught Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer a
lesson, for they have avoided letting the characters do
anything that would prove offensive to the Irish. It is
not a comedy of the high-class order ; it is low, but it is
inoffensive. There are continuous laughs all the way
through, these being created by the situations, by the sub-
titles, and by the acting, mostly by the acting. And in
this, Polly Moran holds the prize.
It is the story of two Irish families, which are closely
related; they are of the “friendly enemies” sort, the two
mothers constantly carrying on a warfare. The daughter
of one of the families (the newly-made rich) falls in love
with a young nobleman and the mother is so proud that
she constantly reminds her sister-in-law of it, galling
her. The two husbands, who are brothers, are friendly,
not taking part in the warfare of the two wives.
The plot is supposed to have been founded on the draw-
ings by George McManus, the famous cartoonist. It has
been directed by Jack Conway. J. Farrell McDonald,
Jules Cowles, Polly Moran, Marie Dressier, Gertrude
Olmstead and others appear in the cast.
It should satisfy almost everywhere, in the theatres
that cater to the working element in particular.
“Mad Hour”— with Sally O’Neil
and Larry Kent
( First National, March 4; 6,625 ft.; 77 to 94 ft.)
This picture has been founded on a story by Elinor
Glynn. The first two reels are jazz doings, the young
heroine being shown acting as if she didn’t care what the
world would say. The remainder of the picture is so
appealing that it is doubtful if there will be a dry eye in
any house, whether it caters to the high-brows or to the
low-brows. In those scenes the heroine is shown as a
pathetic figure ; she marries the wealthy man, but through
her kind-heartedness she becomes the victim of some
crooks, who used her in an attempt to get a reward for
jewels they had stolen. She is shown as arrested, tried
and convicted, her husband abandoning her to her fate,
bowing to his father’s will. She gives birth to a child in
prison.
The sympathy for her becomes warmer, and the com-
passion tenderer, when she, while in jail, is tricked into
signing papers whereby the lawyer of her father-in-law
is enabled, not only to obtain a divorce for the young
hero, but also to snatch her baby away from her.
Toward the closing scenes the sympathy becomes still
warmer for her. She is shown going to her husband
after leaving jail at the end of her term; there she
finds her husband marrying another woman. The scenes
where she is shown meeting her child and grabbing it,
the lawyer ordering the nurse to let her have it so as to
avoid a scene until the wedding ceremony had been per-
formed, are the most pathetic of them all. They tear
one’s heart out.
It is doubtful if the end will satisfy the American pic-
ture-goers. The heroine, after she is told that it is better
for her baby to grow up without the knowledge that his
mother had served a term in jail for theft, is shown enter-
ing her ex-husband’s car, which had been made ready for
the newlyweds, and driving away, eventually running
over a bank, wrecking the car and killing herself. It is
not the reward that should have been given her after her
many sacrifices. Though innocent, she was sent to jail,
lost her husband, saw her child taken away from her,
and then finally she is made to lose her own life, whereas
the guilty persons are not shown suffering the conse-
quences of their acts. It is not justice, and the spec-
tator will leave the theatre dissatisfied.
But, though the majority of picture-goers will “kick”
at the heartless ending, it is doubtful if any of them will
stay away from it just because of the unpleasant ending.
Miss Glyn’s “Man and the Moment” has suggested the
plot. Joseph C. Boyle has directed the picture. Lowell
Sherman and Alice White appear in the cast. Larry
Kent is good as the hero. Sally O’Neill does the best
work in her screen career.
March 24, J928
“Spoilers of the West” — with Colonel
Tim McCoy
( Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Dec . 10; 4,784//.; 55 to 68 min.)
A good program picture 1 It is a frontier drama of
historical interest, the actien taking place in Wyoming
about 1866, when Geenral Sherman with the help of
Custer was trying to get the Indians to sign the Laramie
Treaty, in return for which the Indians were to have
their lands back, which the trappers and settlers were to
vacate. A love story is interwoven and many thrills are
caused by the expert and daring riding of Colonel McCoy,
by his battles with the escaping trapper prisoners, who
refused to move peacefully, and also by the saving of the
lives of the soldiers and of the Indians by preventing
further hostilities.
The hero (Col. McCoy), a Cavalry Lieutenant in the
U. S. Army, because of his knowledge of the Indian lan-
guage and customs, is given the job of forcing the trap-
pers to leave the Indian lands within thirty days so that
a treaty of peace might be signed. The heroine (Mar-
jorie Daw), who runs an illegal fur-trading settlement,
at first is hostile to the Lieutenant. Her brother (Wil-
lian Fairbanks), who also fights the lieutenant, is made
his prisoner, but through the treachery of the heroine,
who lures the hero away from the prisoner’s tent to her
home, he escapes. He gathers the trappers of the settle-
ment and continues to give battle. The heroine is ready
to shoot the hero but because she had fallen in love with
him on account of his bravery, she cannot go through
with it. Her brother, hiding in a tree, shoots him when
he comes on the morning of the final day, but the heroine
nurses him back to health in time for him to save the
day by reaching the firing line before sunset with the
trappers as prisoners, who finally decided to leave their
camp peacefully. After peace is declared hero and hero-
ine are united.
The picture was directed by W. S. Van Dyke from an
original story by John Thomas Neville, scenarized by
Madeline Ruthven and Rose B. Wills.
“The Heart of a Follies Girl” — with
Billie Dove
( First National, Mar. 18; 5,957 ft.; 69 to 85 min. )
If Larry Kent had acted half as well as Miss Dove acts,
“The Heart of a Follies Girl” would have been a knock-
out. Unfortunately, Mr. Kent walks through the picture.
He is colorless and in dramatic moments he merely poses.
But the picture should satisfy, just the same, because the
story material is good, it has been directed well, and
Miss Dove does as good a piece of acting as she has ever
done.
It is the story of a chorus girl, who falls in love with
a young boy, not yet out of his "teens.” He had become
acquainted with her when his employer, who loved her,
had sent him to take her out to dinner because of an
accident he had had, which had made it impossible for
him to take her to dinner himself. He is so struck by her
beauty that he falls madly in love with her. But because
he feared lest he lose her, he conceals from her the fact
that he was only a poor secretary. The heroine tells him
how she dreaded poverty. The hero, in order to “dazzle”
her, forges his employer’s name to a check and with the
money he buys her an expensive ring. But his forgery
soon becomes known and his employer prosecutes him
and sends him to jail. Her pleas on his behalf were of
no avail. Her love for him, however, is so strong, that
she marries him and vows to wait for him. On a New
Year’s eve, before the expiration of his sentence, he
breaks jail, reaches the heroine and begs her to go away
with him to some other land. But the heroine, unwilling
to see themselves hunted all their lives, prevails on him
to go back.
The story has been written by Adela Rogers St. John.
It has been directed by John Francis Dillon well. Lowell
Sherman, Clarissa Selwyn, and Mildred Harris appear in
the cast. Lowell Sherman is the heavy.
It should give satisfaction.
47
HARRISON’S REPORTS
March 24, 1928
“A Woman’s Way” — with Margaret
Livingston, Warner Baxter and
Armand Kaliz
(i Columbia , Feb. 18 ; 5,472 ft.; 63 to 78 min.)
A fairly entertaining program picture. The interest is
maintained pretty well all the way through. Here and
there the suspense is a little tenser. There is hardly any
comedy relief.
The action unfolds in Paris, and revolves around a
Parisian beauty, who danced and sang in a cafe in the
underworld, but who aspired to become a dancer in the
opera. A young American falls in love with her. A
man, who is shown as being friendly with the heroine to
the extent that he would call on her at any time of the
night and enter her apartment unannounced (but no in-
timate relations are shown or even implied between
them), steals a valuable necklace, and, as he is chased
by the police, goes to the cafe where the heroine had been
working, hands her the jewel, and tells her to keep it for
him. The police find him but are unable to arrest him
for lack of evidence. The heroine, while she is taken
home by the hero, drops the jewel case in the taxi. The
hero later finds it and returns it to the heroine just after
the police, who had traced the thief in the heroine’s apart-
ment, had left. But the police had not left ; they had
surrounded the house. They eventually arrest the thief.
He is sent to Devil’s Island, but escapes, returns to Paris
and sends for the heroine so that she might bring him the
jewel. He is trailed by the police, who had followed the
heroine, and is shot and killed by them just as he was
about to shoot and kill the hero, who had followed the
heroine there. Hero and heroine marry.
Izola Forrester wrote the story, and Edmund Mor-
timer directed it.
“The Night Flyer” — with William Boyd
and Jobyna Ralston
( Pathe-DeMille , Feb. 5; 5,954 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
A pretty good program picture. It is a railroad melo-
drama, in which the outstanding situation is that which
shows the wreck of a train, in which the hero was acting
as a temporary fireman. After the wreck he grabs another
train and takes the mail to its destination in record time,
thus earning the right to run an express train and winning
the hand of the heroine. There is some heart interest here
and there and some comedy. Most of the action revolves
around two rivals for the hand of a girl ; they are the
hero and the villain. The action unfolds in the days of
jerk-water railroads, as the engines used indicate. Rivalry
among the Western railroads for the contract to carry
the United States mail is the foundation of the plot.
The plot has been founded on “Held for Orders,” by
Frank Hamilton Spearman; it has been directed by Wal-
ter Lang, from an adaptation and continuity by Walter
Woods. Philo McCullough, Ann Schaeffer, DeWitt Jen-
nings and others are in the cast.
“So This Is Love” — with Shirley Mason,
William Collier, Jr. and Johnnie Walker
( Columbia , Feb. 6; 5,611 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
A very good pugilistic picture of the program grade.
There is suspense in it all the way through, and some
comedy. The comedy is in the prize fight scenes where
the hero is shown meeting the champion and knocking
him out. The heroine, who had learned to love the hero,
feeds the champion with the best food her delicatessen
store carried. She also gives him milk and pickles. This
she did just before the two had met in the ring, her pur-
pose being to make it possible for the hero to knock the
champion out. The hero, who was a dress designer by
profession, was very timid. Once he received a good
beating from the champion. This made him very timid.
The champion knew this, and tried to take advantage of
it. Hence his carelessness, which made him break the
rules laid down by his manager, who had been starving
him so that he might be in shape for the fight.
Miss Mason does well as the heroine, and William Col-
lier, Jr., as the hero. Johnnie Walker does well, too, as
the champion.
The story is by Norman Springer ; it has been directed
by Frank Capra,
“Nameless Men”— —with Antonio Moreno,
Claire Windsor, Ray Hallor and
Eddie Gribbon
{Tiff any ^Stahl, March 25; 5,708 ft.; 66 to 81 min.)
This is a crook melodrama. The suspense in it is tense.
The scenes where the hero is shown as having been
found out by the crooks that he is a detective and is held
up by them at the point of a gun and tied to a chair so
that he might be unable to interfere with them while
they made a desperate effort to get the money which one
of them, a young crook, had hidden in the basement of
the bank before he was caught when two years previously
he and his confederates had robbed the bank, killing the
watchman, hold the spectator in tense suspense. The
scenes on the crooks’ yacht, too, are suspensive ; the
crooks are shown as having abducted the heroine, sister
of the young crook, who was ignorant of the fact that her
brother was a crook, the leader of them intending to take
her along to force her to become his mistress. The spec-
tator’s interest is aroused in the very beginning and is
kept alive until the end.
There are, of course, some technical errors. The hero-
ine, for instance, is not endowed with enough intelligence
to realize that her brother was a crook and to try to
reform him. There are other such faults here and there.
The picture is not of the very cheerful sort ; one hates
to see so young a man as the heroine’s brother (Ray
Hallor), who looks anything but a crook, be a crook, even
though he reforms in the end by the good example the
hero had set for him : The hero, in trying to catch the
crooks, was shot and, when the police arrived, he told
them to be easy on the young man because it had been
his help that had enabled him to shoot and kill the leader
of the crooks.
The plot has been founded on the story by E. Norton
Hough ; it has been directed by Christy Cabanne.
“The Port of Missing Girls” — with
Barbara Bedford and Malcolm
McGregor
( Brenda-Regional , to be released in April; 7,279 ft.)
A good entertainment, and as the title attracts immedi-
ate attention those that will play it should attract good
crowds. Although the story deals with girls that are
swallowed up in a big city and fall into the hands of men
of questionable character, it has been handled so delicately
that it does not give offense. Of course, it is not a
Sunday-School picture, the purpose of the author evi-
dently being to show the dangers young girls run up
against in big cities. The strongest sex situation is that
which shows the hero and the heroine in an automobile
out in a park loving and hugging each other, the impli-
cation being that they had a love union. That they had
such a union is brought out more clearly later in the
story. There is pathos in several of the situations, the
most pathetic of them all being that which shows the
father broadcasting over the radio an appeal for his
missing daughter (heroine) to return home while the
heroine was listening on the other end. The story and
the screen play have been written by Howard Estabrook;
it has been directed by Irving Cummings. The direc-
torial work is first class. Miss Bedford makes an excel-
lent heroine. Malcolm McGregor does well in his part,
which, with the exception of the closing situations, is un-
sympathetic. Natalie Kingston, Hedda Hopper, George
Irving, Wyndham Standing, Charles Gerard, Paul Nichol-
son, Edith Yorke, Rosemary Theby, Lotus Thompson
and others are in the cast.
The story deals with a mother and a father who so
neglect their children because of their club activities that
the eldest daughter gets into “trouble.” Ashamed to return
home she is lured by the conductor of a supposed dancing
school and is taken to a wealthy rounder, supposedly to
give her a job at acting. But her sweetheart, a young
bootlegger, who was the young man that had wronged
her, accidentally discovers her and helps her parents
snatch her from danger,
48
HARRISON’S REPORTS
March 24, 1928
E. P. SMITH OF IOWA
their membership for the Biechele organization. How
can an arbitration board he selects, then, consist of
impartial arbitrators when he and the entire board is
under a compliment to the producers?
It is fortunate that Senator Brookhart, the greatest
friend the exhibitors have ever had among the na-
tional legislators, has put his finger on the sore spot.
I understand that one of the amendments he intends
to make of the Brookhart Bill is to put an end to the
Kangaroo Courts and to the Monkey Trials. He needs
encouragement. Write him a letter and encourage
him. Let him know that you, the unaffiliated exhibi-
tors, whom the Senator has made up his mind to fight
for, are back of him, despite the machinations of the
Hays organization. Tell him that the UNADUL-
TERATED unaffiliated exhibitors are back of him to
a man!
A LETTER FROM MR. CARL LAEMMLE
Murietta Hot Springs, California,
March 13, 1928
Mr. P. S. Harrison,
Harrison’s Reports,
New York City.
Dear Mr. Harrison:
I wonder if you, as the mouthpiece and adviser of
the exhibitors, can point out to them my position on
Universal’s newest picture, “We Americans.” After
this production had been sold to several thousand ex-
hibitors, I discovered that by spending a large addi-
tional sum of money on it, I could turn it into a really
great picture instead of just a good one. I spent the
money, taking the chance that even though the ex-
hibitors had bought it at a low price, they would be
willing to pay more when they discovered that I had
made something far better than they thought they
had bought.
The picture is completed and it is greater than I
can describe. I have asked exhibitors who have
bought it to extend their playing time and, besides,
play “We Americans” on a percentage basis, thus giv-
ing Universal a chance to get some real return on it.
If you think my position properly taken, will you
pass the word along to your readers, asking them to
give this special cooperation to a company which has
never failed to cooperate with them?
With kindest regards, I remain
Sincerely yours,
CARL LAEMMLE,
President.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
New York, N. Y, March 19, 1928.
Mr. Carl Laemmle,
President Universal Pictures Corporation,
Murietta Hot Springs, Cal.
Dear Mr. Laemmle:
I beg leave to acknowledge receipt of your letter of
March 13, by which you ask me to recommend to
those of my subscribers that have bought “We Ameri-
cans” from Universal at low prices to help your com-
pany get some additional revenue by either playing
the picture on a percentage basis or by extending
their playing time, so as to enable you to get back
some of the additional money you have spent in the
making of this picture.
In answer let me say that I regret that I cannot
recommend to my subscribers to play the picture on a
percentage basis, giving up the advantageous contract
they now have. My policy all along has been against
such a practice on the ground that, since pictures are
sold on a “blind-booking” basis, the exhibitor is en-
titled to receive the occasional extra good picture on
the terms of the contract just as he receives and pays
for the extra-bad pictures.
But I could recommend that they extend their play-
ing time, if the picture is as good as you say it is,
because such a recommendation on my part will not
harm their interests.
I hope to find time in the next few days to see the
picture.
Very sincerely yours,
P. S. HARRISON.
Just as I said in the issue of March 3, so it turned
out to be; I have received information from several
Iowa exhibitors to the effect that Mr. E. P. Smith
was sincere in his efforts to allow the exhibitors at
the convention to express their sentiment on the
Brookhart Bill. Only that he was misled by the rep-
resentatives of the producers. This is what one of
them, Mr. Tom Arthur, of Mason City, wrote me:
“Smith is an ‘awfully’ nice fellow and wants to do
what is right. 1 am positively satisfied in my own
mind that he was fed up with Pettijohn’s bunk and
salve
“The meeting down there opposing the Brookhart
Bill was an awful joke, inasmuch as O. H. Jacobs, of
the Palace Theatre, Burlington, and several others
thought that before the resolution was passed they
should give the matter further consideration. But with
Pettijohn sitting there and delivering a smooth talk
the motion was carried. I was the only one that
voted ‘No!’
“In conclusion I will say I will do everything pos-
sible, if Mr. Smith calls on me, to help him with
another meeting
“Whenever I meet a brother exhibitor I am still
talking for the Brookhart Bill and I find that the
greater majority of them are more or less in favor of
it regardless of the resolution.”
I have written to Mr. Smith to call a meeting so
that the Iowa exhibitors, now that Pettijohn is away
and will be unable to influence them with his “sob”
stuff, may express their true sentiments towards the
bill. I have also suggested to him that he may, if he
wants to avoid any misunderstandings, step aside
during this convention and let either Mr. Tom Arthur
or some other impartial exhibitor take the leading
part. I am even willing to send out the call of the
convention from this office, at my own expense, if
Mr. Smith wishes to avoid giving any one cause for
misinterpreting his actions.
T. O. C. C. HONORS SAPIRO
THEATRE OWNERS CHAMBER OF COM-
MERCE, of which body Mr. Sol Raives is president,
is giving a dinner at the Hotel Ritz on April 16, in
which Mr. Aaron Sapiro, Presidnet of INDEPEN-
DENT MOTION PICTURE EXHIBITORS
ASSOCIATION, Inc., will be the guest of honor.
Mr. William Brandt, former President of T. O.
C. C., will be in charge of the arrangements.
The honor T. O. C. C. is doing to Mr. Sapiro is
significant in view of the fact that this organization,
as a body, is not connected with the Sapiro movement.
And not all its members are also members of the new
organization.
There is no question that this dinner will be of
interest to every independent exhibitor through the
land, for it is believed that the aims of the new or-
ganization will be made clearer at that time.
If you can spare the time to come, do come; there
is no question that it will be worth your while.
If you should decide to come, telegraph to the offices
of T. O. C. C., 910 Times Building, for reservations.
FAIRMONT THEATRE COMPANY
Fairmont, Minn., March 5, 1928.
Mr. P. S. Harrison, Editor,
Harrison’s Reports,
New York.
I am glad to note in your current issue that you
have taken notice of the abominable ad which Metro
ran in the trade papers of January 21st. Laying aside
all questions of individual belief in the wisdom of the
prohibition legislation, the fact remains that intoxicat-
ing liquor is an outlaw in the United States, and all
good citizens should obey the law. The plain infer-
ence of the advertisement is that the men in this in-
dustry are in the habit of violating one of our laws,
which is an insult to a great many men engaged in
the business, and a slap at the industry as a whole. It
is hard to understand how anyone in the business
could possess such utterly bad taste.
Yours very truly,
FAIRMONT THEATRE COMPANY,
By W. L. Nicholas.
Entered aa seeoftd-ctase matter January 4, at eke poet otfloe at Mew Yosk, Mow Yoj*, usule-r the act erf March 3, 18*0.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States.. $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, If It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. 3. HARRISON
Editor and PubHsher
Established Jul^ 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
V oi. X
SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1928
No. 13
UNIVERSAL AND ITS ATTITUDE
TOWARDS THE BROOKHART BILL
Mr. R. H. Cochrane, vice president of Universal,
has sent to every exhibitor that has a contract for
their Complete Service a circular letter stating that, if
the Brookhart Bill becomes a law, Universal will be un-
able to sell them such service in that the Bill will make
blind-booking unlawful.
Mr. P. J. Wood, Secretary of M. P. T. O. of Ohio,
answers Mr. Cochrane adequately through a circular
letter that he has sent to the members of the organi-
zation; it reads partly as follows:
“. . .1 am amazed that Mr. Cochrane should have
sent out such a letter in view of the fact that during
the entire week of the hearing on the Brookhart Bill
before the Interstate Commerce Commission of the
Senate, he sat opposite Senator Brookhart and heard
the latter state on numerous occasions that he would
correct the Bill in any manner whatsoever so that it
would not be unlawful for the distributors to sell pic-
tures before they are made if the exhibitor desired to
continue to buy them in this manner.”
In another paragraph Mr. Wood comes to the con-
clusion that Mr. Cochrane, in sending out that cir-
cular, had in mind to frighten the small exhibitors,
who use their Complete Service, into opposing the
Brookhart Bill. He then closes the circular by urg-
ing every exhibitor to write to the members of the
Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce, on their
own letterheads, urging favorable action on the Bill.
“Put everything else aside,” Mr. Wood recommends,
“and write the nineteen letters today,” meaning a let-
ter to each of the nineteen members of the committee.
* * *
The trouble with Mr. Cochrane seems to me to be
that he has not yet realized that the Brookhart Bill
will prove of greater benefit to Universal than to any
other producer-distributor. The theatre-owning pro-
ducer-distributors had so shut out Universal product
that Universal was compelled, according to its own
statements, to go into the theatre field to force them
to buy its oroduct. by threatening, it is assumed, to
refuse to book their product in Universal theatres.
And theatres are a costly venture, not only to Uni-
versal but to all the other producer-distributors, as
my information proves.
Now, the Brookhart Bill, by placing pictures on a
competitive basis, will make it impossible for the
producer-distributors to keep on adding more thea-
tres to their chains, thus closing the market for Uni-
versal and for other independent product, because a
producer-controlled theatre will be unable to compete
with the independent theatre man under the equal
conditions the Brookhart Bill will create. Universal,
then, will not find itself compelled to buy theatres in
order to force the big chains to buy its product; a
market will be created for its product. If Universal
could see this, it would not be pulling the chestnuts
out of the fire for the benefit of the producer-con-
trolled circuits.
This paper desires to make it known that it is in
full accord with Mr. P. J. Wood’s recommendations.
Write to each member of the Senate Committee on
Interstate Commerce requesting immediate considera-
tion for the Brookhart Bill. Do it now, not tomor-
row. Use your own stationery for it.
The following are the names of the Senators:
James E. Watson, Chairman, Indiana; Frank R.
Gooding, Idaho; James Couzens, Michigan; Simeon
D. Cess, Ohio; Robert B. Howell, Nebraska; Guy D.
Goff, West Virginia; W. B. Pine, Oklahoma; Fred-
erick M. Sackett, Kentucky; Joseph H. Metcalf,
Rhode Island; Coleman Du Pont, Delaware; Ellison
D. Smith, South Carolina; Key Pittman, Nevada;
William Cabell Bruce, Maryland; C. C. Dill, Wash-
ington; Burton K. Wheeler, Montana; Earle B. May-
field, Texas; Harry B. Hawes, Missouri; Hugo L.
Black, Alabama, and Robert Wagner, New York.
Your attention is also called to the fact that Sena-
tors Wheeler and Welsh, of Montana, have been,
according to my information, receiving many pro-
tests against the Bill. It is plainly evident that the
opposition has been carrying on a desperate propa-
ganda in Montana. For this reason it is necessary
that the exhibitors of that state write to them at once,
endorsing the Bill, and urging their friends to write
to them also. The organization in that state, if there
is any, has not, to my knowledge, yet taken any steps
to support the Bill. For this reason it is absolutely
necessary that the individual exhibitors take mattors
m their own hands.
DICK BIECHELE SHOULD ANSWER
THIS QUESTION AT ONCE
Mrs. Maud Gandy, a widow, was handling the film
that was taken to the offices of the board of censors
for the two states, Kansas City, Kansas, and Kansas
City, Missouri.
On December 2, 1927, the secretary of the Film
Board notified Mrs. Gandy that her services were no
longer required. The work is now being done by
Dick Biechele’s son, F. D. Biechele.
F. D. Biechele has, of course, the right to sell his
services to anybody, irrespective of whether his father
is or is not an exhibitor leader, and regardless of the
fact that his father, because of his office, must ap-
point the exhibitor arbitrators; but we have, of course,
the right to ask him if he, in the event he were not the
son of the President of an exhibitors organization,
couid get that job! That is the question that has been
bothering many exhibitors of that zone.
If the father has used his influence to get that job
for his son, then how can he be impartial in appoint-
ing the arbitrators of his zone, as required by the
arbitration rules, when he, in accepting such a favor
from the Film Board of Trade, has placed himself
under a compliment to those whose interests are not
in harmony with the interests of those who have
elected him to his office?
For his own sake, Dick Biechele must answer this
question, particularly because the person that has
lost that .job is a woman, and a widow. If he cannot
answer it satisfactorily, he should resign as President
of M. P. T. O. of Kansas.
Charlestown, Ind., March 5, 1928.
Dear Mr. Harrison:
I have found your reports as amazingly accurate in
defining all pictures, and have been guided very
largely by your almost unerring judgment, all of
which is an invaluable asset to the exhibitor, more
especially to small town fellows. . . .
Sincerely and cordially,
(Signed) C. R. HAY.
50
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Stop That Man” — with Arthur Lake,
Barbara Kent, Eddie Gribbon and
George Siegman
{Universal- Jewel, March 11; 5,389 ft.; 62 to 11 min.)
Surprisingly good. It is a farce comedy, in which a
good plot and good acting by the principals, chiefly by
youthful Arthur Lake, contribute towards making it a
very good entertainment. Most of the comedy is con-
tributed by the ^oung hero’s desire to pose as a police-
man; his two brothers were policemen and he dreamed
hours at a time when he, too, would be a policeman,
bravely arresting bad men. Most of the fun is caused
when he, sent by his brother to take his suit to the tailor,
puts it an and has his picture taken with it, just to show
off to the heroine, whom he had just met. The. brother
waits in vain for his suit. There are thrills, too, these
created by the young hero himself, who had accidentally
trapped the thieves that had robbed a home into which he
had innocently let them. The chase the hero gives the
burglars and the burglars the hero, the satcnel containing
the stolen money, changing hands several times during the
struggle, are not only comedy provoking but also thrilling.
The highest point of comedy is reached when the young
hero leads the two burglars to the police station, thus
bringing about the exoneration of his brother, who had
been held pending the investigation of the robbery in a
house where his badge had been found; it is disclosed that
the young hero had dropped the badge.
The love affair between young Lake and Barbara Kent
is charming. Eddie Gribbon and all the other members of
the supporting cast do good work. The story is by George
Hobart. It has been directed with skill by Nat Ross.
“Under the Tonto Rim” — with Richard
Arlen, Jack Luden and Mary Brian
( Paramount , Feb. 4; 5,911 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
A good western, in which thrills abound. It is a gold-
mining melodrama, in which the thrills are caused by
the efforts of the villains to rob the hero and other miners
of their gold claims, and of the hero’s successful efforts
to foil their plans. There is considerable shooting, and
some killings. The locale of the story is supposed to be
Arizona, where in a place called “The Tonto Rim” gold
is discovered and every rancher is made to turn to pros-
pecting. Just like other western melodramas, this one,
too, has its wicked villain, which in this case is imper-
sonated by Harry Morey. The heroine’s brother is put
by him into a position where he thinks that it was he that
had shot and killed the hero’s father. The villain thus
made the young man, who was the chief in the govern-
ment claim office, a puppet in his hands, forcing him to
alter the record so as to deprive the hero and the others
of their claims. But the hero, who had been told by his
father before his death that it was a man that was able to
shuffle cards with one finger that had shot him, eventually
succeeds in pinning the murder on the villain, thus help-
ing the heroine’s brother escape punishment he did not
deserve.
The love affair between Richard Arlen and Mary Brian
is well done. The story is by Zane Grey; it has been di-
rected by Herman C. Raymaker, from a screen play by
J. Walter Ruben. William Franey, Harry Todd, Bruce
Gordon and Jack Byron are in the cast.
“Turn Back the Hours” — with Myrna Loy,
Walter Pidgeon and Sam Hardy
( Gotham-Regional , March 15; 6,600 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
A fair program picture. It is the story of a hero, a
petty officer in the United States Navy, who is demoted
and expelled from the Navy for cowardice. He embarks
as a stowaway in a ship sailing for the Caribbean. The
ship is wrecked and he is washed ashore on a small island.
The heroine, daughter of a planter, finds him and nurses
him back to health. The island is infested with brigands.
The leader covets the heroine and threatens to take her
by force. The hero does not intervene and the heroine,
realizing that he is a coward, upbraids him and then
snubs him. The hero is shamed and goes away. He goes
to the lair of the outlaws. There he learns that the hero-
ine had been abducted and held captive. His love for her
awakens his manhood. He rescues her, goes to her
patio with her, and when they are surrounded by the
brigand he takes the leadership in the defense, until a
United States marine detachment from a battleship comes
and rescues them. The officer in charge recognizes the
March 3l, 1928
hero as his former pal. He takes him aboard the ship
and has him restored to his grade for the bravery he had
shown.
Some thrills are caused by the fight and by the arrival
of the marines to the scene of the fight. The scenario is
by Jack Jungmeyer. Howard Bretherton has directed it.
“A Modern Du Barry” — with Maria Corda
( UFA — about 7,000 ft.; 81 to 100 min.)
Mediocre ! Not up to the UFA standard. It is one of
those European mythical kingdom stories. The King of
Andalia (hero) whose country is broke, goes to Corbett,
a wealthy French capitalist who owns all the oil wells in
his country, for a loan to supply his soldiers with food
and living money. There he meets Toinette (Maria Corda
— heroine) a good little girl that loved a scamp salesman,
who had deserted her. She then becomes a mannequin,
after at first attempting suicide and being rescued by a
boulevardier, who places her in one of the smart theatres.
She allows many men to support her in great style but
Corbett, who had fallen madly in love with her, want£
to marry her. But because she has fallen in love with the
hero, who she thinks is a mere clerk, she refuses to do so
even though she allows him to support her. At a ban-
quet given in his honor, when he comes to Paris a second
time tor more money, she finds out who the hero is. But
she loves him so much that she goes back to his country
with him even though the financier refused to give him
more money. The financier, wanting the heroine for him-
self, causes a revolution among the hero’s subjects. But
when he finds out that the heroine really loves the hero,
he stops the rioting and allows them to marry and to
have the kingdom for themselves.
Miss Corda doesn’t mind being dressed and undressed
in public, evidently liking to show off her rather plump
figure. The wig she wears, however, does not add much
to her appearance. The picture was directed by Alex-
ander Korda, her husband.
“Why Sailors Go Wrong” — with Sammy
Cohen, Ted McNamara, Sally Phipps
and Nick Stuart
(Fox, March 25; 5,112 ft.; 59 to 12 min.)
An excellent farce-comedy. It is full of laughs from
the beginning to the end. But the strongest laughs are
caused, first, on board the yacht, where the two heroes,
Sammy Cohen and Ted McNamara, find themselves di-
vested of their clothes and using anything that comes
along to hide their nudity with. These situations are not
vulgar. The scenes where Sammy Cohen is shown wear-
ing only a blouse and walking like a monkey in an effort
to hide his bare legs are a scream. But the doings on
the island, where the two heroes find themselves sur-
rounded by wild animals, such as lions and monkeys,
ought to make the spectators gasp for breath besides mak-
ing them laugh screamingly. The scenes that show the
pair climbing a tree in order to escape a ferocious lion,
but finding themselves with a lion above, on the branch
of the tree, should make many a spectator rise from his
seat from fear that either the lion above or the one below
would get them. There are numerous such situations all
through in the part of the picture that unfolds on the
island.
The story is by William Conselman and Frank O’Con-
nor ; it has been directed by Henry Lehrman, from a
scenario by Randall H. Faye.
It should give one hundred per cent, satisfaction any-
where.
“Chinatown Charlie” — with Johnny Hines
( First National, April 15; 6,374 ft.; 12 to 90 min.)
This is a better comedy than any of those Mr. Hines
has released in the last two or three years, for the reason
that comedy and thrills are combined in it. The comedy
is of the usual Hines sort, horse-play mostly. The thrills
are caused by the abduction of the heroine in New York’s
Chinatown, where the hero takes sightseers, and by the
hero’s efforts to rescue her from their hands. The usual
Chinatown background is used also in this picture. In
addition, wax figures are introduced in the development
of the plot, at one time the hero impersonating a wax fig-
ure to fool the crooks, succeeding.
The story is by Owen Davis. It has been directed by
Charles Hines. Louise Lorraine is the heroine ; she does
well. Harry Gribbon, Scotter Lowry and Sojin are in
the cast.
March 31, 1928
51
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Flying Romeos” — with Charles Murray
and George Sidney
( First National, Feb. 26; 6,172 ft.; 71 to 88 min.)
The first half is rather slow, but the second half more
than makes up for the first part’s shortcomings. It is a
farce comedy, in which the two heroes are shown, first
as barbers, and later as “flyers.” The comical scenes in
the second half show the two heroes finding themselves
in a flying aeroplane, the engine having been started acci-
dentally by one of them when he pushed a lever with his
elbow. Neither of them knew how to fly and, by strange
coincidence, they perform evolutions that astound the ex-
perts that were watching ‘-hem from the ground. Just as
accidentally they land without a mishap. For this, they
are acclaimed as the best aviators in America, and are
invited to take part in aeroplane races that were to be
held a few days afterwards. The seenes in the aeroplane
are not only comical, but also thrilling. At times they
make the spectators gasp for breath, just as they were
made in “Safety Last” and in similar other pictures.
The picture has been directed by Mervyn LeRoy. Fritzi
Ridgway, Lester Barnard, Duke Martin, James Bradbury,
Jr., and Bell Mitchell are in the cast. Messrs. Murray
and Sidney make a good pair of comedians.
It should please everywhere.
“The Big City” — with Lon Chaney
( Metro-Goldwyn , Feb. 18; 6,838 ft.; 79 to 97 min.)
Intelligent people will laugh at it; picture-goers of the
rank and file may get some enjoyment out of it. One
thing that is in favor of it at least is the fact that it is
not of the gruesome sort, as the last three or four Chaney
pictures have been. It is a crook melodrama, in which
suspense is supposed to predominate. The hero is, of
course, presented as a clever underworld character, a man
who is so clever that he is able to rob other robbers. To
make it easy for him to carry on his robberies he had
established a shop ostensibly to make clothes for the girls
of his cabaret, putting it in charge of one of his confed-
erates, a woman. The effect is spoiled, however, by the
fact that logic is offended “terribly.” For instance, a
criminal such as the hero is presented to be could not
have turned into a “good-goody” so easily, even if love
was the cause of it. Mr. Chaney is made ridiculous by
being made to reform, and to make his confederates to
reform, too. Marceline Day is the cause of the reform;
she takes the part of the innocent ingenue, who had been
engaged by the hero’s confederate to work in their shop,
their purpose being to fool the police. But it was she
that had eventually brought about their downfall, and
eventually their reform; the detectives were able to get
from her information they could not hope to get from one
of the crooks.
The story was written and directed by Tod Browning.
Betty Compson, James Murray, and others are in the cast.
“Something Always Happens” — with
Esther Ralston and Neil Hamilton
( Paramount , March 24; 4,792 ft.; 55 to 68 min.)
This is one of those wild melodramas that one could
not expect to find Miss Ralston in. Secret doors, dark
rooms, shadows, fearful-looking hands with long fingers,
ready to grab anyone by the throat, and mysterious hap-
penings of all sorts make up the action. It comes out
eventually that all was put on for the benefit of the her-
oine, who had been bored in the home of her fiance in
England, and had craved for excitement. But the heroine
turns the tables on them when she, too, after learning of
the innocent deception, puts on an act, while all are still
in the lonely habitation, that frightens the “frighteners,”
by appearing as a walking ghost. But she and the others
are eventually fooled when actual thieves, who were led
by a Chinaman, who had trapped them in the lonely house.
The Chinaman’s desire was to get hold of the stone that
years before had been stolen from a Buddha statue in a
temple in China, which stone had been inherited by the
hero, son of a British nobleman. The story ends with the
arrest of the bad men and with the marriage of hero and
heroine, the heroine showing a readiness to adjust herself
to the surroundings in her husband’s home.
The story is by Frank Tuttle, by whom it has also been
directed. Sojin, Charles Sellon, Rosco Karns, Lawrence
Grant and Mischa Auer are in the cast.
“The Garden cf Eden” — with
Corinne Griffith
( United. Artists, Jan. 14; 7,558 ft.; 87 to 108 min.)
Good. It is a high-class light comedy, in which the
situations as well as Miss Griffith’s acting provoke the
comedy. The chief doings are the heroine’s impersona-
tion of a noblewoman’s daughter, whom the hero, son of
a noble French family, the kind of families that must
o. !«. the girl before the son may be permitted to marry
her, falls in love with hei. The heroine was put into a
position where she had to impersonate a baroness’ daugh-
ter when her friend, with whom she had become ac-
quainted at the hotel where she had been working as a
wardrobe girl, took her to a high-class hotel in Monte
Carlo and registered as a baroness “and daughter.” At
the close questioning of the heroine, her friend (the part
taken by Louise Dresser) revealed the fact that she was
a real baroness, impoverished by the war ; she said she
had her “fling” as herself for two weeks once a year, so
that she might be reminded of her past glories. The
hero, of course, eventually is told by the heroine that she
was not a baroness’ daughter, but that seems to have
made no difference, for he married her, just the same,
because he loved her.
The most dramatic situation is that which shows the
hero’s uncle, who had once attempted to assault the her-
oine while she was a wardrobe woman at the hotel, going
to attend the wedding ceremony. The spectator naturally
expects that he will give the heroine away; instead, he
tells the hero that he could not have made a better choice
for a wife.
The plot has been founded on a play by Rudolph Ber-
nauer and Rudolph Osterricher. It has been directed by
Lewis Milestone. Charles Ray takes the part of the hero
well. Lowell Sherman, Maude George, Edward Mar-
tindel, Hank Mann and others are in the cast.
“Czar Ivan the Terrible” — with
L. M. Leonidoff
{Amkino — about 8,500 ft.; 98 to 121 min.)
A tiresome long drawn out tale of one of the cruel czars
of early Russia, Czar Ivan IV, of the 16th century, who
was a religious fanatic and who loved to inflict inhuman
torture on his subjects. It is not a picture for children
and even the average American audience could not stand
much of this gruesome and morbid picture. The little
theatres who go in for “art” might enjoy its “primitive-
ness.” There is not a cheerful scene throughout the
whole picture and the drunken banquet scene is enough
to sicken one as are the scenes of the terrible punish-
ments, such as running spikes through peoples’ hands,
blinding them wjth hot irons, whipping them in filthy
dungeons and even the Czar throwing scalding stew in
the faces of his victims. The only characters that arouse
sympathy in the spectator are Nikita (hero) who is a
serf of Kurliatov, a bojar or landowner of the old
aristocracy, and his betrothed Fima (heroine). Lupatov,
a bojar of the new aristocracy, appeals to the Czar for the
possession of the hero because he had an inventive mind
and could repair such machinery as they had, but instead
of granting his wish, the czar takes the hero and heroine
to his palace so that he may fix the flax spinning wheel
from which comes a great part of his wealth. Kurliatov
of the old aristocracy is also brought to the palace and
after being subjected to all kinds of insults, he falls into
a bottomless cave in one of the dungeons and is killed.
The Czarina, a very cruel woman, becomes infatuated
with the hero, who had made wings that enabled him to
fly. But because the fanatic Czar, being very super-
stitious, thought that this was an act of ungodliness and
that the hero must be in league with Satan, he casts the
hero into a dungeon where the Czarina makes love to
him. She is betrayed by a former lover to her husband,
who chokes her to death. The hero, too, falls into the
bottomless cave in the dungeon, and is killed. The her-
oine is saved by her kinfolk, who help her to escape.
With all the killings and the ugly faces of most of the
cast, the picture does not leave one in a pleasant frame
of mind, though it does hold one’s interest. The story is
supposed to be historically correct. There are some very
good snow scenes with the horse-drawn sleds plowing
their way over the desolate land. But the acting is
marvelous.
Note : The picture has drawn well at the Cameo, this
city.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
March 31, 1928
52
A PROTEST AGAINST THE CHICAGO
CONTRACT FROM PITTSBURGH
Messrs. Nathan Friedberg and Anthony P. Jim, the
two exhibitors that represented Western Pennsyl-
vania at the Trade Practice Conference, have sent out
a letter condemning the contract that has come out of
the deliberations of exhibitors and producers in Chi-
cago. The letter states:
“We . . . are anything but satisfied with the con-
tract as Adopted by the Contract Committee in Chi-
cago . . .
“. . . In the event of a tie vote the Judge of the
Supreme Court of the United States was to appoint
the seventh man whose decision was to be final. But,
to our surprise there was no need for a seventh arbi-
trator as Mr. Gabriel Hess, Attorney for the Hays
Organization, was also admitted to all conferences to
act as Secretary. And this without any consideration
or recommendation uf the Trade Practice Conference.
“Second, the Contract was to be forwarded to the
Exhibitor Delegates who attended the Trade Practice
Conference for their approval, recommendations or
rejections, but to our surprise we have been ignored.’’
The letter continues condemning the fact that the
proposal of Mr. Nathan Yamins, one of the exhibitor
members of the Contract Committee, that the exhibi-
tor members’ vote as a unit was disregarded; and that
they, as delegates, had not received a copy of the con-
tract up to the date of writing that letter (March 17),
even though producer-distributor members of the
committee including C. C. Pettijohn had such copies
with them in Washington during the hearing of the
Brookhart Bill, which was on Monday, February 27.
The letter closes as follows:
“The sentiment as expressed by the members of our
Organization is that the only hope for an equitable
contract and fair trade practices is through some ac-
tion by the Government.
“In our judgment, the new contract is worse than
the contract we are now working under.”
* * *
I have not yet studied the contract and therefore
am not in a position to say whether it is better or
worse than the contract now in force. Personally I
don’t believe that anything worse could have been
adopted; it could not be made worse unless the pro-
ducers, with the help of the exhibitor contract com-
mittee members, so framed it as to give them the
right to step into the exhibitor’s box office any time
and take his receipts away from him, or to take away
from him even his theatre. I rather believe that the
producers and distributors, in mortal fear of the
Brookhart Bill, have given some concessions to you
so as to weaken our chances of making the Brookhart
Bill a law.
I am going to study it soon and report my findings
to you; and if it is as bad as the Pittsburgh delegates
say it is, then there is only one remedy — court action,
to throw arbitration bag and baggage out of the win-
dow. It can be done, for as it now operates, it is, in
the opinion of many lawyers, in restraint of trade.
LET THEM SAY WHERE THEY STAND!
The following letter has been sent by this office to
Messrs. M. S. Lightman, President of M. P. T. O. of
Arkansas; W. Z. Spearman, President of M. P. T. O.
of Oklahoma, and Charles W. Picquet, President of
the M. P. T. O. of North Carolina:
“To the best of my information you have not yet
called a meeting of the members of your organization
to give them a chance to say whether they are for or
against the Brookhart Bill.
“Your failure to take action in this matter forces
us to believe that you are doing so out of a motive to
serve your personal interests to the injury of the in-
terests of the members of your organization, and we
will continue to think so unless you call a meeting at
once or hold a referendum through the mails.
“As I said before in the columns of Harrison’s Re-
ports, you are entitled to have your own opinion of
the Brookhart Bill, but you have no right to use your
office to stifle the opinion of others.
“May I have a reply to this letter at your earliest
convenience so that the exhibitors of the country mav
know what you intend to do in this matter?”
A DISPLAY OF UTTER LACK OF
COMMON SENSE
In the last two or three years title writers have de-
lighted in making the Prince of Wales the butt of
their jokes.
While the jokes are of the good-natured sort, no
thinking person will fail to realize that they are ill-
conceived and in bad taste. These writers forget that
the subject of their fun is the future ruler of Great
Britain, and is not a person against whom every hack
writer should direct jokes.
Even if good taste were to be left out of considera-
tion, self-interest should make them refrain from in-
dulging in such a pastime, for it is unlikely that the
British nation will stand seeing its future ruler made
so freely fun of; some of these days the industry will
wake up to find greater restrictions placed on Amer-
ican films. Britishers have a sense of humor second
to the citizens or subjects of no other nation; but
they also know when a thing is overdone.
It would be very wise for American producers to
put a ban on such fun-making.
LET FILM SALESMEN HAVE THEIR
CHOICE!
“Sapiro ‘Block-Buying’ Peril Gives Film Salesmen
Chills,” and “Scores Reported Scheduled to Walk
Plank Next Month,” are the headlines on an article
that appeared in The Morning Telegraph .of March 21.
The article goes on to say that with the Sapiro
Movement under foot, the chances of salesmen being
thrown out of work are great and immediate.
This is the reward that those film salesmen that
have opposed the Brookhart Bill will get. This paper
pointed out to them that the Brookhart Bill will prove
of immense benefit, not only to the exhibitors, but
also to the exchangemen, in that, by placing pictures
on a competitive basis, it will put salesmen of ability
at a premium; and that, unless the Brookhart Bill be-
comes a law, their chances for retaining their jobs
were nil.
It is not too late for the salesmen yet; they still can
do good work among the exhibitors.
If you that will read this article are a salesman,
make it a point to visit as many exhibitors as you can
to urge them to support the Brookhart Bill. Induce
them to exert every effort to induce as many of the
voters of their towns as they can to write to their
Senators and Congressmen in support of the Bill.
Don’t neglect doing everything you can to see this
Bill become a law. It is between the Brookhart Bill
as a law with a steady job for you, and the Brookhart
Bill defeated with a loss of your job. Have your
choice!
ROTHAFEL AND HIS EGOTISM
S. L. Rothafel, the well known impresario of Roxy
Theatre, that Cathedral of Motion Pictures, gave an
interview to the Daily Mirror of March 8. Among
other things, the reporter stated the following:
“It is no secret that the Roxy pictures have been
poor consistently. Roxy himself yeterday called them
‘lousy’ pictures.”
It is plainly evident that Sam Rothafel has lost all
sense of proportion. If he had not, he would not have
made such a statement to the press, when thousands
of exhibitors have bought and are playing the pictures
he has called “lousy.”
If he has any grievance against Fox, why take it
out of the hide of innocent persons? On account of
the fact that he has been a much publicized man,
Rothafel’s sayings are telegraphed all over the coun-
try. When he calls the pictures by such a name,
therefore, he makes the public believe that all pictures
nowadays are “lousy.” You can very well, then, real-
ize how much harm he has done to you by such an
expression.
I hold no brief for William Fox, but there are a
few persons in New York City that know what might
have happened had Mr. Fox not stepped into the
Roxy at the time he did.
The Roxy has not paid a cent in dividends on the
original stock investment, and an inquiry into the situ-
ation might not be bereft of benefit to the stock-
holders.
Entered aa second-class matter January 4, U)2A.. at *iie post office at New York, Now York, under fctao aot of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions . 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand .. . ....... 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25 c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, If It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly hr
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreport3
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, APRIL 7, 1928
No. 14
THE EVIL OF “PROTECTION”
The Cleveland exhibitors have decided to re-
frain from buying film next season until the mat-
ter of “protection” in that zone has been settled
satisfactorily to them. At present the first-run
theatres, with the exception of Keith’s Palace,
Keith’s East 105th Street Theatre, and Reade’s
Hippodrome, get 56 days’ protection over subse-
quent-run theatres.
The Cleveland exhibitors have touched upon a
sore spot and should be highly commended by the
exhibitors of every zone. “Protection” has been
the curse in the motion picture industry. In fact,
all its ills are owed to this one abuse. The execu-
tives of the affiliated theatres cannot conduct
theatres on the grocery, restaurant, or drug-store
chain system, because this is one business wherein
individuality is one of the most important factors
in its success. First, they are up against incom-
petence; secondly, they are up against dishonesty
— in many cases, the employees band together and
rob the box office; thirdly, they cannot conduct
the theatres as economically as can the individual
theatre owners. They are trying to offset all these
defects by preventing other exhibitors from using
a film immediately after they use it. The result
is that they are killing not only the exhibiting
business by preventing those that can serve the
public well from serving it, but also the producing
business by making it impossible for the pro-
ducers-distributors from getting back their money
fast and making better pictures economically.
Sam Katz has been the worst offender in the
matter of “protection.” Not satisfied with getting
his film ahead of the others and of obtaining a
fair clearance over his competitors, subsequent
users of the same films, he has established a “pro-
tection” system all of his own, compelling the dis-
tributors other than Famous Players-Lasky to
sign an agreement to that effect. On the strength
of this agreement, he often gets protection from
towns that are as far away from any of his theatres
as forty miles.
It is hardly likely that Sam Katz, the man who
started as an independent exhibitor and has turned
out to be a ruthless, “cruel,” heartless despot,
the bane of the independent exhibitors, will be
able to get away with this “murder” very much
longer. The man who “bartered” away his future
for gold, by becoming an employee of Adolph
Zukor when he could have been the leader of this
industry, thus retaining his independence, if he
had but been satisfied with smaller profits, has
done more to bring about this system of “pro-
tection” than any other person. But he will, no
doubt, be amply repaid for it some day. The
Brookhart Bill is but the natural result of this
ruthless policy of his. And if the Brookhart Bill
will not put an end to this evil, other legislation
is bound to be introduced, not only in Congress
but in every State Legislature.
The Roxy, in this city, has only a fourteen-day
protection over all other theatres of this zone ; the
Strand, only seven days. Even the Loew theatres
have a short protection — seven days. But Sam
Katz wants protection of months, and over towns
that are miles away from his theatres.
If Sam Katz can’t think right, what is the mat-
ter with Adolph Zukor? Can’t he see that such a
policy is so unfair to the public that legislation
is bound to be resorted to? Can the public allow
one person to say to them that they must not see
the pictures in any other theatres except in those
that are controlled by him? For, after all, that
is what the San Katz kind of “protection” means.
SEND AN IMMEDIATE PROTEST
TO WARNER BROS.
Warner Bros, are refusing to furnish me with the re-
lease numbers of their features. They assert that this in-
formation is private, and as such it belongs only to the
company.
I have written them that, inasmuch as the release
numbers are printed on the contract at the time they sell
their pictures, it is not private information for the use
only of the company; and inasmuch as you want this in-
formation, it is their duty to furnish it to me.
Although more than two weeks have passed, I haven’t
received the information.
There is, in my opinion, no reason for their refusing
to give me the release numbers other than to make it pos-
sible for them to switch pictures without your knowl-
edge. I can conceive of no other plausible reason.
When you read these lines, sit down without a mo-
ment's delay and send a protest to Mr. Albert Warner,
321 West 44th Street, New York City. Tell him what
you think of their refusal to give me this information. I
am trying to help you run your theatre profitably by fur-
nishing you with the information you want. Warner
Bros, are putting hardships in my way with no justifica-
tion. I would have not asked them for this information
were you not entitled to it. The release numbers of features
are, since you buy them along with the titles, your prop-
erty and Warner Bros, have no excuse for withholding
them from your representative.
Next time a Warner Bros.’ salesman steps into your
theatre to solicit your business, ask him why his com-
pany refuses to furnish me with what you are rightfully
entitled to. And if he knows no reason why his company
refuses to furnish it, tell him to go back to find out and
then come back to you.
Write a letter to Mr. Warner irrespective of whether
you are or are not a Warner Bros.’ customer. Lend your
help to your fellow-exhibitors in this instance so that
your fellow-exhibitors may render you their assistance in
case you need it. Show solidarity ! Make Warners say why
they are refusing to co-operate with this paper in a mat-
ter in which they should co-operate.
54
HARRISON’S REPORTS
April 7, 1928
“We Americans” with George Sidney,
Patsy Ruth Miller, and George Lewis
( Universal Special, May 6; 8,700 ft.; 101 to 124 min.)
One thing that impresses one most is the naturalness of
the action, particularly in the first half. It is true to life,
for example, that the sons of immigrants that raise them-
selves above their environment by education and associa-
tions feel as a rule ashamed of their parents if they remained
behind. The father and the mother of this picture’s heroine,
though they had been in America for several years, had
not changed at all. In one scene the brother tried to smooth
things over so as to avoid a scene between his sister and
their father ; but the heroine immediately shut him up
when she asked him point blank if it was not true that
both were ashamed to bring their friends into the house
because of tire fact that their parents were not well man-
nered. That scene is as true to life as anything could be.
The action is made realistic by the excellent acting of Mr.
Sidney. The scenes that show him returning from work
tired and stretching himself upon the sofa and taking a
nap, snoring, could not have been presented more realisti-
cally. There is deep human interest all the way through.
There are some scenes in which it will be impossible for
the spectator to surpress his emotions. One such scene is
where the Jewish parents learn that their son has been
killed in the war. Another is where a young neighbor is
shown returning from the war with a leg missing. The love
affair between the Christian boy, son of wealthy parents,
society people, and the daughter of the Jewish hero is
well done and arouses sympathy. The scene where the
mother of the Christian boy tells the Hebrew that a mar-
riage between their children is unthinkable, the boy inter-
vening and saying to his mother that if it were not for his
sweetheart’s brother he would have never returned alive
from the war, is full of heart interest, too.
All, however, is not pathos ; there is considerable comedy
throughout the picture.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by Milton
Herbert Gropper and Mark Seigel. It has been directed
with skill by Edward Sloman, under the supervision of
Carl Laemmle, Jr. A1 Cohn wrote the scenario.
Note : In my answer to Mr. Carl Laemmle, President
of Universal Pictures Corporation, which was printed in
the issue of March 24, I said that if “We Americans’’
proved to be a good box office attraction I would recom-
mend to those who have bought it to extend the playing
time if I should find it a good picture. In my opinion, it
deserves extending the playing time. I believe that you
could make more money by playing it the extra time than
you would if you should play an ordinary picture.
Those who have bought it for one day can safely play it
two; those who have bought it for two days can safely
play three or even four ; these who have bought it for
three days can play it four, and even five if circumstances
warrant it.
“Stand and Deliver” — with Rod LaRocque,
Lupe Velez and Warner Oland
( Pothe-DeMille , Feb. 19; 5,423 ft.; 63 to 77 min.)
Just fair. It is a melodrama, revolving around an Eng-
lishman, formerly an aviator in the world war, who so
craves excitement that he goes to Greece and joins the
Greek army with the determination of exterminating a
band of outlaws that infested Greece. Most of the thrills
occur when he and a girl he was trying to protect are
captured by the brigands and taken to their lair ; and later
by his efforts to escape and also to rescue the girl from
the brigand leader, who coveted her. The lair of the
brigands is supposed to be a former monastery, perched
upon an unapproachable rocky mountain, entry and egress
to which could be had only by means of a basket, pulled
up or lowered by a windlass, worked by a donkey. Weak-
hearted picture-goers may feel dizzy when the “shots”
that were taken from above are shown. There is a love
affair, too, between the hero and the girl with whom he
had been made a captive. The girl had told the arch-
brigand that she was a wife to the hero. The hero re-
luctantly pretended to corroborate her statement so as to
save her from unpleasant consequences. The story ends
with the hero’s falling in love with the girl, marrying her
and taking her along with him to London, but not until he
had succeeded in having the brigands rounded up and
arrested by the Greek army.
The plot has been founded on a story by Sada Owen.
It has been directed by Donald Crisp. The title does not
mean anything.
Note: The picture is supposed to represent modern
Greece. But it is apparent that whoever is responsible' for
it, whether it is the author or the director, knows as much
about Greece as I do about the North Pole. To begin with,
the names given are not Greek. On top of this, the cos-
tumes employed are not Greek at all, let alone “modern”
Greek. It is a clear misrepresentation, making a nation
appear as a nest of brigands. If any number of your cus-
tomers are of Greek nationality you had better not show
it. Bring the matter before the board of arbitration, de-
manding that you be released from the obligation of play-
ing it. The producers would not dare make a picture
putting the Mexicans in a similar light; why should they
do it to the Greeks? They could have just as well used
a fictitious name and nothing would have been detracted
from the picture.
“Red Hair” with Clara Bow
(Paramount, March 10; 6,331 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
A good picture. It is nothing extraordinary, but it is of
the cheerful sort. It is about the flirtations of a girl, who
accepts presents from admirers, but who does not allow
their attentions to go beyond offering her presents. There
are many laughs all the way through, caused either by
the situations, by the subtitles, or by Miss Bow’s acting.
The love affair between Miss Bow and Lawrence Grant
is charming. Miss Bow wears pretty clothes and expen-
sive jewelry. This ought to prove attractive to women
customers.
The plot has been founded on a story by Elinor Glyn.
It revolves around a red hair young manicurist, who ac-
cepts presents from wealthy admirers. She accidentally
becomes acquainted with the hero. He falls in love with
ber and pursues her. The heroine, seeing no reason why
she should not marry him, allows him to pursue her. An
expensive fur coat gives away to the hero the fact that
she accepted presents from people that had no right to
make presents to her. These men happened to be the hero’s
three guardians. They have a conference and decide that
the heroine is not the proper person for a wife to their
protege. The heroine, however, exposes the three sanc-
timonious guardians. The hero, realizing that the hero-
ine’s relations with his wealthy guardians was platonic,
marries her.
There is “spice” in it, but not of the offensive sort.
“Matinee Idol” — with Bessie Love and
Johnnie Walker
(Columbia, March 14; 5,807 ft.; 67 to 83 min.)
A good comedy-drama. Most of the comedy is of the
burlesque sort. This occurs mostly in the scenes where
the hero, a famous actor, while out in the country, acci-
dentally finds himself employed by the heroine, who did
not know that he was a famous actor, to act a small part
in her traveling tent show. The crudeness with which
dramatic productions were given in the country places in
the old days has been faithfully reproduced; and it is a
source of many laughs. Laughs are caused also in the
performances given by the heroine’s troupe on Broadway,
New York City, where she went after being engaged by
a New York producer; the producer hoped to make the
New Yorkers laugh as they had never laughed before.
And he succeeded. There is some pathos toward the end
where it is shown that the heart of the heroine was broken
when she saw the audience laugh when in her opinion
they should feel sad ; she was unaware of the fact that she
had been “kidded” right along. The interest is maintained
fairly tight from the beginning to the end.
The plot has been founded on a story by Robert Lord
and Ernest Pagano. It has been directed by Frank Capra.
Lionel Belmore, Ernest Hilliard, David Mir and others
are in he cast.
April 7, 1928
“The Trail of ’98”
(Metro-Goldivyn-M ayer Supers pedal )
There are in this picture four things that make it stand
out : First, the snowslide ; secondly, the long line of gold-
seekers going over the Chilkoot Pass ; thirdly, the riding
of the rapids in frail improvised boats; and fourthly, the
human torch. .... , .
In the first, it seems as if millions of tons of snow were
set adrift by exploding tons, no doubt, of dynamite, lhe
awsome effect is increased by the mechanical device of
shifting the screen forward and of enlarging the picture,
making the spectator think that the snowslide occurred
near him. One does not know how it happens that the pic-
ture becomes of immense, size ; it all occurs so suoden > .
In the second, so great have been the numbers of people
employed in it that one is impressed deeply with the sight
of that human trail, all being impelled by a desire to find
g In the third, it seems as if those that rode the rapids did
so at the actual risk of their lives, for the riding of these
rapids is not faked, as is usually the case in dangerous un-
dertakings in pictures ; one can see fully the danger to the
lives of those in the frail boats. .
In the fourth, it is not known how a human being was
set afire without actually being burned. The feat is
decidedly new and makes one gasp for breath. 1 he villain
is supposed to have caught fire when the hero threw the
kerosene lamp on him, the kerosene pouring over him when
the lamp broke to pieces, the flame from the wick setting
fire to his clothes.
There is one scenes in it, however, that is very dramatic.
This is where the hero’s pal, after betraying him for gold,
abandons the hero to freeze in the wilderness in his tent,
with the blizzard blowing hard outside and with the cold
forty degrees below zero. T. his man, after abandoning the
hero to his fate, comes upon gold — almost tons of it. But
because he had no matches to make a fire with which to
warm himself up, his hands freeze and he is unable eyen
to drop the gold nuggets he held in his hands. He dies,
becoming the prey of the wolves. 1 his situation conveys
so great a moral that it is unlikely that it will escape being
noticed. Another dramatic scene is that which shows one
of two brothers returning with gold. These brothers had
always fought together, and shared the hardships. But
when the brother that had stayed behind acts as if he
had a right to half the gold his brother had brought with
him, the lucky brother repulses the unlucky brother. As
a result, the latter shoots and kills the former. While the
dead man is on the floor, the gold dust is seen pouring
over him. The moral this situation conveys vividly is
that gold often turns men into beasts.
The closing scenes show the hero, the heroine and their
two friends back in San Francisco, rich and happy. But
one of the friends is not satisfied to remain there, even
though he had made enough money to take care of himself
during the rest of his life. “It isn’t the gold you want,”
he observes, “it is the fun of getting it 1”
The story is by Robert W. Service. It has been directed
by Clarence Brown. Ralph Forbes makes a good hero ;
Dolores Del Rio a good heroine ; but Flarry Carey, vyho
takes the part of the villain, walks away with the acting
honors. Tully Marshall and Karl Dane contribute consid-
erable comedy. Emily Fitzroy, Russell Simpson, George
Cooper, Cesare Cravina and others are in the supporting
cast.
“The Sporting Age” — with Belle Bennett
( Columbia , March 2; 5,348 ft.; 62 to 76 min.)
It has been produced well, but Miss Bennett’s part is
anything but sympathetic ; though married, she is shown
as having fallen in love with another man, her husband’s
young secretary. She is not shown as having done any-
thing wrong; but one can hardly forgive a heroine for
violating society’s moral code, when no bona fide excuse
exists. Her only excuse is her husband’s indifference
towards her. But her husband is not shown as having
either become infatuated or fallen in love with another
woman. This lack of sympathy for the heroine lasts almost
to the very end. The young man arouses some sympathy
55
by his efforts to resist the heroine, out of the great esteem
in which he held his employer (hero) ; but such sympathy
is not strong enough ta impress any one deeply.
The story has been written by Armand Kalitz ; it has
been directed by Erie C. Kenton. Holmes Herbert takes
the part of the husband ; Carroll Nye, of the secretary
The heroine, because of her husband’s neglect of her,
falls in love with her husband’s secretary. The husband
loses his eyesight in a railroad wreck. The heroine hears
of it just as she was about to elope with the young man.
After that, she does not elope, and nurses her blind hus-
band. She continues to press his attentions on the young
man against his wishes. The hero regains his eyesight, but
instead of making it known to the heroine he proceeds to
regain her love first. He succeeds. The young secretary
marries the hero’s niece.
“Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come” with
Richard Barthlemess
( First National, April 8; 7,700 ft.; 89 to 110 min.)
A fairly appealing picture. Sympathy is aroused for
the young hero, but not much of it. There are also some
mild thrills. These are found towards the end, where the
heroine is shown going to the hero, an officer of the Union
forces, to inform him that the outlaws whose extermination
he was seeking were making ready to deliver a surprise
attack on him, the hero so distributing his forces as to
enable him successfully to repel the attack. There is
a defect in the construction of the plot in that the spectator
is at one time led to believe that the hero would marry
another girl.
The plot has been founded on a story by John Fox, Jr. ;
it has been directed by Alfred Santell well, from an
adaptation and continuity by Bess Meredith. It is a civil
war story, in the beginning presenting the hero as an orphan
boy, who had never known his parents. In time it came
to light that he was the descendant of a prominent Kentucky
family, his father having been disinherited by his grand-
father for having married without the grandfather’s con-
sent. The hero eventually establishes his identity and
marries the girl with whom he had been reared in the
Kentuckey mountains.
Molly O’Day takes the part of the heroine. Nelson
McDowell, Martha Mattox, Victor Potel, Claude Gilling-
water and others are in the cast.
Richard Barthelmess’ popularity and the attractiveness
of the title should help the picture draw.
“Good Morning Judge” with Reginald
Denny
(Univ. -Jewel, April 29; 5,645 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
A good picture. There isn’t much comedy in it but there
is suspense. Such suspense is created by the hero’s efforts
to hide his indentity from the heroine, to whom he was
about to be betrothed. The heroine had never met the hero ;
nor did the hero the heroine. The hero, however, had
accidentally learned who she was. The scenes that show
the hero’s sister calling on the heroine, a settlement worker,
are suspensive : the heroine had assigned the hero to the
task of showing the building to his own sister. He had
managed to escape detection by turning his face around so
that she would not see him, until finally he had to make
his presence known to her. But he managed to prevent her
from exclaiming and making the fact known that he was her
brother. The scenes in the hero’s home where the heroine
had taken her reformed criminals, also are suspensive.
The hero had detected them in the act of concealing the
jewels they had stolen from the guests while dancing with
them. The heroine’s suspicions that it was the hero who
had stolen the jewels adds to the suspense. The story ends,
of course, with the hero’s identity made known to the
heroine and with their marriage.
The story has been written by Harry O Hoyt. The
picture has been directed by William A. Seiter well.
Dorothy Gulliver takes the part of the hero’s sister ; Mary
Nolan that of the heroine. Otis Harlan, William David-
son, William Worthington, Bull Montana, Charles Cole-
man, Sailor Sharkey and others are in the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
56
HARRISON’S eSPuStST "
QUESTIONS IN ARBITRATION
In October, 1926, an exhibitor signed a contract for
one picture to be played February 16, 17, 18, and 19, 1927.
When the contract came back approved, he did not no-
tice that there was a Rider attached to it stipulating that
in case the picture was not released up to those dates the
exhibitor be obligated to give other dates.
The question was put up to me to say whether the con-
tract was valid or not.
This is the opinion I rendered :
Inasmuch as the Rider was not initialed, not only is it
not binding but it renders the contract null and void, be-
cause it had been altered by the one party without the
consent of the other party. Without the rider, the con-
tract would have become null and void on February 16,
1927, because of the distributor’s failure to deliver the
picture on that date on account of the fact that the pic-
ture had not yet been made.
It has been the custom among many exhibitor-arbi-
trators in such cases to vote in favor of the distributor
on die ground diat the exhibitor ought to have compared
the approved contract with his memorandum copy when
he received the approved contract. Such arbitrators at-
tribute to the exhibitor, as a rule, ulterior motives. They
will not believe the exhibitor when he asserts that he
did not notice that the contract had been altered; they
say that he did notice the change but, having in mind to
“gyp” die exchange, refrained from entering a protest. Con-
sequendy he ought to, according to their way of tliink-
ing, be bound by the contract, even as altered.
I have had a vehement argument with two exhibitor-
arbitrators of this zone, friends of mine, on this point,
and won them over. My contention is that no arbitrator
has the right to imply that such an exhibitor had dis-
honest intentions, unless he, the arbitrator, has a proof of
it. And no proof can be offered to justify the arbitrator’s
stand against die exhibitor when the exhibitor says, “I
did not notice that die approved contract came back
altered.” No one can say that it is impossible for an ex-
hibitor to overlook to compare the two copies. You know
that such a thing is possible.
But let us, for our purpose, assume that the exhibitor
noticed that the approved contract had been altered and
that he failed to protest, having in mind to take advan-
tage of the distributor ; has such an arbitrator the right
to vote against the exhibitor ?
In order to answer this question intelligently, it is nec-
essary for us to examine the acts of both parties for the
purpose of finding out whose act was the most offensive :
The exhibitor, in failing to protest when he noticed
that the approved contract had reached him altered, his
desire being to take advantage of the distributor, com-
mits a dishonest act ; but he breaks no law. On the other
hand the distributor, in altering the contract without the
consent of the exhibitor, not only commits a dishonest act,
but also breaks the law. Thus we see that the offense of
the distributor is far greater than the offense of the ex-
hibitor. Exhibitor arbitrators should, therefore, vote in
favor of the exhibitor in all such cases.
Vote for the exchange when the exhibitor is clearly
wrong! Vote for the exhibitor always when he is right!
Vote for the exhibitor when both, distributor and ex-
hibitor, are wrong, particularly when the distributor is
doubly wrong, for by so doing you discourage sharp
practices.
THE T. O. C. C. AND THE
NEW CONTRACT
I have been informed reliably that Theatre Owners’
Chamber of Commerce, of New York City, is planning
to throw arbitration overboard, resorting to the courts if
necessary, unless the producer-distributors consent to sub-
mit any of their contract and arbitration procedure
reforms that the contract committee received from them
but ignored, to a seventh arbitrator, to be appointed by the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,
in accordance with an agreement reached at the Trade
Practice Conference.
It is a well-known fact that not a single question was
submitted to a seventh arbitrator.
I hope that the New York exhibitors are not full of
wind this time. Let us hope that this threat is not a
mere gesture, such as we have been accustomed to seeing
Mr. Hays make, and that they will carry it out. A1
Steffes, president of the exhibitors of the northwest, is
April?, 1928
doing things in Minneapolis; recently he won a case for
an exhibitor before the arbitration board. Warner Bros,
did not like the decision and went to court to enjoin the
board from applying the penalties agreed upon in the
arbitration rules. The court issued the injunction. This
naturally prevented the board from either refusing to hear
Warner Bros, cases or to demand of the film board that
the penalties be applied. The exhibitor-arbitrators, how-
ever, decided to hear no cases at all, until the court had
rendered a decision as to whether the injunction should
be made permanent or not. The producer-distributors
asked the Mayor of Minneapolis as well as the President
of the Chamber of Commerce to appoint the exhibitor-
arbitrators, but these officials refused to become embroiled
in the controversy. The result was that the calendar was
glutted with cases, and no one was to hear them.
That is how the boys of the Northwest have been doing
— they have been acting, instead of merely talking. Let
Theatre Owners’ Chamber of Commerce, too, act an cut
out talking.
ICE, ICE EVERYWHERE!
The reception Mr. Will Hays received in Paris, France,
where he went to have a talk with the French statesmen
in an effort to have the restrictions put on American films
moderated, if not lifted, was as warm and cheerful as
was the reception that the hero, the heroine, and other
characters in “The Trail of ’98” received when after six
months of gruelling hardships they reached Dawson,
Klondike. The last stage of their journey to Dawson
was riding the rapids, in which teat they but lost their
lives. When they reached the city they were told that
every foot of land had been staked and that what they
went through in their six months’ struggle to reach their
goal was a child’s play as compared to what they would
go through in the following six months to make a living.
There was ice ahead of them; there was ice back of
them ; and there was ice above them — there was ice
everywhere.
That has been the reception of Mr. Hays in Paris —
ice, ice everywhere.
The fact that Mr. Hays had sent his advance agent,
C. C. Pettijohn, three weeks ahead, so that he might
build some fires and warm up the place did not seem to
make any difference; when Hays arrived, he found that
there was ice everywhere, just the same.
Mr. Hays’ departure from New York was very warm,
indeed; Adolph Zukor and the other prominent members
of the motion picture industry, members of the Hays’
organization, were on the boat to see him off. It was
well staged. But to many that know the inside of things
it seemed like the send-off President Harding gave to
Mr. Hays when he went to the President and told him
that he got a job in the moving picture industry and
would like to leave the Cabinet. “Here’s your hatl
W hat’s your hurry !” President Harding is quoted as hav-
ing said to him.
The trouble with Mr. Hays is just what this paper has
said right along — he has not yet realized that he is in a
business and not in politics. To send a “fixer” ahead to
prepare a reception in Paris was very poor taste, indeed.
Mr. Hays ought to have known that when he deals with
French statesmen he does not deal with exhibitors ; he
can “kid” exhibitors but he cannot “kid” men like Her-
riot, Poincare, Briand and other brainy men of France.
At best the Frenchmen would say to themselves what the
Raleigh, North Carolina, editor said when it was an-
nounced that “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” was to be shown in
that city: “We have no complaint to make about the
program of a ‘Tom Show’ in a Raleigh moving picture
show.” The French men must have said: “We have no
complaint to make at the presence of Will H. Hays in
Paris. We’ll be glad to show him the sights.”
Mr. Hays’ mission in France will undoubtedly be a
failure. It doesn’t take much intelligence to arrive to
such a conclusion ; a child could have foreseen it, for he
lias gone there ten years too late. Besides, he has adopted
political methods to deal with a purely business proposi-
tion. He has made a failure of all such attempts in the
United States and there is no reason why we would as-
sume that he will make a success of them in France.
What a cold city Paris must have appeared to Mr.
Hays ! What an ice box it must have proved to him.
And how his heart must have frozen when he saw
ice everywhere. I venture to say that the Eiffel Tower is
the biggest icicle he has ever seen.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United Statee $10.09
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.60
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.60
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
TeL : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, APRIL 14, 1928
No. 15
“THE ARGUMENT
“C. C. Pettijohn, chief counsel for the Hays organiza-
tion, has been my only source of information regarding
the merits of the Brookhart Bill to put a stop to block-
booking. I have read all his arguments in opposition
to it, and those of no one else in support of it, and have
satisfied myself that the bill should pass. Block-book-
ing is economically unsound, and as practiced by the
motion picture industry is ethically unsound. I assume
that Pettijohn, the paid protester, has assembled all
the protests that can be made, but his arguments could
not impress an open mind. He touches only the surface
of the question, and contradicts himself when dealing
with it. He invites the public to devise a better selling
system and present it to his organization. The argu-
ment of a burglar that he can think of no easier way to
make money may be sound enough as an argument, but
scarcely will be accepted as an excuse for burglary. . .”
— Welford Beaton in his FILM MERCURY, Holly-
wood.
* * *
The pet argument of the producers in their effort to
induce the exhibitors to oppose the Brookhart Bill is
that in its present form the Bill will open the way to
non-theatrical competition. The producers talk as if
the way to non-theatrical competition is closed now.
As things now stand, the producer that will refuse to
sell film to a non-theatrical place runs the risk of going
to jail.
But that is not the important point: the producer-
distributors, who shed tears before you because the
bill “will open the door wide open to non-theatricals,”
not only do not discourage the selling of film to non-
theatrical places, but encourage it, even though they ap-
pear as if discouraging it. There are hundreds of non-
theatrical places that get film ahead of the regular
theatres today, and the exhibitors’ protests are impotent
to change things. In Connecticut, the exhibitors are up
in arms because of such a situation. There is, in fact,
hardly a state in the union but has some grievance
against the producer-distributors for renting film to
non-theatrical places to the detriment of the business
of regular theatres.
But here is another condition that makes the passing
of the Brookhart Bill an absolute necessity, no matter
whether the danger from non-theatricals is real or not:
In Michigan, the Butterfield Circuit is demanding a
thirty-day protection, within a radius of twenty-five
miles, over all other exhibitors. This means that over
350 theatres in the state of Michigan will not be able to
use the film that the Butterfield Circuit uses — and it
uses practically all — until thirty days shall have
elapsed from the time that circuit’s theatres have used
it. Remember that Famous Players-Lasky has a
twenty-five per cent, interest in that circuit. This means
that the Paramount and Publix resources are back of
Colonel Butterfield. Consequently, the demand will be
acceded to by all the distributors.
Now, as I said last week, Sam Katz has demanded
and received long protection from all distributors
within a radius in some cases as high as forty miles in
the towns wherein Publix Theatres are situated. The
demand from the Butterfield Circuit seems to be a well-
laid plan on the part of Famous Players-Lasky to im-
pose a similar condition in every zone in the United
States. Where they have no theatres, the benefit will
go to the other producer-distributor-exhibitors in re-
turn for their support of the Publix stand.
Let us now see what will happen if this condition
should become general:
OF A BURGLAR”
Independent exhibitors will not be able to use a film
until at least thirty days have elapsed from the time the
circuit s theatre has used it. Now, in this territory, the
Loew interests demand only a seven day protection
over their competitors. And yet there are times when
the independent exliibitors, competitors to a Loew Thea-
tre, are unable to show the film that the Loew theatre
has shown until thirty days and often several months,
have elapsed, for the reason that, in some cases, the
Loew interests demand that no independent exhibitor
shall use the film until all the Loew theatres in the
territory have played it; in some other cases they hold
the film back for so long that it has whiskers when the
independent exhibitor gets it. You may realize, there-
fore, what a weapon this protection is becoming in the
hands of the big cricuits; they can put out of business
any independent exhibitors merely by withholding the
film for an unreasonable length of time, so that when
it at last reaches them it has lost all its publicity value.
As they succeed in getting protection, their demands
will increase until the time will come when they will
want a six-month protection or longer.
The withholding of film for an unreasonable length
of time has also one other “kick-back”; the producers
that are not in the ring do not get their money back
quickly enough to go on with the production of their
other pictures. The result is that they either have to
get along as best as they can with whatever funds they
have on hand, in which case the result is poor pictures,
or they go to the bank and borrow money to keep on
producing, in which case the result is excessive cost of
production, for every one knows that the banks get such
producer’s shirt for whatever money they lend him.
The only remedy from all this is the Brookhart Bill.
Have your choice: either the Brookhart Bill, with all
its faults, if it has any, but an ability on your part to
get film to run your theatre with, or no Brookhart Bill
and the present situation continued, aggravated by the
well laid plan of the producer-distributors to put you
out of business by means of their demands for “pro-
lection,” and of other means. But remember that, if
the Brookhart Bill has flaws in it, Senator Brookhart
is willing to so amend his bill that you, the independent
exhibitor, will be protected. He wants to help you, not
to hurt you.
Do not pay any attention to the arguments that are
put out by the producers and distributors. They don’t
want the Brookhart Bill to become a law, because they
know that under it they will crack; they will not be
able to amass the millions they are now amassing so
easily. At present the moving picture industry is the
property of two or three concerns; it is the cow these
three now milk exclusively; they keep the cream and
pass the skimmed milk to you and to the public. The
Brookhart Bill will let you, too, have some of the cream.
Have your choice 1
NO FURTHER PROTESTS TO WARNER
BROS. NECESSARY
Warner Bros, have now supplied me with the release
numbers of their features. So you may now consider the
matter closed.
Before disposing of this matter entirely, however, I want
to thank all those who sent a protest, particularly the Con-
necticut M. P. T. O., for the wonderful resolution they
passed at their meeting in support of my stand. The won-
derful spirit you have shown encourages this paper to carry
on more determined than ever.
58
“The Big Noise”- — with Chester Conklin
( First National, March 25 ; 7,400 ft.; 86 to 105 min.)
Humorous 1 it is the story oi a New York subway guard
who gets slightly injured when he is pushed over by the
••sardines,” as the subway travelers are called, and falls
on the tracks, the train just touching him when it was
brought to a stop. ...
What follows is a travesty, not only on the sensational
newspapers, but also on some candidate for Mayor of New
Y’ork City, who, in connection with a tabloid, exploits the
accident to his political advantage. The candidate for
mayor and the owner of the tabloid make a great hero out
of the subway guard, getting great publicity for themselves.
Instead of allowing the guard to be treated at the subway
company’s hospital, they have him removed to one oi trie
best hospitals in the city, supply him with nurses, forbid
even his wife to talk to him while in the hospital, and in
fact so magnify his accident that the people ot New York
City are shown showering him with honors.
The candidate is elected and he immediately forgets all
about the great national hero. Heartbroken, the hero turns
to the subway company, offering to accept the ten thousand
dollar check for a settlement, which he refused to accept
before the elections when the company, who feared that
candidate, offered him in an effort to burst up the publicity
bubble and prevent his election, but is turned down flatly.
But his daughter saves the day when the man she married
turns out to be the son of a great and wealthy dairy man.
The plot has been founded on an original story by Ben
Hecht. It has been directed skillfully by Alan Dwan, trom
an adaptation by Tom Gerathy. Alice White, Bodil Ros-
ing, San Hardy, Jack Eagan, Ned Sparks, David Torrence
and others are in the cast.
It should please everywhere.
“Canyon of Adventure” — with
Ken Maynard
( First National, April 22; 5,800 ft.; 67 to 83 min.)
It seems as if a necessity to review the pictures in which
Ken Maynard appears hardly exists. Every one seems to
turn out as good as the others. They are sure Western
entertainments.
Mr. Maynard again takes the part of a gallant young
man, who undertakes to protect the heroine’s interests from
scheming villains. This time he is a Government repre-
sentative, sent to the heroine’s father, a noble Spaniard, in
an effort to induce him to register his land before the date
set by the Government of the newly acquired territory, Cali-
fornia. During his call, he sensed that the villain coveted
the old Spaniard’s land, and his daughter, and that he was
advising him badly so that the land and the girl might even-
tually fall in his hands. But the hero, who saw through the
scheme, came to the rescue — he saved the land and won
the heroine as a wife.
The scenes that show the hero as having fallen in the
hands of highwaymen are suspensive. His ability to outwit
them by making them believe that he was a famous outlaw,
eventually using them to help him defeat the villain’s plans,
interests the spectator.
The plot has been founded on a story by Marion Jackson ;
it has been directed well by Albert Rogell. Virginia
Browne Faire takes the part of the heroine. Eric Mavne,
Theodore Lorch, Tyron Brereton and others are in the cast.
“The Skyscraper” — with William Boyd,
Sue Carol, Alan Hale and
Alberta Vaughn
( Pathe-DcMille , April 8; 7,040 ft.; 81 to 100 min.)
This is a combination of “Safety First” and “Hold Your
Breath.” It is a picture that has been photographed on
the dizzy heights of a new-constructed skyscraper. The
trade has not seen another picture so produced. The scenes
that show a young boy, impersonated by Wesley Barry,
swinging from one place of the skyscraper to another by
means of a rope, perhaps 200 feet above the ground, give
one the chills ; one is made to feel as if the boy would lose
his hold and be dashed to pieces on the pavement below.
And that is exactly what happens. Only his actual fall is
not shown ; it is only implied. The most pathetic situation,
however, is that which shows the heroine calling on the
hero and the hero “not even getting up to greet her,” as she
put it when later she met the heroe’s chum. The hero had
been crippled as a result of a fall, and was doing all he could
to make the heroine cease loving him. because he thought
that he would remain a cripple all his life, and he did not
want her to marry a cripple. Pathetic is also the scene
April 14, 1928
where the heroine becomes aware of the fact that he was
a cripple. I he picture is interspersed with comedy, caused
chiefly by Allan Hale, who takes the part oi a Bwede. He
and tne flero, chums, are shown as inenuiy enemies, ngm-
ing ail the time. The scenes that show Allan Hale pur-
posely taunting the hero so that he might awaken in him a
desire to get well are full of heart appeal; he risked losing
the hero’s friendship, but he would not give up taunting
him.
The plot has been adapted by Elliott Clawson and Tay
Garnett, from the story by Dudley Murphy. It has been
directed with skill by Howard Higgin.
YTou will not make a nnstaxe n you should advertise this
picture to your public as a special.
“Speedy” — with Harold Lloyd
( Paramount , April 7; 7,960 ft.; 92 to 113 min.)
It is hard to chose between “Speedy” and “The Fresh-
man” as to which is the better. But one can settle the
argument by deciding that "Speedy” is as funny as “The
Jr reshman.”
“Speedy” is not as high-class a comedy as was “The
Freshman,” but it is just what its title indicates — speedy.
Its action is dizzily fast from the beginning to the end.
And there are thrills almost in every foot of the action.
These thrills are caused chiefly by Mr. Lloyd’s running a
delapidated car at top speed through the crowded thorougn-
fares of a big city, supposedly New York. This happens
twice — when he is a taxicab driver and when he makes an
effort to save his sweetheart’s father’s horse car which had
been stolen by some thugs, who were paid by a railroad
magnate to steal it; the magnate wanted to electrify that
road but was unable to do so because the heroine s iatner
would not sell him his franchise ; and the only way whereby
the railroad man could annul his franchise was to cause the
interruption of the service for twenty-four hours.
I he iove affair between Harold Lloyd and Ann Christy is
charming.
1 he picture was directed by Ted Wilde, from a story that
was the result of the collaboration of many writers.
“The Devil’s Skipper” — with Belle Bennett
and Montagu Love
( Tiffany-Stahl , Feb. 1 ; 5,510 ft.; 64 to 78 min.)
A powerful story of the sea. It is, in fact, as powerful
as any of the Jack London stories that have been filmed.
It presents the heroine as a pirate skipper’s captain who
roamed the seas and carried on a slave traffic. She is
eventually shown touching New Orleans, and sending for
a wealthy trafficer in negro slaves. When the slave mer-
chant and his daughter with her fiance board the ship, the
heroine gives orders to weigh anchor and to set sail. The
merchant does not understand it all. It is then that the
heroine reveals her identity to him : she tells him that she
is his wife, whom he had kidnapped and given to a captain
of a slave ship to be handled as the captain saw fit.
The entreaties of her husband and his assurances that it
was not he that had given her to the captain of the slave
ship but his father, who had not approved of the secret
marriage, are impotent to make the heroine believe him.
In revenge, she orders that his daughter be deliv-
ered to the crew of her ship, to be handled the way that
the man who would win her in a fair fight with the other
members of the crew saw fit. The slave merchant tells the
heroine that the girl is their own daughter. The heroine
is horrified when she hears of it; she rushes and snatches
her daughter from the hands of the man that had won her
in a fair fight. The man stabs the heroine in the back. She
dies, begging her husband never to let their daughter know
who she was.
The last scenes, in which Belle Bennett is is shown beg-
ging her second in command (who was the one that had
rescued her from the hands of the slave crew when years
before she had been given to them), to let her see her
daughter and holds her in her arms, and actually holding
her in her arms and pressing her against her breast, are
pathetic in the extreme. Pathetic are also the scenes of
her last moments. Her aid holds Her in his arms and sheds
tears ; he loved her with all his heart
The picture has been directed Dy that reliable old di-
rector, John G. Adolphi, from a screen adaptation by John
Francis Natterford. Belle Bennett does well as the skipper,
and Montagu Love as her second in command. Cullen
Landis, Mary McAllister, and Gino Corrado are in the cast.
It should take well among customers with literary taste
and where strong melodramas are liked.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
■Mf
HARRISON'S &EPORTS
April 14, 1928
“Their Hour” — with Dorothy Sebastian,
June Marlowe and John Harron
{Tiff any -titahi, March 1 ; 5,6o2 ft.; 65 to'8U min.)
Not a bad little picture. On the contrary, there is deep
numan interest in some oi the situations, and the attention
is heid pretty tignt irom the Deginmng to the end.
it is a sex piay, in wmch the nero is shown as erring , he
was engageu io uie Heroine, hut her weaitny cousin sets her
eye on nun and is determined to have some "iun with him.
bne invites hero and heroine to her lather's home in the
country, she taxes the hero on an aeropiane ride and lands
lar away by pretending that something had gone wrong
with the motor, they are thus compelled to spend a night
in the nearest inn. i he heroine s cousin so tempts the
hero that he is unable to restrain himselt. in the morning
he leeis gunty and decides to tell the heroine that it would
now be umair lor him to marry her, and to ask her to re-
lease him. Alter hesitating tor several hours, writing and
tearing many letters beiore being able to write one that
suited him the most, he posts the letter. But how shocked
he is when a man appears in the morning and the girl
introduces him to the nero as her tuture nusDandl ihe
hero is Dreathiess. He takes a car and rushes to the post
office to take back his letter to the heroine, but finds that
the letter had already gone. He returns to the city, calls
on the heroine, kneeis heiore her and begs iorgiveness.
The picture is hardiy lor young Doys and gins, nut it is
not unsuitable tor aduits, unless uiey are strictly religious.
T he plot has been iounded on a story by AiueA Bneiby
Levino. it has been directed by A1 Raboch. Holmes Herb-
ert, John Koche, Huntly Gordon, John Stepling, and Myrtle
Stedman also are in the cast.
“Partners in Crime” — with Wallace Beery
and Raymond Hatton
( Paramount , March 17 ; 6,600 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
Not since “We’re in the Navy Now” has Paramount pro-
duced so good a comedy as it has in “Partners in Crime.”
Although the laughs in this picture are not so numerous
as they were in “We’re in the Navy Now,” yet “Partners
in Crime" has this advantage, that it combines thrills and
laughs.
Mr. Beery is this time presented as a stupid detective,
and Mr. Hatton as a newspaper reporter. But Mr. Hatton
was unfortunate enough to have a double, in the person of
“Knife” Regan, a famous underworld murderer, a fact he
was unaware of. You can imagine, then, the complications
that arise from this mixture of identities. There are times
when the famous Killer is taken tor the reporter, and vice
versa. Wallace Beery, too, is shown confused at times.
Often he talks to the Killer thinking that it was his friend
the reporter he was conversing with. 1 he reporter, too, is
led to believe that his friend was not really a detective but
a second-story man, masquarading as a detective.
The greatest suspense is caused in the situations where
Mr. Beery is shown as having been engaged by ttie ie<iuer
of a rival gang, who was mortally afraid of the Killer. Mr.
Beery had “socked” the Killer in the jaw and ieUed him,
thinking that it was his friend. For this, the leader of the
rival gangsters hires him as a bodyguard.
There is a situation in this picture that is comedy pro-
voking because it is original. Its originality comes from
the fact that tear bombs have been used in pictures for the
first time. The two heroes are shown, while in the lair of
the crooks, coming upon some innocent looking paper boxes.
They use them as missiles. When the boxes break they
create smoke and the characters are soon in tears and
powerless to offer resistance. This enables the authorities
to round up all the criminals. It is quite laughable to see
the characters weeping while talking.
The picture has been directed by Frank Strayer. Mary
Brian does well as the heroine. William Powell, Jack
Luden, Arthur Housman, Bruce Gordon, Joseph W. Girard
and others are in the cast.
“The Road to Ruin” — with Helen Foster
( Regional ; 5,167 ft.; 60 to 73 min.)
This picture deals with the delinquency of youth. But
never has a theme of this sort been handled so delicately,
and made so convincing as has this one. There are some
situations in it that should make it difficult for anybody
to suppress his emotions. What makes it convincing, in
particular, is the fine acting of Helen Foster and of all the
other characters, thanks to Director Parker’s skillful han-
dling of them. The situation where the young heroine’s
father, a tired businessman, of the kind that seek diversion
away irom home hnds his ciaugnter (, heroine; m a house
Or prostitution* and Ts' hornTied";”the situation later wnere
the young heroine, alter the lather had taken her home,_is
shown dying — ah this and more will wring the heart of any
human being.
ihe sioiy shows an innocent young girl going bad, be-
cause ot her mother’s over-confidence in her and her father’s
inditterence as to the sort oi young men and young girls
she was associating with. To make matters worse, the sec-
ond friend sue had made takes her to a lake doctor, who
periorms a criminal operation. Though she is not feeling
well, she is induced by her young friend to go for his sake
to a certain party, where they were short of a girl. To her
horror, the man that was to call on her turns out to be her
own lather. He takes her home and sends for the doctor.
But the doctor tells the parents that there is no hope for her
because of the clumsy operation and of other complications,
and that she had but a few hours to live. She dies in the
arms ol her father
This picture should do more good than a million preach-
ments. it is a picture that every young man and young girl
between the ages of 16 and 2i should see. But it cannot
be handled in the ordinary way ; either it must be shown in
theatres where special pictures are shown, or the theatre
owner must make it plain to his customers what the nature
ot the theme is. It would be much better, in fact, if a time
were set aside when young girls could see the picture with-
out the presence of young men and to young men at a time
when no young girls were present. It could be shown to
mixed adult spectators.
“The Blue Danube” — with Leatrice Joy,
Joseph Schildkraut and Nils Asther
{Pathe-DeMille, March 11 ; 6,589 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
An excellent drama 1 The story is very dramatic, and
Mr. Schildkraut is given an opportunity to do some wonder-
ful acting. There are some deeply pathetic situations in it,
that which shows the hero returning from the war and
finding the girl he loved married to a hunchback being par-
ticularly so. The interest is kept tense all the way through.
Nils Asther, as the titled young Austrian, who loved the
heroine, a commoner, does excellent work in the hero’s
part. He seems to be a newcomer but shows promise.
Leatrice Joy does not fill the part of the heroine so well.
The story is supposed to unfold in Austria just before
the great world war days, and shows a young Baron (hei o ) ,
officer in the Austrian Army, fall in love with the heroine,
daughter of a tavern keeper. She is loved passionately by a
hunchback, who kept his love to himself. On the eve ot their
marriage the hero is ordered to join his colors and to leave
for the front immediately. He sends word to the heroine
by the hunchback to meet her at the station so that they
might be married by the army chaplain. But the hunch-
back withholds the message from the heroine. The hero is
captured by the Russians and is sent to Siberia. His father,
who had become impoverished and who aspired to see his
son marry a wealthy brewer’s daughter, forges his son’s
name on u. leUer, leading the heroine to believe that the
hero no longer cared for her, by asking his father to pay
her a certain sum of money as a dowry, so that she might
marry some one else. The forger succeeds; the heroine,
incensed, marries the hunchback, thus hoping to spite the
hero. The hero returns and finds the heroine married.
When he tells her of the deception, she is heartbroken. The
hunchback commits suicide. Hero and heroine are at last
united.
It is an original screen story by John Farrow. It was
adapted by Harry Carr and Paul Sloane, and has been di-
rected by Mr. Sloane with skill.
Its drawing power will most likely be governed by the
drawing power of Leatrice Joy.
ANSWERS FROM M. P. T. O.
PRESIDENTS
Mr. M. A. Lightman, President of M. P. T. O., of
Arkansas, has written me a fine letter in answer to mine,
which was printed in the issue of HARRISON’S RE-
PORTS on March 24. He is holding a convention on April
16, in which the Brookhart Bill will be discussed.
Mr. Charles Picquet, President of M. P. T. O., of North
Carolina, has not yet replied.
W. Z. Spearman, President of M. P. T. O., of Oklahoma,
has replied very angrily with a scurrilous letter. But I feel
sure that after reflection he will apologize for whatever he
has said.
60
HARRISONS -REPORTS^ — — ApfiFH, 1928
SAFE AGAIN! ' -
Now that Charlie Pettijohn is back in the United States,
the motion picture industry is safe again. It spent sleep-
less jiights.dnring_his .absence, because of the fact that the-
other twin was "in Europe at the same time, and no .one
would be here to prevent a calamity should a calamity
visit it.
The Kangaroo Courts will continue to function as before,
the Monkey Trials will be held weekly, thanks to the
safe return of Charlie, their supervisor. We hope that
the producers will never again send the Siamese twins out
of the United States at the same time, for it is unwise for
them to leave the industry unprotected.
Charlie spells his name C. C. Pettijohn. We used to
think that the two C’s meant Confidence and Cooperation ;
but since the last general meeting oi the theatre Uwners
Chamber ot Commerce, in which meeting the brookliart bill
was discussed, we tound that the middle C stands tor Cash ;
he said that the reason why he left you, much to your
regret, I assume, and went to the producers, was the fact
that you would not pay him what he deserved and the
producers have paid him. So his name now is, not Confi-
dence and Co-operation Pettijohn, but Confidence and
Cash Pettijohn, with the accent on “Cash.”
Charlie goes where the money is. And where it isn’t, he
isn’t. In the old days he took an interest in the Indiana
exhibitor organization matters. But because there wasn't
any money in exhibitors, he used to “bust up” the meetings.
He went to Chicago, representing the “busted” Indiana
exhibitors’ organization, where Lee Ochs ran and was
elected President of the national exhibitors’ organization
for the last time. That was back in 1919, if my memory
serves me right. But Charlie wrecked that convention, be-
cause there was no money there ; he was the leader ot the
faction that bolted.
Immediately afterwards he started the Affiliated Exhibi-
tors for the purpose of buying film for the members co-
operatively. When things did not look so rosy, he and a
Mr. Brink, from Grand Rapids, Michigan, sold the bankers
the idea that much money could be made if they would
consent to amalgamating Mutual and Affiliated Exhibitors.
The Bankers consented and The Exhibitors Mutual Film
Company was born.
But the new company did not take long to “bust up”;
Pettijohn was an officer of it and a leading spirit, and it
had to go the way of the others.
Charlie then joined hands with Looie Jay Selznick.
While with Selznick, he startled the scientific world by
proving that one plus one do not make two but three, for
he told them that one was Selznick, two was the ex-
hibitors, and three was National Pictures Theatres.
By means of that organization Looie and Charlie were
to save the exhibitor.
But National Picture Theatres went the way of the others,
for Charlie, the Undertaker, was there. It would not do
to spoil the series of his successful failures.
Immediately after the burial of National Pictures Thea-
tres, Looie and Cash put their heads together and The
American Fiscal Corporation was born, with Charlie Cash
as its founder and President.
The object of The American Fiscal Corporation was to
manufacture and sell wall paper in the form of Selznick
Stock, and with the proceeds, after fifty per cent, was kept
by Charlie Cash, Selznick was to set the producing world
afire. The two were to earn seas of radium for the stock-
holders. Unfortunately, Charlie Cash was there, and
that, too, had to go the way of the others.
Finally he discovered Will H. Hays, of Indiana, and sold
him to the producers.
Will and Charlie have been working so closely ever since
that the two have become the Siamese Twins. One can
not do without the other. Charlie Cash is, in fact, the Eye
of Will, for Charlie Cash is supposed to know all about
exhibitors. Unfortunately, however, Charlie Cash re-
ceives only $34,000 a year. You may think that he is not
worth $34 a week, but he is worth more than that to the
industry.
Let us pray and give thanks that Charlie has been spared
to return to these shores to the everlasting glory of the
moving picture business.
KEEP THIS FOR FUTURE USE
When the distributors of so-called big pictures insist that
you must charge a fifty cents minimum admission price to
their pictures, just ask them why they should discriminate
against you? I have before me a circular put out by the
Carolina Theatre, of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, in which
'if is stated that “Sadie Thompson,” “Seventh Heaven,”
“The Enemy,” “Sorrell and Son,” “The Tempest,” “Ra-
mona,” “The Circus,” “Speedy,” “What Price Glory,”
“Love,” “Gaueljor”- "-The- Tempest,’’ atid other big pictures,
have been or will be shown in that theatre- at thirty cents.
“All the above pictures are showing in the Northern Cit-
ies from fifty cents to two dollars," says the circular. “The
Carolina Theatre which will be one of the finest theatres in
the South to show the above pictures, will only charge
thirty cents,”
The Carolina Theatre is a Publix house.
Why do they charge thirty cents ?
Simple enough 1 There is opposition in that town ; and
where there is opposition they lower the admission price
until they put the independent exhibitor out of business.
When they accomplish this ; when they remove all opposi-
tion. they put up the price, usually to fifty cents.
That is what the circuits do ; they “soak” the poor public.
In connection with chain theatre operation, let me repro-
duce herewith part of an article printed in the April 5th is-
sue of News and Observer, of Raleigh, North Carolina :
Scotland Neck, N. C., April 4. — “Chain organizations in any
business constitute virtual monopolies, and today they are drawing
the life blood out of every community in which they operate.”
asserts R. J. Madry prominent business man of Halifax County,
in an open letter which he wrote Senator F. M. Simmons today.
Declaring that the chain grocery stores, chain motion picture
houses, chain drug stores, chain department stores, and other
chain systems are not only a menace, but are “almost entirely
responsible for the present great depression in business every-
where,” Mr. Madry warns that “unless something is done by
Congress or the Federal Trade Commission, to remedy the situ-
ation, the whole country will be thrown into bankrupcy and
revolution.
“These chain systems constitute the vilest form of monopoly
the country has ever faced.” the Scotland Neck man, who is a
wholesale grocer, motion picture house owner, and farmer, wrote
Senator Simmons. “Authoritative statistics show that in the
grocery business the chain system have already eliminated 90,000
independents and are moving on rapidly. They are crushing the
life of the independent business man of every community; you
know what will happen when they have eliminated enough to
stifle competition. They will fix prices where they want them,
and those prices won’t be low.
“In 1900 there were only 25 chain drug stores in this country.
Today there arc about 5,700, and they do 20 per cent of all the
drug business in the country. The Bureau of Census reports that
four of the grocery chains jumped 209 per cent in volume of
business between 1919 and 1926.”
Mr. Madry describes the chain system as “leeches drawing the
life blood out of every community in which they operate. Their
system is a continuous drawing out process,” he declares. “All
goes out and nothing comes in to take its place. These stores
place money in the local banks one day and the next day it is
drawn out by the big moguls of their organization who sit in Wall
Street. . . .
STATEMENT OF THE OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT CIR
CULATION, ETC., REQUIRED BY THE ACT OF CON-
GRESS OF AUGUST 24, 1912, OF HARRISON'S REPORTS
published Weekly at New York, N. Y., for April 1, 1928
County of New York.
State of New York.
Before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State and County
aforesaid, personally appeared P. S. Harrison, who, having been
duly 'sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the
Editor and Publisher of the HARRISON'S REPORTS and that
the following is, to the best of his knowledge and belief, a true
statement of the ownership, management, etc., of the aforesaid
publication for the date shown in the above caption, required by
the Act of August 24, 1912, embodied in section 443t Postal Laws
and Regulations, to wit:
1. That the names and addresses of the publisher, editor,
managing editor, and business manager, are:
Name of Publisher, P. S. Harrison, 1440 Broadway, New York,
N. Y.
Name of Editor, P. S. Harrison, 1440 Broadway, New York,
N. Y.
Managing Editor, None.
Business Manager, None,
2. That the owners are: P. S. Harrison, 1440 Broadway,
New York, N. Y.
3. That the known bondholders, mortgagees, ando other secu-
rity holders owning or holding 1 per cent, or more of total
amount of bonds, mortgages, or other securities are: None.
4. That the two paragraphs next above, giving the names of
the owners, stockholders, and security holders, if any, contain
not only the list of stockholders as they appear upon the books
of the company but also, in cases where the stockholder or se-
curity holder appears upon the books of the company as trustees
or in any othe fiduciary relation, the name of the person or
corporation for whom such trustee is acting, is given; also that
the said two paragraphs contain statements embracing affant’s
full knowledge and belief as to the circumstances and conditions
under which stockholders and security holders who do not ap-
pear upon the books of the company as trustees, hold stock and
securities in a capacity other than that of bona fide owners; and
this affiant has not reason to believe that any person, asso^-
ciation, or corporation, has any interest direct or indirect in the
said stock, bonds, or other securities than as so stated by him.
(Signed) P. S. HARRISON,
(Owner).
Sworn to and subscribed before me the 30th day of March
1928.
MARY D. ROMARY.
(My commission expires March 30, 1930
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
II A R RIS O N’S REPORTS
Vol X SATURDAY, APRIL 14,~1928 = No. 15
(Partial Index No. 2 — Pages 29 to 56 Incl.)
Alex the Great — F. B. O 43
A Modern du Barry — U. F. A 50
Beyond London Lights — F. B. O 30
Big City, The — Metro-Goldwyn 51
Bringing Up Bather — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 46
Burning Daylight — First National 38
Buttons — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 34
Chinatown Charlies — First National 50
Chaser, The — hirst National 35
Count of Ten, The — Universal 43
Crowd, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 30
Czar Ivan the Terrible — Amkino 51
Doomsday — Paramount 35
Dressed to Kill — Box, 6,566 ft 42
Feel My Pulse — Paramount 38
Finders Keepers — Universal 34
B lying komeos — f irst National 51
hour Sons — Box, 9,412 ft 39
Garden of Eden, The — United Artists 51
Girl in Every Port, A — Fox 31
Good Morning, Judge — Umversal- Jewel 55
Ham and Eggs at the Front — Warner Bros 34
Heart of a hollies Girl, The — First National 46
Ladies’ Night at a Turkish Bath — First National 42
Latest From Paris, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 35
Leopard Lady, The — Pathe-DeMille 35
Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — First National 55
Love Me and the World Is Mine — Universal 30
Mad Hour, The — First National 46
Marry the Girl — Sterling 39
Matinee Idol — Columbia 54
Nameless Men — Tiflany-Stahl 47
Night Flyer, The — Pathe deMille 47
Noose, The — First National 35
Peaks of Destiny — UFA-Paramount 34
Port of Missing Girls, The — Brenda-Regional 47
Red Hair — Paramount 54
Rose Marie — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 31
Sadie Thompson — United Artists 35
Secret Hour, The — Paramount .42
Showdown, The — Paramount 34
Skinner’s Big Idea — F. B. 0 43
Smart Set, The — Metro-Goldwyn 38
So This Is Love — Columbia 47
Soft Living — Fox 38
Something Always Happens — Paramount 51
Spoilers of the West — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 46
Sporting Age, The — Columbia 55
Sporting Goods — Paramount 30
Square Crooks — Fox, 5,397 ft 38
Stand and Deliver — Pathe-deMille 54
Stop That Man — Universal-Jewel 50
Streets of Shanghai — Tiffany 34
Surrender — Universal 39
That’s My Daddy — Universal 31
Tragedy of Youth, The — Tiffany-Stahl 43
Trail of ’98, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 11,000 ft. . . .54
Under the Tonto Rim — Paramount 50
We Americans — Universal 54
Whip Woman, The — First National 35
Why Sailors Go Wrong — Fox 50
Wickedness Preferred — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 31
Woman’s Way, A — Columbia 47
FIRST NATIONAL PICTURE
EXHIBITION VALUES
377 The Sunset Derby— June 3 700,000B— 700.000P
407 Dance Magic— June 12 900.000B— 800, 000 P
404 Framed— June 19 950.000B— 950.000P
391 Naughty But Nice— June 26 1.300.000B
385 Lonesome Ladies — July 3 700, 000 B
422 The Devil’s Saddle— July 10 500.000B
443 The Prince of Headwaiters — July 17 900.000B
413 White Pants Willie— July 24 800.000B
409 For the Love of Mike— July 31 900.000B
548 Poor Nut— Aug. 7.. .: ....... ... 1,000, 000B
432 The Stolen Bride — Aug. 14.. . l,10O,000B
405 Hard Boiled Haggerty — Aug. 21 950.000B
428 Three’s a Crowd — Aug. 28 l.OOO.OOOB
368 Camille — Sept. 4 Special
465 The Red Raiders — Sept. 4 700,000B
450 Smile, Brother, Smile — Sept. 11 900.000B
453 The Life of Riley — Sept. 18 l,100,0O0B
400 The Drop Kick — Sept. 25 1,100,000b
545 Rose of the Golden West — Oct. 2 Special
433 American Beauty — Oct. 9 1,100,000B
379 The Crystal Cup — Oct. 16 900.000B
319 Breakfast at Sunrise — Oct. 23 Special
457 No Place to Go — Oct. 30 800,000 B
469 Gun Gospel — Nov. 6 $600.000B
547 The Gorilla — Nov. 13 Special
462 Home Made — Nov. 20 800.000B
452 Man Crazy — Nov. 27 900.000B
549 A Texas Steer — Dec. 4 Special
441 Valley of the Giants — Dec. 11 950.000B
544 The Love Mart — Dec. 18 Special
393 Her Wild Oat— Dec. 24 1.300.000B
546 Shepherd of the Hills — Jan. 1 Special
542 Helen of Troy — Jan. 8 Special
446 French Dressing — Jan. 15 900.000B
459 Sailors’ Wives — Jan. 22 800.000B
437 The Noose — Jan. 29 1,100, 000 B
445 The Whip Woman — Feb. 5 900.000B
426 The Chaser— Feb. 12 1,000,000B
464 The Wagon Show — Feb. 19 600.000B
455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 1,100,000B
447 Mad Hour — Mar. 4 900.000B
440 Burning Daylight — Mar. 11 950.000B
434 Heart of a Follies Girl — Mar. 1 1,100,000B
448 The Big Noise — Mar. 25 900.000B
451 Ladies’ Night in a Turkish Bath — Apr. 1 .. 1,000, 000 B
436 Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — Apr. 8.1,300,000B
461 Chinatown Charlie — Apr. 15 800.000B
468 Canyon of Adventure — Apr. 22 700.000B
444 Harold Teen — Apr. 29 900.000B
442 The Hawk’s Nest — May 6 not set
456 Vamping Venus — May 13 not set
435 The Yellow Lily — May 20 not set
460 Three-Ring Marriage — May 27 not set
FEATURE PICTURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
Columbia Features
That Certain Thing — Viola Dana Jan. 1
The Wife’s Relations — Shirley Mason Jan. 13
Lady Raffles — Estelle Taylor Jan. 25
So This Is Love — S. Mason-Wm. Collier, Jr. .Feb. 6
A Woman’s Way — W. Baxter-M. Livingston. .Feb. 18
The Sporting Age — Belle Bennett Mar. 2
The Matinee Idol — Bessie Love-J. Walker Mar. 14
The Desert Bride — Betty Compson Mar. 26
Broadway Daddies — Jac. Logan-A. Francis Apr. 7
After the Storm — Hobart Bosworth Apr. 19
Excellent Features
Satan and the Woman — Windsor-Keefe Jan. 20
The Stronger Will— P. Marmont-R. Carewe..Feb. 20
Women Who Dare — Helene Chadwick Mar. 31
A Bit of Heaven — B. Washburn-L. Lee Apr. 25
F. B. O. Features
8233 Driftin’ Sands — Bob Steele Jan. 1
8207 Coney Island — Lois Wilson Jan. 13
8215 Dead Man’s Curve — D. Fairbanks, Jr Jan. 15
8243 Wizard of the Saddle — Buzz Barton Jan. 22
8209 Little Mickey Grogan — Frankie Darro Jan. 30
8294 Fangs of the Wild.. Ranger the Dog... Feb. 5
82111 Her Summer Hero — Blane-Trevor Feb. 12
82012 Wallflowers — Trevor-Scott Feb. 16
8234 Riding Renegade — Bob Steele Feb. 19
8226 When the Law Rides — T. Tyler Feb. 26
82011 Chicago After Midnight — Eddy-Ince. , 4
Partial Index
April 14,1928 HARRISON’S REPORTS
8244 The Little Buckaroo — Buzz Barton. . .Mar. 11
82110 Beyond London Lights — Shumway Mar. 18
82015 Freckles — Fox-Bosworth-Darro Mar. 21
8235 Breed of the Sunsets — Bob Steele Apr. 1
82j17 The Devil’s Trade Hark— B,.. Bennett, Apr, 7
8295 Law of Fear — Ranger, the Dog Apr. 8
8218 Red Riders of Canada— Patsy R. Miller. Apr. 15
8225 Phantom of the Range — Tom Taylor.. Apr. 22
82018 Skinner’s Big Idea— M. Sleeper Apr. 24
8245 The Pinto Kid — Buzz Barton Apr. 29
82016 Crook’s Can’t Win — R. Lewis May 11
8217 Alex the Great — “Skeats” Gallagher May 13
8236 Man in the Rough — Bob Steele May 20
82014 The Little Yellow House — M. Sleeper May 28
8296 Dog Justice — Ranger June 10
8224 Texas Tornado — T. Tyler June 24
Fox Features
Daredevil’s Reward — Tom Mix Jan. 15
Soft Living — Madge Bellamy-John M. Brown Feb. 5
A Girl in Every Port — Victor McLaglen Feb. 26
Square Crooks — Robt. Armstrong Mar. 4
Horseman of the Plains — Tom Mix Mar. 11
Dressed to Kill — Ed. Lowe-Mary Astor Mar. 18
Why Sailors Go Wrong — N. Stuart-S. Phipps.. Mar. 25
Love Hungry — Lois Moran-L. Gray Apr. 1
The Escape — Wm. Russell-V. Valli Apr. 8
Honor Bound — Geo. O’Brien-E. Taylor Apr. i5
The Play Girl — M. Bellamy -J. M. Brown Apr. 22
Hangman’s House — J. Collyer-V. McLaglen Apr. 29
Hello, Cheyenne — Tom Mix Apr. 29
The Thief in the Dark — Geo. Meeker May 6
No Other Woman — D. Del Rio-D. Alvardo May 13
Don’t Marry — L. Moran-N. Hamilton May 20
The News Parade — N. Stuart-S. Phipps May 27
Mr. Romeo — N. Carroll-Geo. Meeker June 3
None But the Brave June 10
Painted Post — Tom Mix June 17
Part Time Marriage — June Collyer June 17
Holiday Lane June 24
Fleetwing — B. Norton-D. Janis July 8
Gotham-Lumas Features
San Francisco Nights — Percy Marmont Jan. 1
Bare Knees — Virginia Lee Corbin Feb. 1
Turn Back the Hours — Myrna Loy Mar. 1
The Chorus Kid Apr. 1
Hell Ship Bronson — Mrs. W. Reid May 1
United States Smith May
The Man Higher Up June 1
The Man Higher Up June
The Head of the Family July
Through the Breakers Aug.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Features
853 Love — Garbo-Gilbert Jan. 2
817 West Point — Haines-Crawford Jan. 7
832 Divine Woman — Garbo-Hanson Jan. 14
812 Baby Mine — Arthur-Dane Jan. 21
846 Law of the Range — McCoy-Crawford Jan. 21
805 Wickedness Preferred — Cody-Pringle ....Jan. 28
854 Student Prince — Novarro-Shearer Jan. 30
825 Latest From Paris — Shearer-Forbes Feb. 4
843 Rose Marie — Crawford-Murray Feb. 11
839 The Big City — Chaney-Compson Feb. 18
855 The Enemy — Gish-Forbes Feb. 18
816 Smart Set — Haines-Day Feb. 25
841 The Crowd — Boardman-Murray Mar. 3
828 The Patsy — Marion Davies Mar. 10
819 Bringing Up Father — McDonald-Moran. . Mar. 17
802 Under the Black Eagle — R. Forbes Mar. 24
848 Wyoming — McCoy-Sebastian Mar. 24
813 Circus Rookies — Dane-Arthur Mar. 31
830 Across to Singapore — Novarro-Crawford Apr. 7
840 Laugh, Clown, Laugh — L. Chaney Apr. 14
849 Riders of the Dark — Tim McCoy Apr. 21
824 The Actress — N. Shearer Apr. 28
822 Diamond Handcuffs — E. Boardman-C. Nagel. May 5
842 The Cossacks — J. Gilbert-R. Adoree May 12
852 Skirts — Syd. Chaplin-B. Balfour May 19
814 Detectives — K. Dane-G. Arthur May 26
730 Forbidden Hours — R. Novarro-R. Adoree June 2
806 Mile. From Armentieres — E. Brody-J. Stuart. June 9
Tiffany-Stahl Features
Jan. 1 — “A Woman Against the World”. . Harrison Ford
The Tragedy of Youth — W. Baxter-R. Miller Jan. 15
The Devil's Skipper— Belle Bennett-M. Love. .,. .Feb. 1
Nameless Men — A. Moreno-C. Windsor Feb. 15
Their Houf—J. Harron-D. Sebastian Mar. 1
Bachelor’s Paradise — S. O’Neil-R. Graves .Mar. 15
House of Scandal — D. Sebastian-P. O’Malley Apr. 1
The Scarlet Dove — R. Frazer-J. Borio Apr. 15
Clothes Make, the Woman — Southern-Pidgeon. . .May 1
Ladies of the Nightclub — B. Leonard-R. Cortez. . May 15
Lingerie — Not announced June 1
Paramount Features
Jan. 7 — 2772 — “Beau Sabreur” Gary Cooper
2705 Wife Savers — Beery-Hatton Jan. 7
2741 Love and Learn — E. Ralston -L. Chandler. .Jan. 14
Jan. 21 — 2713 — “The Pioneer Scout” Fred Thomson
2785 The Last Command — E. Jannings Jan. 21
2784 Gentlemen Prefer Blondes — Taylor- White. .Jan. 28
2751 Peaks of Destiny — U. F. A Jan. 28
2745 The Secret Hour — Negri-Hersholt Feb. 4
2754 Under the Tonto Rim — Arlen-Brian. . . . Feb. 4
2717 Sporting Goods — R. Dix Feb. 11
2737 Doomsday — F. Vidor Feb. 18
2761 The Showdown — Geo. Bancroft-E. Brent.Feb. 25
2727 Feel My Pulse — B. Daniels Feb. 25
2783 Tillies Punctured Romance — Fields. .. .Mar. 3
2786 Old Ironsides — W. Beery-E. Ralston. . .Mar. 3
2708 Red Hair — Clara Bow Mar. 10
2787 The Legion of the Condemned — Cooper.Mar. 10
2703 Partners in Crime — Beery-Hatton Mar. 17
2742 Something Always Happens — Ralston. .Mar. 24
2750 Adventure Mad — U. F. A. Prod Mar. 31
2789 Speedy — Harold Lloyd Apr. 7
2733 A Night of Mystery — A. Menjou Apr. 7
2746 Three Sinners — P. Negri-W. Baxter Apr. 14
2714 Sunset Legion — Fred Thomson Apr. 21
2718 Easy Come, Easy Go — R. Dix Apr. 21
2712 Fools for Luck — W. C. Fields-C. Conklin. . .May 5
2728 The Fifty-Fifty Girl — B. Daniels May 12
2704 4th — Beery-Hatton May 19
2762 The Drag Net — Geo. Bancroft-E. Brent.... May 26
2738 The Magnificent Flirt — F. Vidor June 2
2782 The Street of Sin — E. Jannings June 9
2723 The Racket — T. Meighan June 9
2743 Free, White and 21 (tent) — E. Ralston June 16
2755 Vanishing Pioneer — J. Holt-S. Blane June 23
2709 Ladies of the Mob — C. Bow June 30
Pathe Features
1178 Laddie Be Good — Bill Cody Jan. 1
1191 The Ballyhoo Buster — Buffalo Bill, Jr Jan. 8
1199 Desperate Courage — Wally Wales Jan. 15
1230 A Perfect Gentleman — Monty Banks Jan. 15
1183 What Price Beauty — Nita Naldi Jan. 22
1208 Boss of the Rustler’s Roost — Don Coleman. Jan. 22
1251 The Cowboy Cavalier — Buddy Roosevelt Jan. 29
1234 Crashing Thru — Jack Padjan Feb. 5
1206 The Apache Raider — Leo Maloney Feb. 12
1192 Valley of Hunted Man — Buffalo Bill, Jr.Feb. 19
1209 The Bronc Stomper — Don Coleman. .. .Feb. 26
1224 Marlie the Man-Killer — Dog Picture. ... Mar. 4
1200 Saddle Mates— Wally Wales Mar. 11
1217 The Bullet Mark — Jack Donovan Mar. 25
1210 The Black Ace — Don Coleman Apr. 8
1225 The Law’s Lash — Dog Picture Apr. 15
1225 The Avenging Shadow — Dog “Klondike”. . .Apr. 29
Pathe-deMille Features
320 On to Reno — Marie Prevost Jan. 1
314 Let ’er Go Gallagher — Jr. Coghlan Jan. 16
304 The Leopard Lady — Jacqueline Logan Jan. 25
323 The Night Flyer — William Boyd Feb. 5
336 Chicago — P. Haver- V. Varconi Feb. 12
321 Stand and Deliver — Rod LaRocque Feb. 20
325 A Blonde for a Night — Marie Prevost. .. .Feb. 27
334 The Blue Danube — Leatrice Joy Mar. 12
324 Midnight Madness — Logan-Brooks Mar. 26
309 The Sky Scraper — William Boyd Apr. 9
317 His Country — R. Schildkraut Apr. 23
311 Walking Back — Sue Carol May 6
333 Hold ’Em, Yale — Rod LaRocque ..May 12
Partial Index HARRISON’S
Ray art Features
The Painted Trail— B. Roosevelt -Feb,
Trailin’ Back — B. Roosevelt Mar.
The Danger Patrol— Wm. Russell-V. B. Faire Apr.
Trail Riders— B. Roosevelt Apr.
A Midnight Adventure— C. Landis-E. Murphy. . May
The Ligntnin' Shot— B. Roosevelt May
The Branded Man — C. Delaney-J. Marlowe May
The Devil’s Tower— B. Roosevelt June
Mystery Valley— B. Roosevelt July
Sterling Features
Burning Up Broadway — H. Costello-R. Frazer.. Jan. 30
Marry th« Girl— B. Bedford-Bob Ellis. ..... .Mar. 1
A Million for Love — R. Howes-J.-Duncan-M. Carr. May 1
It Might Happen to Any Girl not announced
Undressed Notannounced
REPORTS
April 14, 1928
Off Balance — Monty Collins-Cameo Apr. 22
Felix the Cat in Eskimotive Apr. 29
Never Too Late — W. Lupino-Cameo May 6
helix the Cat in Arabiantics May 13
Three Tough Onions— M.' Collins-Cameo. May 20
Felix the Cat in In- and Out-Laws May 27
Educational — Two Reels
Listen Sister — Lupino Lane Mar. 26
Whoozit — Bowers Apr. 1
No Fare — Big Boy-Juvenile Apr. 8
Kitchen Talent — Geo. Davis-Mermaid Apr. 15
Blazing Away — Hamilton Apr. 22
Slippery Head — Johnny Arthur -Tuxedo Apr. 29
Fandango — Lupino Lane May 6
At It Again — M. Collins-Mermaid May 13
You’ll Be Sorry — Bowers May 20
Navy Beans — Big Boy-Juvenile May 27
A5724
A57U2
A5698
A5701
A5705
A5707
A5703
A5712
A5714
A5/25
A5715
A 5699
A5713
A5711
A5720
Universal Features
That’s My Daddy — Denny Feb. 5
Finders Keepers — L. LaPlante Feb. 5
The Shield of Honor— All Star Feb. 19
Midnight Rose — DePutti-Harlan Feb. 26
Surrender — Philbin-Mosjukine Mar. 4
Stop That Man!— All Star Mar. 11
A Trick of Hearts — Hoot Gibson Mar. 18
Thanks for the Buggy Ride— LaPlante.Apr. 1
13 Washington Square — All Star Apr. 8
Good Morning, Judge — Denny Apr. 29
We Americans — All Star May 6
Hot Heels— G. Tyron May 13
The Wild West Show — Gibson June 20
Buck Privates— DePutti June 3
The Count of Ten— Ray-Ralston June 17
United Artists
The Gaucho — Douglas Fairbanks Jan. 1
Sadie Thompson — Gloria Swanson Jan. 7
The Garden of Eden — Corrine Griffith Feb. 4
Ramona — Dolores Del Rio Feb. 11
Two Lovers— Ronald Colman-V. Banky not set
Tempest — John Barrymore not set
Steamboat Bill, Jr — Buster Keaton not set
Hell’s Angels — Ben Lyon-Greta Nissen not set
A Woman Disputed — Norma Talmadge not set
Drums of Love — M. Philbin-L. Barrymore Apr. 8
Warner Features
The Fortune Hunter — Syd Chaplin Nov. 7
217 The Silver Slave— Irene Rich Nov. 19
196 Ginsberg the Great — Geo. Jessel Nov. 26
207 Brass Knuckles — Monte Blue Dec. 3
215 If I Were Single — May McAvoy ..Dec. 17
189 Ham and Eggs at the Front — Wilson-Conklin.Dec. 24
199 Husbands for Rent — Moore-Costello Dec. 31
200 Beware of Married Men — Irene Rich Jan. 14
216 A Race for Life — Rin-Tin-Tin Jan. 26
206 The Little Snob— May McAvoy Feb. 11
193 Across the Atlantic — Monte Blue Feb. 25
192 Powder My Back— Irene Rich Mar. 10
202 Domestic Troubles — Cook-Fazenda Mar. 24
213 The Crimson City — Loy-Miljan Apr. 7
201 Five and Ten Cent Annie Apr. 21
209 Rinty of the Desert — Rin-Tin-Tin May 3
211 Pay As You Enter — Fazenda-Cook May 19
Extended Rims
The Jazz Singer — Al. Jolson
Black Ivory — Monte Blue
Noah’s Ark — Dolores Costello
Glorious Betsy — Dolores Costello
Tenderloin — Dolores Costello
The Lion and the Mouse — McAvoy-L. Barrymore
RELEASE SCHEDULE FOR
COMEDIES
Fox — One Reel
Jungles of the Amazon Feb. 5
Ship Ahoy ! Feb. 19
The Vintage Mar. 4
The Desert Blooms Mar. 18
On a South Sea Shore Apr. 1
America’s ittle Lamb Apr. i5
Spanish Influence Apr. 29
Sea Breezes May 13
Lords of the Back Fence May 27
Thar She Blows June 10
The Dude Ranch June 24
Fox — Two Reels
Hold Your Hat — Imperial Jan. 15
Love Is Blonde — Imperial Feb. 26
Too Many Cookies — Van Bibber Mar. 11
The Polecat’s Pajamas — Animal Mar. 25
Old Wives Who Knew — Imperial Apr. 8
T. Bone For Two — Van Bibber Apr. 22
A Lady Lion — Animal May 13
Jack and Jilted — Imperial May 27
A Knight of Daze — Van Bibber June 10
A Cow’s Husband — Animal June 24
F. B. O. — One Reel
Newslaff Feb. 5
Newslaff Feb. 19
Newslaff Mar. 5
Newslaff Mar. 19
Newslaff Apr. 2
Newslaff Apr. 16
Newslaff Apr. 30
Newslaff May 14
Newslaff May 28
Newslaff June 11
F. B. O. — Two Reels
Rah! Rah! Rexie — Karnival Feb. 20
Too Many Hisses — Karnival Mar. 5
Top Pats — Karnival Mar. 19
Are Husbands People — Karnival Apr. 2
My Kingdom For a Hearse — Karnival Apr. 16
After the Squall Is Over — Karnival Apr. 30
Mickey’s Wild West — Mickey McQuire May 7
Restless Bachelors — Karnival May 14
Big Bertha — Standard May 14
Silk Sock Hal — Karnival May 28
Mickey in Love — Mickey McGuire June 4
Heavy Infants — Standard June 11
Come Meal — Karnival June 11
Almost a Gentleman — Karnival Jjune 25
Mickey’s Triumph — Mickey McGuire july 2
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
Sanctuary — Oddity May 5
Golden Fleeces — Oddity May 19
Tokens of Manhood — Oddity June 2
Palace of Honey — Oddity June 16
Sleeping Death — Oddity June 30
Educational — One Reel
Felix the Cat in Comicalamities Apr. 1
Green-Eyed Love— Geo. Hall-Cameo Apr. 8
Felix the Cat m Sure-Lock Homes Apr. 15
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Limousine Love — Chase Apr. 14
Your Dam Tootin’ — Stars Apr. 21
Tell It to the Judge — Davidson Apr. 28
Fair and Muddy — Gang May 5
The Virgin Queen — Events May 12
The Kid’s First Fight — Chase May 12
Their Purple Moment — Stars May 19
Crazy House — Gang June 2
Cleopatra — Events July 7
Paramount — One Reel
Love Sunk — Krazy Kat Mar. 24
Koko’s Earth Control — Inkwell Imps Mar. 31
Tong Tied — Krazy Kat Apr. 7
Koko’s Hot Dog — Inkwell Imps Apr. 14
A Bum Steer — Krazy Kat Apr. 21
Koko’s Haunted House — Inkwell Imps Apr. 28
Gold Bricks — Krazy Kat May 5
Koko Lamps Aladdin — Inkwell Imp May 12
The Long Count — Krazy Kat May 19
Koko Squeals — Inkwell Imps May 26
The Patent Medicine Kid — Krazy Kat June 2
Koko’s Field Daze — Inkwell Imps June 9
Stage Coached — Krazy Kat June 16
Koko Goes Over — Inkwell Imps June 23
The Rain Dropper — Krazy Kat June 30
Paramount — Two Reels
Cruising the Arctic — Novelty May 5
Love’s Young Scream — Christie May 12
Horse Shy — Horton May 19
A Gallant Gob — Dooley May 26
Hold ’Er Cowboy — Vernon June 2
Say Uncle — Christie-Duffy June 9
Slippery Heels — Adams June 16
Alice in Movieland (tent) — Novelty June 23
Scrambled Weddings — Horton June 30
Universal — One Reel
Sagebrush Sadie — Oswald Cartoon Apr. 2
Ride ’Em Plowboy — Oswald Cartoon Apr. 16
Ozzie of the Mounted — Oswald Cartoon Apr. 30
Money! Money! Money! — Hall-Har. Highbrow. May 7
Hungry Hoboes — Oswald Cartoon May 14
Summer Knights — Lake Drugstore May 21
Oh! What a Knight — Oswald Cartoon May 28
The Trickster — Hall -Harold Highbrow June 4
Universal — Two Reels
A Big Bluff — Stem Bros May 2
Newlywed’s Imagination — Jr. Jewels May 3
Sailor George — Stern Bros May 9
Women Chasers — Stern Bros May 16
Buster’s Whippet Race — Stern Bros May 23
George’s School Days — Stern Bros June 4
Who’s Wife — Stern Bros June 6
A Full House — Stern Bros June 13
George Meets George — Stern Bros June 20
NEW YORK RELEASE DATES OF THE
DIFFERENT NEWS WEEKLIES
50 Even Number
51 Odd Number
52 Even Number
53 Odd Number
54 Even Number
55 Odd Number
56 Even Number
57 Odd Number
58 Even Number
59 Odd Number
60 Even Number
61 Odd Number
62 Even Number
63 Odd Number .
64 Even Number
65 Odd Number
Fox
Saturday, Mar. 17
Wednesday, Mar. 21
Saturday, Mar. 24
Wednesday, Mar. 28
Saturday, Mar. 31
Wednesday, Apr. 4
Saturday, Apr. 7
Wednesday, Apr. 11
Saturday, Apr. 14
Wednesday, Apr. 18
Saturday, Apr. 21
Wednesday, Apr. 25
Saturday, Apr. 28
Wednesday, May 2
Saturday, May 5
Wednesday, May 9
22 Even Number
23 Odd Number
24 Even Number
25 Odd Number
International
Saturday, Mar.' 17
Wednesday, Mar. 21
Saturday, Mar. 24
Wednesday, Mar. 28
26 Even Number
27 Odd Number
28 Even Number
29 Odd Number
30 Even Number
31 Odd Number
32 Even Number
33. Odd Number .
34. Even Number
35 Odd Number
36 Even Number
37 Odd Number
..Saturday, Mar. 31
Wednesday, Apr. 4
. . . Saturday, Apr. 7
Wednesday, Apr. 11
. . . Saturday, Apr. 14
Wednesday, Apr. 18
. . Saturday, Apr. 21
Wednesday, Apr. 25
. . . Saturday, Apr. 28
Wednesday, May 2
, . . Saturday, May 5
Wednesday, May 9
5379
5380
5381
5382
5383
5384
5385
5386
5387
5388
5389
5390
5391
5392
5393
5394
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Kinograms
. . Saturday, Mar. 17
Wednesday, Mar. 21
. . . Saturday, Mar. 24
Wednesday, Mar. 28
. . Saturday, Mar. 31
.Wednesday, Apr. 4
. . . Saturday, Apr. 7
.Wednesday, Apr. 11
. . . Saturday, Apr. 14
.Wednesday, Apr. 18
. . . Saturday, Apr. 21
.Wednesday, Apr. 25
. . . Saturday, Apr. 28
.Wednesday, May 2
. . . Saturday, May 5
.Wednesday, May 9
25 Odd Number
26 Even Number
27 Odd Number
28 Even Number
29 Odd Number
30 Even Number
31 Odd Number
32 Even Number
33 Odd Number
34 Even Number
35 Odd Number
36 Even Number
37 Odd Number
38 Even Number
39 Odd Number
40 Even Number
Pathe
Saturday, Mar. 17
Wednesday, Mar. 21
Saturday, Mar. 24
Wednesday, Mar. 28
Saturday, Mar. 31
Wednesday, Apr. 4
Saturday, Apr. 7
Wednesday, Apr. 11
Saturday, Apr. 14
Wednesday, Apr. 18
Saturday, Apr. 21
Wednesday, Apr. 25
Saturday, Apr. 28
Wednesday, May 2
Saturday, May 5
Wednesday, May 9
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
..Saturday, Mar. 17
Wednesday, Mar. 21
. . Saturday, Mar. 24
Wednesday, Mar. 28
. . Saturday, Mar. 31
.Wednesday, Apr. 4
. . . Saturday, Apr. 7
.Wednesday, Apr. 11
. . . Saturday, Apr. 14
.Wednesday, Apr. 18
. . . Saturday, Apr. 21
.Wednesday, Apr. 25
. . . Saturday, Apr. 28
.Wednesday, May 2
. . . Saturday, May 5
. Wednesday, May 9
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Numbfer
Odd Number
Even Number
Odd Number
Even Number
Paramount
Saturday, Mar. 17
Wednesday, Mar. 21
Saturday, Mar. 24
Wednesday, Mar. 28
Saturday, Mar. 31
Wednesday, Apr. 4
Saturday, Apr. 7
Wednesday, Apr. 11
Saturday, Apr. 14
Wednesday, Apr. 18
Saturday, Apr. 21
Wednesday, Apr. 25
Saturday, Apr. 28
Wednesday, May 2
• Saturday, May 5
Wednesday, May 9
Entered as seeend-clase matter January 4, 1-921, at fhe post office at N'err "Fork. Mew IPork, under the aet of March S, UMS.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States.. $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.60
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.60
- 25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing- Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, APRIL 21, 1928
No. 16
QUESTIONS IN
Often an exchangeman, in order either to frighten
an exhibitor into settling a controversy his, the ex-
changemn’s, way or to influence the exhibitor arbi-
trators into voting in his favor, asserts that all
arbitration boards in the East have voted his way
in cases of similar nature. He does not mention
specific cases ; he makes only general, unsubstan-
tiated statements.
In many instances the exchangeman succeeds in
gaining his object.
For your information, let me say that a decision
of a foreign arbitration board in a case of a certain
nature is not binding on the arbitrators of your
zone. The arbitrators may study the foreign case
so that they might learn the reasoning the arbitra-
tors used in order to arrive at (heir conclusions ; but
they are in no way obligated to follow the precedent
established in another zone. Each arbitration board
is a unit ; the sole aim of the members should be to
study their own case and to render an impartial
award (if that is possible under the system that
arbitration is conducted in his industry) regardless
of how the arbitrators of another zone have voted
in a similar case.
I am bringing this matter to your attention for
this reason : The Hays organization, which con-
trols the mechanics of arbitration, in some cases
with knowledge and consent of the exhibitor or-
ganization executives and in some cases without
their consent, being powerless to nullify its influ-
ence, is able to relay to the exchangemen arbitra-
tors all important decisions that have been made in
other territories. It takes such a step so as to keep
its arbitrators well informed and so to groom them
to battle the exhibitor arbitrators. On the other
hand, the exhibitor arbitrators have no intercom-
municating system ; they must render their deci-
sions unaided and unguided by the decisions of
other arbitration boards. To allow the exchanges,
then, to make an effort to influence the exhibitor
arbitrators by citing such foreign cases when the
awards in the foreign cases have nothing to do with
the case on hand is equal to letting them get away
with “murder.”
Don’t let them bluff you! If an exchangeman
should make the assertion that a similar case to
yours was decided in favor of the exchanges in
other zones, you should tell him that the other zone
is not your zone, and that you are not concerned
how a similar case was decided there. Insist that
your case be tried on its own merits.
* * *
There have been brought to the attention of this
paper lately cases where awards were made with-
out the presence of the exhibitor-party to the
arbitration agreement. In other words, the arbi-
ARBITRATION
tration board rendered a judgment by default. This
matter was treated in these columns once before, in
the issue of November 27, 1926. But because of
its importance, I am treating of it again:
A judgment by default is illegal and makes the
arbitrators liable to a suit for damages, and even
for conspiracy in restraint of trade, for the reason
that the case is not tried in accordance with the New
York State law, which governs arbitration in this
industry. The New York State law specifies as
follows :
“Section 3. Remedy in case of default. A party
aggrieved by the failure, neglect or refusal to per-
form under a contract or submission providing for
arbitration, described in Section 2 hereof, may pe-
tition the supreme court, or a judge thereof, for an
order directing that such arbitration proceed in the
manner provided for in such contract or submis-
sion. Eight days’ notice in writing of such appli-
cation shall be served upon the party in default.
Service thereof shall be made in the manner pro-
vided by law for personal service of a summons.
The court, or a judge thereof, shall hear the parties,
and upon being satisfied that the making of the
contract or submission or the failure to comply
therewith is not an issue, the court or the judge
thereof, hearing such application, shall make an
order directing the parties to proceed to arbitra-
tion in accordance with the terms of the contract or
submission. . . .”
In other words, if you, when you are asked to
appear before a board of arbitration to arbitrate
a difference that might have arisen between you
and an exchange with which you have a contract,
fail to appear, the only way for the aggrieved ex-
change to force you to arbitrate is to petition the
supreme court for an order directing you to appear
so that the dispute may be arbitrated in accord-
ance with the rules in force in the motion picture
industry. The summons must be served on you
in accordance with the law, and eight days’ grace
must be given you from the time the summons was
served to the day of the hearing.
The case is heard, and the award is made. If
the award is against you and you refuse to abide
by it, the arbitration board must record it with the
county clerk. Then and only then may such award
become a judgment, collectible by the sheriff, in
accordance with the process provided by the law.
Any other procedure is illegal.
The imposition of penalties in case a party to
and arbitration agreement refuses to abide by the
arbitration board’s award is another serious mat-
ter in the system of arbitration in this industry.
Many lawyers have declared this system a con-
( Continued on last page)
62
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Broadway Daddies” — with Jacqueline
Logan, Rex Lease and Alec B. Francis
( Columbia , April 7; 5,400 ft.; 62 to 77 min. )
A pretty tair drama, revolving around a ciiorus girl,
and around the attempts of a wealthy man to possess her.
She meets and falls in love with a young man (hero), son
of a wealthy father; but he does not reveal to her the
fact that he is wealthy, preferring that she love him for
himself and not for his riches.. Misunderstandings creep
in between them, bringing about a temporary break in
their love affair. At one time the hero thimcs that the hero-
ine had been a bad girl, because he had seen her in the com-
pany of the wealthy man, during a wild party this man
had given for her. But in the end it becomes clear to
the hero and to the hero’s father that she was as good as
a diamond. Even the wealthy roue had to acknowledge
that he had misjudged her, telling the hero’s father that
he owed her an apology.
There is nothing extraordinary about the story, but it
succeeds in holding the interest fairly tight and in awak-
ening some sympathy for the hero as well as for the
heroine. Mr. Lease makes a good hero; Miss Logan
does well as the heroine. Alec B. Francis is good as the
hero’s father. Phillip Smalley takes the part of the
wealthy man. Clarissa Selwynne, Betty Fiancisco, De-
Sacia Mooers and others are in the cast.
The plot has been founded on a story by Victoria
Moore; it has been directed by Fred Windermere.
“The Desert Bride” — with Betty Compson
and Allan Forrest
( Columbia , March 26: 5,425 ft.; 63 to 77 min.)
Not a bad program picture, unfolding among Arabs,
and showing their machinations for revolt against the
French, their rulers. There are several situations in
which the spectator is held in pretty tense suspense.
These are found mostly towards the end, where the hero,
attached to the Intelligence Department, upon learning
that the Arabs were about to receive a shipment of rifles
and ammunition, disguises himself as an Arab and tries
to find out where the rifles are to come from or where
they had been hidden. The situation which shows the
hero attending the secret meeting of the Arabs and being
apprehended by them is still more suspensive. The suspense
is sustained also in the later scenes, where the heroine had
been made a prisoner by the Arab leader, a man who
posed to the French as their friend, and where the hero
tries to rescue her and to save himself, too. The closing
scenes, showing the French battering down the Arab
leader’s home and rescuing the hero and the heroine, the
information having reached them when the heroine threw
a note out of the window to an American soldier in the
service of the French, offer pretty strong thrills.
The plot has been founded on the story by Ewart
Adamson. It has been directed by Walter Lang. Ed-
ward Martindel, Otto Matiesen, Rosco Karns, Frank
Austin and others are in the cast.
“Tenderloin” — with Dolores Costello
and Conrad Nagel
( Warner Bros. Extended Run Prod., April 28 ; 6,809 ft.)
It has been produced well but its appealing qualities are
mediocre. The chief trouble seems to lie in the part the
hero plays. He is a crook ; and it is hard for crooks to
arouse one’s sympathy. In this instance, however, things
are made worse by the fact that the hero is not only a crook
but also a liar ; he leads the heroine to believe that he loves
her when he did not ; his main object was to exact from her
some information, which he thought she had. It is true
that he becomes regenerated in the end, but even his regen-
eration fails to bring much sympathy for him. Miss Cos-
tello arouses sympathy because of her good acting as well
as of her sympathetic part. Though innocent, she becomes
involved with the police authorities and is hounded by them.
In two places the vitaphone is used, making the characters
talk. One of such places is where the heroine is subjected
to the third degree. The other is towards the end, where
the heroine and the hero are shown in the country, married
and happy, visited by two of the hero’s former confederates.
In the third-degree scenes, the talking is so natural that it
creates a deep impression. Whether, however, the picture-
goers will accept the voice in preference to the silent ex-
pression is problematical.
The plot, which has been founded on a storv hv Me'vil'e
Crossman and has been directed by Michael Curtiz, deals
with a heroine, a chorus girl in an underworld cabaret, who
falls in love with a young crook, but who, although he did
April 21, 1928
not love her, made her believe that he loved her. She was
unaware of the tact that he was a member of a band of
bank robbers. While paying her a visit in her apartment,
he makes an insulting proposal to her. She strikes him on
the head with a clock and fells him. She runs away. She
finds a moneybag in the street and takes it with her. She
rents a room in a place she thought to be a hotel, but when
the vice squad raids it she realizes it was a dive. She is
arrested. When the bag is found in her suitcase, the police
think she is a confederate of the bank robbers, who had
thrown the bag away while being chased by the police. The
bag is opened ; it is found that it contained old newspapers.
There are more complications, in which the hero is Thown
as making love to the heroine, his purpose being to find out
what had become of the money. In the end, however, it is
shown that the hero had really fallen in love with her and
married her.
“A Night of Mystery” —
with Aolph Menjou
( Param April 7; 5,741 ft.; 66 to 82 min.)
Nothing to it; the story is mechanical, and the role of
Mr. Menjou arouses little sympathy. The part makes
Mr. Menjou appear as a wooden actor, his movements
being guided by the author, who one feels is somewhere
telling the hero what to do, what to say and how to act
in given circumstances.
The story is supposedly that of a self-sacrificing hero:
the brother of the girl he, captain in the French Army,
loved, was arrested for a murder he had not committed!
Circumstantial evidence, however, was so strong against
him that he is convicted for murder in the first degree
and sentenced to hang. The hero knew the young man
was innocent, because he had been an eye-witness of the
murder ; but because his confession would have implicated
the wife of the judge, on account of the fact that the
murderer would have told the judge that he, the hero,
had been seen coming out of' his, the judge’s house at
one o’clock after midnight, the hero decided to assume
the guilt of the murder himself and, after confessing, to
commit suicide rather than brand his friend’s wife for
life. Things, however, so turn out that the young man is
saved from the gallows, the hero does not commit sui-
cide, and the woman in the case keeps her reputation.
The plot has been founded on the play, 4 Captain Fer-
reol,” by Victorien Sardou ; it has been directed by
Lothar Mendes. Nora Lane takes the part of the hero’s
sweetheart, William Collier, Jr., that of the sweetheart’s
young brother, and Evelyn Brent that of the judge’s wife.
“Tillie’s Punctured Romance” —
with An Ail-Star Cast
( Paramount , March 3; 5,733 ft.; 67 to 82 min. )
The picture has been directed by a first-class director,
and acted by a first-class cast ; but the entertaining values
are not very high. It is not a bad farce comedy, but it is
nothing extraordinary. Most of the comedy occurs at
the war front, where the two heroes, Chester Conklin
and W. C. Fields, go with their circus, prompted by the
patriotic feeling of entertaining those who were to fight ;
and later where they are seen falling into the hands of
the Germans and posing as Germans in order to avoid
being put against the wall and shot. And in these scenes,
the most laughable are those that show the lions breaking
away from their cages and entering the trenches, fright-
ening the fighters.
Whatever plot there is to it, it shows Mack Swain, an
American of German descent, seeking to find the man
(Chester Conklin) that had, many years before, stolen
his wife, and shortly afterwards, during a wintry day,
leaving their child on his doorstens. This child (he-o-
ine) grows up to womanhood. Before the United States
entered the war, the German-American leaves America
and goes back to Germany; he joins the Army with his
rank. At the front, he discovers Mr. Conklin and pro-
ceeds to revenge himself upon him. Mr. Conklin, how-
ever, is able to rescue himself from his hands one time
after another.
The picture has been produced by A1 Christie at a
probable expense of $400,000: it has been directed by
Edward Sutherland. Louise Fazenda is Tillie. W. C.
Fields the villanous ringmaster. Chester Conklin is the
liontamer, without his well known mustache at first, with
it later. Mack Swain does well as the German General.
Doris Hill, Grant Withers, Tom Kennedy, Kalla Pasha,
Mickey Bennett and others are in the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
63
April 21, 1928
“Midnight Madness” — with Jacqueline
Logan and Clive Brooks
( Pathe-DeM il'e, March 26; 5,659 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
This picture is not only boresome but irritating, for
the reason that one is compelled to watch a heroine
whose acts at times: do not mean anything and at times
betray altogether lack of character. I o Degin with, no
one likes a woman who accepts a position that calls for
getting information out of a person to the detriment of
h;s interests; in real life we call such persons sneaks and
double-crossers, no matter whether they are men or
women. Following this, the heroine upbraids the hero
because he, alter their marriage, had not taken her to
South Africa on a first-class ticket, but on a second class,
and had taken her to an old shack out in the wilderness
instead of to a fine hotel in civilization. She would have
a cause for complaint if she had been used to the fine
things of life ; but she had been living in a dingy room,
back of a shooting gallery, had a father who drank all
the time and had not been shown to have done a day s
work in his life, and she had been pounding on a type-
writer for a living. All the way tnroug.i tne picture
Miss Logan is unsympathetic. Clive Brooks, too, fails
to arouse any sympathy, for the reason that he appears
as a weakling; one cannot forgive him for having tol-
erated a woman such as the heroine is shown to be, and
for hav.ng been patient with her until he had won her iove.
The p'ot has been founded on the story “The Lion
Trap," by Daniel Nathan Rubin; it has been directed by
F. Harmon Weight. ,
It is the story of a diamond merchant from boutn
Africa who meets the heroine and, having fallen in love
with her, proposes. She accepts his marriage proposal
with the intention of getting for her employer, who had
naid her for it, information as to where his diamond mines
were located. He overhears her telling that she would
marry him for whatever she could get out of him and is
heart-broken. He marries her and takes her to South
Africa to an old shack instead of to a fine hotel. She
upbraids him and demands that he send her back to civi-
lization. In the end, the hero succeeds in taming her.
This picture is an example of how money could be
thrown away.
“The Street Angel” — with Janet Gaynor
and Charles Farrell
( Fox Superspeciai ; 9,221 ft.; to be released next Fall.)
A powerful drama, unfolding in Naples, Italy, and re-
volving around a young man and a young woman, who
loved each other passionately. From the point of view of
direction and acting it is a masterpiece — one that should
form a model for other directors. Mr. Borzage seems to
possess the touch of Murnau ; if one, in fact, did not kno\v
who had directed it, one would feel positive that it had
come out of the hands of director Murneau. There is teel-
in" in the acting of all the characters, particularly in that
of Janet Gaynor and of Charles Farrell. Miss Gaynor. one
may be sure, has never done better work in her short screen
career. She and Mr. Farrell make an excellent pair ot
screen players. The scenes where the heroine is show n
being confronted with the Carabineer, who had recognized
her as a fugitive from justice and followed her to her home
to arrest her ; the scenes that follow, which show her spend-
ing a last hour, granted her by the Carabineer at her plead-
ings, the hero being unaware of the fact that she was to
leave him to go to jail to serve her sentence of one year,
which had been imposed on her for attempted robbery
while soliciting ; the distraction of the hero, who, when he
woke up in the morning, found the heroine missing and
was unable to explain her absence ; their meeting at the
waterfront a year later, when the heroine came out of jail
and was unable to find the hero ; the hero's overtaking her
when she, fearful lest the hero, who did not know the
cause of her absence and had taken the wrong viewpoint,
ran into the church, seeking sanctuary' ; the sight of the
hero’s painting, which represented the heroine as a Ma-
donna, hanging over the altar and bringing about an imme-
diate change in the feeling of the hero towards the heroine
— all these are so presented as to leave an indellible im-
pression on one’s mind. It is not the direction or the
acting alone ; it is the combination of both, wrapped up
with. the soul of the director and of the players : —
Her mother being near death and having no money to
engage a doctor, the heroine, a young Italian girl, decides
to follow the example of a woman of the streets she hap-
pened to see, so as to obtain money by selling her body to
men. But she is so young that people do not take her seri-
ously'. bhe attempts to steal some money from a customer
oi a spaghetti stand, but is arrested ; she is sentenced to
one year in the workhouse for attempting to steal while
"soliciting.” While taken to jail she escapes, bhe joins a
circus, lhe hero, an artist, meets the heroine and is so
fasc.nated with her beauty that he obtains employment in
the circus j ust to be near her. As time goes on the two fall
desperately in love with each other, l he hero paints the
heroine, picturing her as a Madonna. During one of her
stilt-walking periormances, the heroine spies some cara-
bineers. 1 he past arises before her like a ghost ; she loses
her balance and falls, injuring herself seriously. The hero
takes her to a good doctor in Naples. The heroine is horri-
fied at the thought that she might be detected by the police
authorities. The hero rents a studio and starts painting.
But he is unable to sell any of his paintings. Being des-
perately in need of funds, he sells his painting of the hero-
ine, which he prized better than anything else in life. The
buyer is so struck with it that he sets out to fake it and to
pass it as the work of an old master. The heroine, while
out purchasing food, is seen and recognized by the Cara-
bineer from whose hands she had escaped. He follows her,
knocks at the door and when she appears he puts her under
arrest. She pleads with him to let her spend an hour with
the hero, so that she might have an opportunity to slip
out without the hero’s becoming aware oi where she was
going, because she told the Carabineer that the thought of
her going to jail would kill him. He consents to let her have
one hour's time. She succeeds in leaving the hero unaware
of her predicament. The following morning the hero is
disconsolate at her disappearance. A year later she comes
out of jail. One of her jailmates, who came out at the same
time, meets the hero and tells him all about the heroine.
Shortly afterwards the hero, in seeking in the waterfront
a woman with the face of an angel but with the soul of a
devil so that he might make a new painting, comes upon the
heroine. The fire in his ey'es so frightens her that she runs
into a church to seek sanctuary. The hero follows her
there. He is about to choke her when he sees his painting
above the altar. The heroine is able to convince the hero
that she is still what that painting represented. They
embrace.
The plot has been founded on a story by Moncton Hoffe ;
it has been put into scenario form for director Frank Bor-
zage by Marion Orth. Natalie Kingston, Guido Trento,
Alberto Rabagliati, Henry Armetta and others are in the
supporting cast. But of the supporting players, Mr. Ar-
metta stands out the most. As the owner of the circus,
Mr. Armetta steals the picture in a few of the situations
wherein he appears. He acts in so peculiar a way as to
cause laughter quite often.
“Street Angel” is truly a big picture.
“Simba”
(M. P. Capitol Pictures Corp., no rel. date set; 8,000 ft.)
An instructive as well as entertaining travelogue of
wild animal life, taken mostly in British East Africa.
The title “Simba” means lion.
The first third of the picture or prologue covers the many
years spent by Mr. and Mrs. Martin Johnson in the wilds
of the east, shooting big game and photographing records
for historical value. Some of it is done in technicolor, en-
hancing the natural beauty of the landscape.
The second third shows the life of the many animals —
the varied-colored zebras, the long-necked giraffes, the
swift- footed antelopes, the ostriches, the ponderous rhi-
noceri and hippotami, and the chattering baboons, most of
them in daily fear of being devoured by lions, or of suf-
fering from thirst in the dry season when no water-holes
are available. There is also a thrilling scene of an other-
wise peaceful elephant family in stampede, caused by a
forest fire.
The last third deals with the Simba or lion ; it show's
how they stalk their food, taking what they w'ant and
leaving the rest for the hovering vultures. A native vil-
lage, depending for its livelihood on the cattle it raises,
fights periodically the onslaughts of the lions. One’s ad-
miration for the lion is aroused w'hen after running tw'ice
from the spears, he holds his ground the third time and
is lanced to death by the natives. A great celebration is
held when the natives are freed from their deadly enemy
for a short time, but they are soon again compelled to
fight the foe.
“Simba” should appeal to all adults, because almost
every rational and sound adult loves animals. But it
should prove a great treat to children.
64
HARRISON’S REPORTS
April 21, 1928
spiracy in restraint of trade, because of the con-
certed action of the exchanges. An exchange has
the right to impose any conditions upon an ex-
hibitor whom it has found unreliable, but the other
exchanges, members of the film board of trade,
break the law when they impose penalties for a dis-
pute that does not concern them. It is perfectly
legitimate even for these other exchanges to impose
harsh conditions on an exhibitor for any contracts
he may wish to make with them for product, but
they break the law in imposing these conditions on
existing contracts, when the exhibitor is living up
to his obligations with them. If an aggrieved ex-
hibitor should want to fight such a matter in the
courts, it is my opinion that he can make things
tough for the exchanges that took part in a dis-
pute that did not concern them.
In the matter of judgments by default, I believe
that a person against whom such a judgment has
been rendered and has been, by the system of pen-
alties (or additional securities, as they are called),
forced to satisfy the amount of the judgment, has
a cause also for civil action against any member or
all the members, exchangemen and exhibitors, of
the arbitration board. In other words, such an ex-
hibitor can sue for damages.
I suggest to every exhibitor on the arbitration
boards to consult his lawyer in order to avoid un-
pleasant consequences, for one cannot foresee what
may happen in the future ; some exhibitor may get
extremely angry and invoke the law. The same
suggestion is made to every one of you, too, to con-
sult your lawyer in this matter so as to verify
whether these deductions are correct or not, for if
you should find that they are correct, you can take
whatever action you may see fit in such cases.
If you should happen to be sitting as an arbi-
trator on a case where the exhibitor failed to ap-
pear, refuse to act on it. Do not sign any paper
that the film board secretary may present you giv-
ing the exchange an award by inquest. The ex-
hibitor arbitrators in this territory have steadfastly
refused to sign such papers, because they know
the consequences of such an act. An arbitration
board is not a court of law ; it can impose no pen-
alties. All it can do is to render an award ; and
then, only if both parties to an arbitration agree-
ment are present. If one of the parties is not
present, then it is up to the aggrieved party to force
the recalcitrant party to arbitrate through the pro-
cess prescribed by the New York State Arbitration
Act.
One other important matter that I desire ro call
your attention to is the habit of exchanges of using
the arbitration boards as collection agencies. The
collection of a debt is not the function of the arbi-
tration board. If, for instance, you refuse to pay
a bill to an exchange for some grievance or other,
the exchange has no right to bring you before the
board ; and if it did bring you before it, the board
has no right to render an award. The arbitrators
are there to arbitrate, and not to penalize. And
when they assume the authority to tell you that you
must pay a debt, they undertake functions that are
foreign to them. In the case of a debt, there is no
dispute; you acknowledge the debt but for some
reason you refuse to pay it or even cannot pay it.
And since there is no dispute, there can be no
arbitration.
Even if you did not acknowledge the debt, the
grievance of the exchange has nothing to do with
a non-performance of a contract. The contract
specifies that you must pay for the film at least
three days in advance. When the exchange lets
you have the film with the understanding that you
pay for it at a later date, it waives its rights to that
particular clause. And it cannot base a subsequent
action on a clause that it itself has waived.
When you are summoned before a board on a
non-arbitrable matter, you should refuse to appear
before it. And if the taking of any steps should
be threatened against you, communicate with this
office.
I feel it my duty to bring these matters to your
attention so as to acquaint you with your rights for
the reason that arbitration, as it is now conducted
in this industry, is, with but few exceptions, unjust
and unfair. It is in the hands of the Hays organi-
zation and I feel that I should leave nothing un-
done for the protection of your interests, particu-
larly if you are in a zone where the president of
your organization has pledged to ride along with
Pettijohn and Hays.
A CORRECTION
In last week’s editorial it was stated that Wel-
ford Beaton is the owner of “The Film Mercury.”
This was a typographical error ; Mr. Beaton pub-
lishes “The Film Spectator.”
ABOUT “STAND AND DELIVER”
The Pathe-DeMille organization has informed
me that they are retitling “Stand and Deliver” so
as to remove the feature that is objectionable to the
Greeks in that it cast a slur on the Greek nation.
The action of Joe Kennedy in this matter is
highly commendable ; he was prompt in giving
orders for the retitling of the picture, even though
it will mean the expenditure of a respectable sum of
money.
THE EXPLOITS OF OUR FRIEND,
CHARLIE CASH
Last week, in recounting the accomplishments
of our friend, Charlie Cash Pettijohn, I said that
he, as President of American Fiscal Corporation,
manufactured and sold wall paper in the form of
Selznick Stock certificates.
But there was another thing that he engaged in
at the same time; he provided comedy entertain-
ment.
In Allentown, Pennsylvania, he happened to
come across the young son of an old jeweler.
The young man had more ambition than he could
safely hold in him ; he wanted to become a movie
star.
Charlie promised to satisfy the young man’s
ambitions. He sent him west and Mr. Selznick
gave him a minor part in a picture.
When the picture was completed, Charlie, as the
President of American Fiscal Corporation, took it
to Allentown, engaged a theatre, advertised it three
weeks ahead of time as “the picture with the local
talent,” posted his stock selling hounds to the right
and to the left of the theatre entrance, and started
the picture on its engagement.
After the first day or so he let his stock selling
dogs loose ; and within a short time he was able to
get thousands of dollars out of the people of Allen-
town, giving them the Selznick wall paper in
return.
To some this was comedy ; but to some, tragedy.
Entered as seeond-elase master January 4, 1934, at the Pest office at New York, New York, under the aot of March 8, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Ins'Rlar Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.60
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
26c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly hy
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and FhbftS-her
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harr sports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, APRIL 28, 1928
No. 17
IF THE AMERICAN EXHIBITORS
WOULD ONLY HAVE ACTED LIKE
THE FRENCH STATESMEN!
I read a funny little dispatch in the New York
papers last week; it said that the French officials,
with whom Mr. Hays wanted to confer on the film
situation, refused to receive Mr. Hays, telling him
to go back to his hotel and to put into writing what-
ever he wanted to tell them.
It is manifest that the French statesmen have
profited by the experience the American exhibitors
have had with Mr. Hays. It seems as if some one
has put them wise, and they are not taking any
chances with him. They do not want speeches of
confidence and co-operation ; they want facts. And
in writing. How profitable it would have been to
you if your executives, too, had made Mr. Hays
put everything in writing !
And by the way, it is evident that Mr. Hays left
his slogan bag in America ; he did not take it with
him to Paris. But he did take his canned speeches,
for in comparing those that were telegraphed to the
American newspapers with those that he delivered
in this country at various times, I found out that
they were the same. The only unfortunate part of
it is that the Frenchmen were wise to it ; Mr. Hays
could not fool them as he has fooled and is still fool-
ing you.
The situation now stands thus : The French Par-
liament has passed a law creating a film commission
and empowering it to protect the French Film In-
dustry by forcing other nations to buy a certain
number of French films for every certain number
of foreign films taken into France.
When the supply of American films stopped, the
French exhibitors protested to the French Govern-
ment on the ground that they could not keep their
theatres open without American films, for not
enough French film are produced to take care of
their needs, and those that are produced are not as
popular with the French public as are the American
pictures.
The French Government, the aim of which natur-
ally is not to cause the French theatres to shut down,
and which wants the revenue from the theatres just
as well as it does from other sources, heeded their
protests and allowed some American films to get in.
This situation will eventually cause the French
Government to abandon the idea of discouraging
the importation of American films, the chief aim of
the Frenchmen, who want to help the French film
industry ; but they want to make the best bargain
they can with Mr. Hays, who represents the Amer-
ican producers.
Mr. Hays naturally knows of this situation and
will refuse to give in. But he may be compelled to
give in to a certain extent. He will then come back
to the United States hailed as “The Victor.” As a
a result, he will be fastened around your neck for
another ten years.
Whatever concessions Will H. Hays may make to
the French, it will be at your expense; for it will
be you that will be forced to buy whatever French
films he throws into the bargin.
In connection with this matter, let me print here-
with a letter that I have received from an exhibitor,
who desires that his name be suppressed :
* * *
“Reading of the English, French, and German
quotas now being established, I am wondering just
now how many English, French, and German pic-
tures will be included in the ‘blocks’ that Para-
mount, Metro, and the rest of the Hays’ companies
will force on independent exhibitors.
“To sell pictures in England, Paramount, for
example, will buy a certain number of English pic-
tures, and attempt to get the cost back by including
them in ‘block selling’ to the independent exhibi-
tors. There is little chance of their daring to show
them in their own houses ; witness ‘Tiptoes’ and
‘Lady Pompadour.’ As they sell in Germany the
block will include some more ‘Peaks of Destiny’
and ‘Adventure Mad’ atrocities. France will add a
few more to the unaffiliated exhibitors’ burdens and
the whole affair will be multiplied by the number of
companies with which they must do business.
“Personally I am thinking of having a rubber
stamp made for use on all contracts at time of sign-
ing, said stamp will give me the right to cancel any
picture not made in U. S. A. I am rather weary of
pulling distributors’ chestnuts out of the fire.
“If you care to pass this idea along editorially —
before distributors include all this foreign junk in
their ‘blocks,’ you are at liberty to do so and thereby
add to your already long list of favors accorded
your exhibitor subscribers.”
4= * *
There is not one of you, not a single American
exhibitor, that cares where a film comes from —
whether it is French, English, German, Chinese,
or Timbuctooian ; all you care about is pictures
that will make you money and that will please
your customers. But in looking over the foreign
productions that were forced on you in the last
two years, we find that only one picture made
any money for you — “Variety,” German made, re-
leased by Paramount. The others were all fail-
ures. But they were forced on you by Metro-
Goldwyn and by Paramount, because it was the
only way whereby they could close the UFA deal.
UFA controls a large number of theatres in Ger-
( Continued on last page )
66
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Little Yellow House” — with a
Special Cast
(F. B. O., May 28 ; 6,402 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
Good ! It is a human-interest story, revolving around the
memories a mother cherished about the little house in
which she lived almost all her life, and where her children
were born. She felt she would be unhappy anywhere else,
and did not want to move, despite the pleadings of her
wealthy but austere sister. The most pathetic situation is
that which shows the father brought dead to the home of
the sister, w here the family had moved, after it gave up the
little yellow house ; the austere sister had told her brother-
in-law that she would put him out of the house the first
time he came home drunk. And she kept her word; the
brother-in-law, while out in the street, is struck by an auto-
mobile and killed. The scenes where it is shown that the
young man that loved the daughter (heroine) had bought
the little yellow house and remodelled it, so that he might
please the heroine’s mother and make it attractive also for
the heroine and thus induce her to marry him, too, are
pathetic. It is shown that the heroine, who, having listened
to the suggestions of her employer, a married man, had
rented an apartment downtown and accepted presents from
him, had been shocked when she found out that her em-
ployer’s motives were not pure, returns home to her
mother's arms, and to the arms of the man who loved her
and was awaiting. Lucy Beaumont, as the mother; Wm.
Orlamond, as the father ; Martha Sleeper, as the daughter ;
Edward Peil, Jr., as the brother; Edyth Chapman, as the
wealthy old woman ; Orville Caldwell, as the hero ; Free-
man Wood, as the married man — all do good work. Edward
Peil, Jr., deserves special mention ; the wise-cracking young-
brother, he causes many laughs.
The story has been written by Beatrice Burton. It has
been directed with skill by Leo Meehan, from an adapta-
tion by Dorothy Yost and from a continuity by Charles
Kerr.
It is a safe bet when shown as a program attraction.
“The Crimson City” — with Myrna Loy
John Miljan, Sojin, Matthew Betz
and Others
( Warner Bros., April 7 ; 5,338 ft.; 62 to 76 min.)
A pretty good melodrama, unfolding supposedly in
Shanghai, China, and revolving around the love of a Chi-
nese girl for a white man (hero) that had sunk to society’s
lowest strata, because of something that had weighed on
his conscience. There is fairly warm human interest in
many of the situations, the warmest being in the closing
scenes, where the Chinese heroine gives up the hero, whom
she loved and whom she had reclaimed, so that he might
marry the white girl he loved ; she felt that the difference
in their races would make their union unhappy. There are
several thrilling situations, these being the one that show
the lives of the hero and of the heroine being in jeopardy as
a result of the heroine’s efforts to escape from the hands of
her Chinese captor, who wanted to sell her to a wealthy
Mandarin, and of her efforts to save the life of the hero,
who had been kept a prisoner by the Chinaman. The action
is somewhat slow in the first half, but it becomes fast in
the second half, keeping the spectator in fairly tense
suspense.
The plot has been founded on a story by Anthony Colde-
way; it has been directed by Archie May. Anna May
Wong, Leila Hyams, Anders Randolph, Richard Tucker
and others are in the cast.
The story shows the hero being hunted by the police for
embezzlement ; although innocent, he could not prove his
innocence. He longed for his sweetheart. A representative
of the British police authorities arrives with the confes-
sion of the guilty man, seeking the hero to deliver the papers
to him. But the villain, who wanted the heroine as a wife,
manages to have the papers stolen, by using a Chinaman;
he wanted to prevent the hero from being cleared of the
charge against him. The Chinaman, by strange coincidence,
uses the hero himself to steal the very papers that would
April 28, 1928
have proved his innocence. A Chinese girl (heroine), who
had taken an interest in the hero and had reclaimed him,
overhears the Chinaman talking to the white villain, and
learns that they had papers that would prove the hero inno-
cent ; she steals them and delivers them to the hero. Al-
though she loves him, she gives him up to the white girl
to whom he was engaged, but before whom he did not dare
appear because he was unable to prove his innocence. She
had never lost faith in his innocence.
“Love Hungry” — with Lois Moran and
Lawrence Gray
(Fox, April 8 ; 5,792 ft.; 67 to 82 min. )
A good entertainment of the light comedy variety. There
are many laughs all the way through, some of them being
caused by the hero’s having mistaken the identity of the
heroine. She had returned home with her friend, a gold-
digger, after the troupe they were with had been stranded.
In entering her father’s home, the heroine is confronted by
the hero, who took her and her friend for two girls looking
for a room. The heroine does not disillusion the hero and
when they become what the hero had thought “fresh,” he
attempts to throw them out of the house. But they are res-
cued when her father and her mother arrive. Miss Moran
impersonates her part with feeling. Marjorie Beebe is a
great help to Miss Moran ; with her “wisecracking” and
her good acting as a gold-digger, she keeps one in laughter
almost continuously. Lawrence Gray is good as the hero,
the would-be author. Edythe Chapman, as the heroine’s
mother, and James Neil, as her father, do well.
The plot has been founded on a story by Victor Herrman
and Randall H. Faye ; it has been directed by Mr. Herrman.
It should give a pleasurable evening’s entertainment to
any picture-goer.
“Crook’s Can’t Win” — with a Special Cast
(FBO, May 11 ; 6,300 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
This is a silk robbery picture, a great deal of the action
unfolding in a silk warehouse, and showing the means the
robbers employ to “lift” the silk undetected. It is so realis-
tic, that one is made to feel as if being present in a real-life
occurrence. One feels the thrills that come from the danger
of such an undertaking ; one fears for the lives of the police-
men and of the hero, who are trying to detect the robbers
and thus to put an end to the frequent robberies. The
scenes that show the hero, a rookie policeman, made a pris-
oner by the crooks, who used his young brother as a decoy ;
the ones that show him, after being indefinitely suspended
for abandoning his post, obtaining a position as a truck
driver, thus hoping to get a clue that would help him detect
the crook ; those that show him being trapped by the crooks
when his young brother uttered an exclamation the minute
he came face to face with him; the scenes that follow,
showing the police surrounding the warehouse and using
machine guns either to kill the robbers or to make them
surrender themselves — all these scenes are thrilling in the
extreme.
The story was written by Joseph J. O’Neil (better known
as Joe O’Neil) ; it has been directed by George M. Arthur
from a continuity by Enid Hibbard. Unlike other crook
stories it does not leave an unpleasant feeling. Sam Nel-
son, as the hero; James Eagle, as the hero’s brother;
Thelma Hill, as the heroine ; Ralph Lewis, as the heroine’s
father; Alfred Dayton, Jr., as the half-owner of the silk
establishment, in league with the crooks — all do good work.
Mr. Nelson, in particular, arouses warm sympathy because
the part shows him as a man of character.
The story shows how a rookie policeman was framed and
trapped by silk robbers, and how he, after being indefinitely
suspended from the service, goes after the crooks determined
to catch them and thus, not only re-establish himself, but
also rescue his young brother, who had been made a captive
by the crooks, as well as to win the love of his sweetheart.
He succeeds.
April 28, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
67
“ Three Sinners” — with Pola Negri
( Paramount , April 7 ; 7,029 ft.; 81 to 100 min.)
Not only is “Three Sinners” the most appealing story
that has been given Miss Negri, here and abroad, but
also the best constructed drama that has been filmed in
some time. To be sure there is one situation that appears
implausible ; yet, the way it has been acted, it has been made
plausible. This situation is where the heroine is shown not
being recognized by her own husband in her assumed iden-
tity. The most dramatic situation is that which shows the
heroine telling her husband, after making her identity
known, that she will take her child with her, and that if
any one tried to interfere with her she would go back to
Germany and tell the world how unfaithful he, her husband,
had been, threatening to spare nobody, not even herself.
There are tensely dramatic situations in other parts of the
picture. Miss Negri has never acted better in her life; and
the part fits her well.
The plot has been founded on the story “The Second
Life,” by Bermauer and Osterreicher. It has been directed
most skillfully by Rowland V. Lee.
The story deals with a German countess (heroine), whose
husband finds “business matters” as an excuse to hide from
her the fact that he had been having intimate relations with
another woman, a baroness. Her music teacher is infatu-
ated with her and, when her husband persuades her to go
to Vienna, the music teacher, who was taking the same
train, is asked by her husband to look after her. The music
teacher tricks her into getting off the train in his home
town and keeps her in his house for one night. The train
is wrecked and the heroine is thought to have perished in
the fire which consumed the coach she had been riding in.
The heroine’s father-in-law calls on the music teacher to
get whatever details he could from him about his daughter-
in-law. There he discovers her and, being shocked, he
tells her that she must remain “dead.” The heroine leaves
• the music teacher and, despondent for her mistake, but par-
ticularly because she had been separated from her child,
accepts assistance from a gambler, masquerading as a
count, and becomes his hostess in his gambling establish*
merit in Paris, posing as his wife.
A few years later she meets her husband in the gambling
establishment. The husband is shocked at her resemblance
to his supposedly dead wife but the heroine convinces him
that there was no relation between them. Learning that
her husband was about to marry the baroness, the heroine
determines to prevent the marriage ; she makes her husband
fall in love with her. Soon she exacts a confession from
him that while his “dead” wife was burning to death in the
wreck he was in the arms of the baroness. The heroine then
makes her identity known and regrets that she should have
gone through “hell” because she thought that he was a
morally clean man. She demands her child and threatens
to tell the world what he is if he should try to interfere
with her demand. She takes the child and goes to the boat
sailing for America, where she meets a young wealthy
American, who loved her and who asked her to marry him.
The sex situations have been handled in so a delicate way
that it is unlikely that they will offend any one.
“The Patsy” — with Marion Davies
(Cosmopolitan-Metro-Gold.-Mayer, March 10; 7,289 ft.)
It is hardly likely that “The Patsy’ ’would have been much
of entertainment without Marion Davies. The plot is weak,
but Miss Davies’ good acting, coupled with King Vidor’s
skilful direction, have made it an intertainment, chiefly for
high-class audiences. Miss Davies captures the spectator’s
sympathy right in the beginning, and holds it until the end.
She is presented as the drudge of the family, from whom all
the care is taken away to be lavished on her elder sister.
When there is a good dress, it is the elder sister that gets
it. V hen a nice-looking young man visits them, the young
heroine is hidden somewhere so that she might not detract
the attention of the visitor from the pet of the family, the
elder sister. There is comedy almost in every foot of the
film, caused by the subtitles and by Marion Davies, chiefly
by Miss Davies’ acting. Considerable comedy is caused in
the closing scenes by Del Henderson, who takes the part of
a hen-pecked husband, father of the heroine. He was fond
of his young daughter (heroine) and did not like to see the
elder daughter being petted and pampered and the heroine
neglected. But because ‘Maw” Harrington ( Marie Dress-
ier) was the boss of the house, he could not open his mouth.
Toward the end, however, he assumed courage enough to
tell “Maw” and everybody in the house except the heroine
what he thought of them. With the result that “Maw”
was dethroned, “Paw” assuming control of the manage-
ment of the house. The young heroine at last marries the
man she loved.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by Barry
Connors. Orville Caldwell takes the part of the hero.
Lawrence Gray that of the man whom the heroine’s flirty
sister loved. Jane Wimton is the flirty sister.
“The Adorable Cheat” — with Lila Lee and
Cornelius Keefe
( Chesterfield-Regional , Aug. 1 ; 5,400 ft.)
A fairly good program picture. The story is not extra-
ordinary, but fairly good handling has made it into a mildly
appealing entertainment. It is the story of a wealthy girl,
who falls in love with a poor clerk (hero), and who
eventually convinces her father that he will make a better
husband than any of the wealthy young idlers, thus gaining
his permission to marry him. The plot does not lack com-
plications ; before the young hero could gain the consent of
the heroine's father for their marriage, the author made
him go through some experiences, the outcome being that
the young man had shown good character. For instance,
he, while visiting the heroine at her country home, dis-
covers her young brother opening the wall safe and taking
some valuables out of it; he makes the young man put
them back. The villain, a young waster, who wanted the
heroine as a wife, because of her money, overhears every-
thing and, when it is found that some money was missing
from the safe, leads the father to believe that it was the
hero that had robbed the safe. The hero allows himself to
be thought of as guilty rather than give the heroine’s
brother away. In the end, however, the hero’s innocence
is proved and the heroine’s father calls on the hero and
begs his forgiveness, asking him to go to his daughter, who
loved him.
The plot has been founded on a story by Arthur Hoerl ;
it has been directed by Burton King, from a screen play
by the author himself.
“The Play Girl” — with Madge Bellamy
{Fox, April 22; 5,290 ft.; 61 to 75 min.)
The story is not original, but the picture should please,
because of the good handling by the director and of the
good acting. There are some situations in it that should
bring forth roars of laughter. These are where the heroine
is shown in a bachelor’s apartment with only her bloomers
on, having thrown her clothes away so as to prove to the
wealthy man that she wasn’t “that kind of girl.” She had
allowed him to buy her expensive presents, jewelry and
clothes, all the while he having in his mind more than
“thanks” ; but when the heroine discovered that he wasn’t,
after all, an altruist, she threw everything at his face. This
naturally left her embarrassingly clothless, but the hero’s
coat comes in handy to hide her semi-nudity ; he takes her
home and tells her that she mustn’t do that again, and that
she must marry him so that he might protect her from
persistent men. There is comedy in the ‘ wisecracks” that
are made by the heroine’s friend, a gold-digger.
The plot has been founded on a story by John Stone; it
has been directed by Arthur Rosson. John Mack Brown
takes the part of the hero; Wanter McGrail that of the
wealthy bachelor ; Anita Garvin of Millie, the gold-digger.
The story shows how a wealthy young man met and mar-
ried a wordly unwise young girl ; she had fallen in love with
him not knowing that he was wealthy.
68
HARRISON’S REPORTS
many; but in order for these two companies to be
able to sell their pictures to these theatres, they
had to agree to buy a certain number of UFA
films for American consumption. That is how
you are being compelled to buy German junk.
The stamp this exhibitor tells us about is a good
means whereby you can protect yourselves. But a
better means yet is to refrain from buying pictures
early. Buy them late enough to enable you to get
an idea what you will be buying. This year more
than any other year you have to be careful in how
much you will pay for film. If you don’t you will
not be able to survive.
AN INTERESTING LETTER FROM
A PHILADELPHIA EXHIBITOR
“Dear Pete :
“The Sentry Safety Control is a little bit of an
attachment that is placed on a machine to auto-
matically throw the dowser on the machine if the
film jams or runs off of the sprocket. This little
attachment is a very good thing when film is run
straight out of the can; but when the film is of
twenty days’ run it causes a never ending trouble
to the operator by shutting off the picture, and in
most instances where it has been tried the operators
just side track it in order to have less thouble.
“It is a clever little attachment ; but it is claimed
it is only efficient for film that is less than fifteen
days old. It costs $22.00 to manufacture the two
attachments for two machines, and there is abso-
lutely no upkeep of any consequence to maintain
them in operation, and practically no wear out to
them.
“NOW HERE COMES THE RUB :
“The Sentry Safety Control people, which is
owned and controlled by Harry Schwalbe and sev-
eral of the Stanley group as a separate corporation,
charge $250.00 per annum rental for the use of
this in each theatre irrespective of seating capacity
or magnitude ; and before you can use it you must
sign up for a five-year contract.
“FURTHERMORE, HERE COMES SOME
GOOD RUBBING:
“The Fire Marshal of Philadelphia passed a rul-
ing that no theatre in Philadelphia would be given
a license to run unless equipped with this device.
220 theatres in Philadelphia at $1250.00 each for
the five years of the contract makes a total of TWO
HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIVE THOU-
SAND DOLLARS ($275,000.00) ; and the Fire
Marshal will not O. K. any device but this one, and
anything similar to it he has refused to O. K.
“It is rumored that, through the different inter-
locking interests of those who control movies,
they are going to try to have laws passed in each
state compelling the use of a Safety Device on pro-
jection machines. Imagine what this will be ! I
understand, in fact, that an effort is now being made
in your city to have an ordinance passed making
the use of this device on the part of the exhibitors
obligatory. I don’t think they can get away with it
in New York City, where the exhibitors are well
organized and where the administration has always
favored them because the exhibitors have always
helped the administration during elections, but God
help the exhibitors in the cities where they are not
organized well.
“It is also said that there is another attachment
in the market that is just as good (if not better)
but it is managed by a firm that is not connected di-
April 28, 1928
rectly with the movies, and it is rumored that the
Sentry Company may tie them up in law suits and
may even take them if necessary to the highest
courts in the land to forestall the installation. If so,
the Sentry Company can force their contracts on all
exhibitors ; they will make them for a long term
of years, and probably they will reap benefits for
the children and grandchildren of the men who
now have it. Gee, it’s a great business and a won-
derful high-minded class that control it!
“In the Philadelphia Exhibitor in the issue of
February 15th, on page 12, you will notice just a
little squib about the Fire Marshal of Philadelphia
compelling the use of it; but the underlying facts
and other thoughts that are rumored are not men-
tioned in this.
“There are numerous theatres in Philadelphia
that are leased propositions, and the lease termi-
nates in less than five years; but the Fire Marshal
condescended that it was only necessary to take the
lease for the term that they had it so as not to run
into any legal complications ; but no doubt after
they get over this initial installation they will ram
them good and hard for lengthy contracts in the
future.”
* * *
I have investigated this exhibitor’s statement and
have found out that he is correct ; an effort is being
made in this city to have an ordinance passed com-
pelling the use of the Sentry Safety Fire Control
device.
I have taken the matter up with the proper ex-
hibitor leaders to block any such attempt by having
this matter explained to the political leaders in its
true light; but in other cities it will be up to the
exhibitors themselves to take steps to forestall this
new form of taxation.
If the Sentry Safety Fire Control device is a
good one, let it sell on its own merits ; its back-
ers should not attempt to fasten it on the necks of
the exhibitors by legislation.
LOOK OVER YOUR FILES
Look over your files and if you find any copies
missing notify this office. Duplicate copies will be
sent to you at once, free of charge.
Do not leave your file incomplete; you don’t
know when you may need the particular copy you
are short of. I have had exhibitors go to the ex-
pense of wiring for a particular copy. Why place
yourself into a position where you have to wire
for a copy ?
Some times the copies are lost in the mails, but
most of the times they are appropriated by film
salesmen, who want to use them to help them sell
pictures to other exhibitors, if the reviews for
their pictures happen to be favorable. They do
not take copies that contain unfavorable reviews ;
they are interested only in copies that contain
good reviews.
DISREGARD SUBSCRIPTION
SOLICITING CIRCULARS
If you are a subscriber and you happen to re-
ceive a circular soliciting your subscription, you
are kindly requested so to note on the postal card
and to mail it back.
The list of names is so large that it is difficult
to check all up, no matter how carefully the work
is done.
l&rtered as second-class mat-ter January 4, is)2i, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 2, 18f9,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MAY 5, 1928
No. 18
AGAIN ABOUT JUDGMENTS BY DEFAULT
Air. Fred Herrington, Secretary of M. P. T. O. of West-
ern Pennsylvania, wrote me as follows :
“After reading the report in the trade papers that the
exhibitor members of the Cleveland arbitration board de-
cided to refuse to arbitrate any cases where the exhibitor
was not present for fear of getting into legal entanglements,
we of Pittsburgh took the same attitude today.
“Immediately after taking this action we called Air.
George Erdmann, the secretary of the exhibitors' local in
Cleveland, up on the telephone, and were informed by him
that they had taken the above action but later reconsidered
because they had been informed that there had been an
amendment put into the Arbitration Laws of New York
State legalizing the giving of judgments by default in case
either side did not appear.
“If you can possibly secure a copy of the law and the
amendment thereto or any other information we would ap-
preciate it very much if you would let us have same at your
earliest convenience.”
* * *
Yes, there is an amendment to the New York Arbitration
Act, Section 4A, covering judgments by default. The Act
reads as follows :
“Section 4A. Enforceability of Award in Certain Cases.
Where pursuant to a provision in a written contract to set-
tle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising between
the parties to the contract, or a submission described in sec-
tion two hereof, an award has been, or is hereafter rendered,
without previous application to the supreme court, or a
judge thereof, as required by section three hereof, such
award shall notwithstanding anything contained in section
three hereof be valid and enforceable according to its terms,
nevertheless to the provision of this section. At any time
before a final judgment shall have been given in proceed-
ings to enforce any such award whether in the courts of the
State of New York, or elsewhere, any party to the arbitra-
tion who has not participated therein may apply to the
supreme court, or a judge thereof, to have all or any of
the issues hereinafter mentioned determined, and if, upon
any such application the court, or a judge thereof, or a jury,
if one be demanded, shall determine that no written con-
tract providing for abitration was made, or submission en-
tered into, as the case may be, or, that such party was not
in default by failing to comply with the terms thereof, or
that the arbitrator, arbitrators and, or umpire was, or were
not appointed or did not act, pursuant to the written con-
tract, then and in any such case, the award shall thereupon
become invalid and unenforceable. Where any such appli-
cation is made any party may demand a jury trial of all or
any of such issues, and if such a demand be made, the court
or a judge thereof shall make an order referring the issue
or issues to a jury in the manner provided by law for refer-
ring to a jury issues in an equity action.
“New. Added by L. 1927, Ch. 352. In effect Alarch 29,
1927.”
* * *
I must confess that, like Air. Erdmann and Mr. Her-
rington, I knew nothing of the existence of this amend-
ment. I believe, in fact, that very few exhibitor-arbitrators,
if any, knew that such an amendment to the Arbitration
Act had been put through the Legislature of this State. A
man such as Air. Harry Suchman, who is, not only a good
lawyer, but also a prominent members of Theatre Owners’
Chamber of Commerce, and who has served on the Arbitra-
tion Board repeatedly, knew nothing about it until I
called his attention to it. Even Air. Sol Raives, President
of Theatre Owners Chamber of Commerce, who appoints
the exhibitor arbitrators, a man who is a member of the
American Arbitration Association, knew nothing about it.
This leads me to believe that the Hays organization, which
no doubt sponsored it, did not want us to know anything
about it ; perhaps they hoped that, by making as little noise
about it as they could, they would make the exhibitors
swallow it without any protests, or without taking steps to
have it repealed.
Why do I accuse the Hays organization as having spon-
sored this amendment?
Because its members will benefit from it more than will
the organization members of any other industry.
Now, what does this amendment mean?
It means that the hardships in any arbitration dispute are
lifted from the shoulders of the distributor and placed on
those of the exhibitor, for it practically tells the exhibitor
this: “We have rendered a judgment by default against
you. Now go and prove that we have rendered such a judg-
ment illegally 1 Spend your own money and time by run-
ning to the courts to prove it !”
Use common reasoning and I am sure that you will come
to the conclusion that Section 4A of the New York State
Arbitration Act is unconstitutional, because it gives the
right to voluntary judges to “convict” the absent party to
an arbitration agreement before it had been determined
whether the matter in dispute was arbitrable or not. You
will come to the same conclusion also when you bear in mind
that arbitration is placed higher than either our civil, and
even our criminal, laws. In a criminal as well as in a civil
action, the law requires that the defendant be served per-
sonally, in accordance with a certain procedure. In arbi-
tration, no such service is necessary, thanks to this amend-
ment. Don’t you think that there is something wrong
somewhere ?
But so long as this amendment is not tested, it will be the
law of the land, and it will be necessary for you, if a judg-
ment by default has been rendered against you, to fight the
matter in the courts to upset it, either by using the means
described in the same amendment, or by fighting the law,
as amended, on the grounds of unconstitutionality.
Despite this amendment, I still feel that the exhibitor-
arbitrators should refuse to take part in the arbitration
proceedings when one of the parties is absent.
Let there be no misunderstanding: by advising the ex-
hibitor-arbitrators not to take part in any judgment by
default proceedings^ I do not try to shield wrong-doing
exhibitors ; I am merely trying to prevent the producers
and distributors from legalizing oppression. If the system
of arbitration were not in the hands of the Hays organiza-
tion, the policy of this paper toward arbitration would have
been different ; but every sensible person realizes that now
it is in its hands ; every one knows that arbitration in this
industry is compulsory. And that is why I am fighting it
so hard.
Aladison, W. Va., April 23rd, 1928.
Air. P. S. Harrison,
New York.
Dear Sir :
Your REPORTS for April 21st, is quite interesting to
me, since in my five years of battling with the exchanges
over the arbitration clause of the uniform service contract
I have never before seen anything pertaining to it in print
from a reliable source. I want to take just a little of your
valuable time :
June 8, 1926, I was taken before the Charleston Joint
Arbitration Board upon a complaint of Universal and upon
advice of my attorneys refused to arbitrate since their
( Continued on last page)
70
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Honor Bound’’ — with George O’Brien
( Fox , May 6 ; 6,188 ft.; 71 to 88 min.)
A powerful melodrama. It is really an expose of the
convict labor atrocities that were uncovered in the state of
Alabama several years ago. It was written by Mr. Jack
Bethea, a newspaper man who had investigated the condi-
tions in the Southern prison camps personally, and there-
fore knew what he was writing about. There are thrills
aplenty. The scenes that show the hero being lashed will
surely make tender-heatred picture-goers sick in the stom-
ach. The cruelty shown by the prison guards and by the
contractor of the convict labor is realistic in the extreme.
There are thrills also in the fire scenes, where the convict
labor barracks are shown set afire by a mentally deranged
convict, who had taken that step to avenge the wrongs
against the prisoners and particularly against the hero. In
that fire, the hero is shown trapped and barely able to es-
cape with his life. There is good drama in it. George O’Brien
is excellent in the part of the hero. Estelle Taylor does well
as the faithless woman. Tom Santschi, Leila Hyams, Frank
Cooley, Sam DeGrasse and others are in the supporting
cast. The picture has been directed by Mr. Alfred Green
writh skill.
“Hot Heels”— with
Glenn Tryon and Patsy Ruth Miller
(Universal- Jewel, May 13; 5,864 ft.; 68 to 83 min. )
Good entertainment 1 Human interest, thrills and
comedy are mixed up in this picture, which starts out
on a comedy slapstick note but finishes with a whirl-
wind horse-race, keeping the spectators in tense sus-
pense. There are numerous comic absurdities in the
opening scenes, where the hero is seen as an eccentric
hotel-keeper, acting as his own clerk, and playing all
kinds of tricks on the members of a traveling the-
atrical troupe, which had come to town. The wander-
ing dancers put on a show at the town opera house.
This is a laughable burlesque of the melodramas that
were popular out in the “sticks” a generation ago.
Later, when the troupe goes broke, the hero agrees to
finance it for a trip to Havana and goes along with
the outfit. He is decoyed into this arrangement by
the leading man, who fakes a telegraph message from
Cuba. In the development of the plot it is shown
that when the troupe arrives in Havana the hero dis-
covers he had been fooled and thinks the heroine, with
whom he was in love, had helped to frame him. The
horse, Hot Heels, who performs in the show, is a
thoroughbred. As a last resource, the heroine enters
Hot Heels in a big race. The villain beats up Tod
Sloan, the jockey, who was to have ridden Hot Heels.
The hero substitutes, rides Hot Heels to victory, and
wins the purse, and the girl.
Glenn Tryon does excellent work in the part of
hero. Patsy Ruth Miller is a charming heroine.
The plot has been founded on a story by Jack Foley
and Vin Moore; it has been directed by William
Craft, from a continuity by C. O. Hoyt.
It should direct a universal appeal.
“The Escape” — with
William Russell and Virginia Valli
(Fox, April 29; 5,109 ft.; 59 to 73 min.)
A good underworld melodrama with human interest
as well as exciting situations. There is considerable
suspense throughout the picture. The heroine arouses
most of the sympathy at first, because the hero is
shown rather as a weakling, who cannot control his
desire for drink, but who redeems himself toward the
end. The action takes place partly in New York’s slum
district and partly on Broadway, where one of the
principal characters operates a night club. He is a
man in love with the heroine, who has a job as hostess
in his club, but who does not care for him. There are
thrills in the opening scenes where bootleggers are
operating and chased by officers, the heroine’s father,
who is one of the band, being killed by a shot. The
heroine takes the night club job in order to provide
for her younger sister. A young doctor, whom the
May 5, 1928
heroine had met while he was performing his duties
as an interne in the slums, becomes degraded through
drink and goes to work for the night club proprietor,
making booze. The heroine discovers him and per-
suades him to go into the country to “brace up.” She
is constantly annoyed by the club owner, who persists
in his attempts to win her. Her young sister is in-
fatuated with a gangster and visits the club with him
on New Year’s Eve. The hero returns reformed and
in good physical condition. A free-for-all fight takes
place in the club; the hero battles his way out with
the heroine and her sister, the club-owner and a lead-
ing gangster being shot to death. Later the lovers
are seen happy in the country.
The scene where the club is “shot up” is thrilling
in the extreme.
The plot has been founded on a play by Paul Arm-
strong; it has been directed by Richard Rosson, from
a scenario by Paul Schofield. William Russell does
excellent work as the unscrupulous club-owner;
George Meeker is a pleasing hero, and Virginia Valli
is good as the heroine.
The picture should give satisfaction anywhere.
“The Wagon Show” — with Ken Maynard
(First National, Feb. 19; 6,235 ft.; 75 to 89 min.)
A very good western with a circus background; it
is full of thrills and suspense. The thrills are caused
by Maynard’s daring riding and trick stunts as the
cowboy guide (hero) who joins a traveling circus.
Tense suspense is caused when Maynard rescues the
wagons stolen by a rival circus in time to save the
show from ruin. Because he had fallen in love with
the proprietor’s daughter (heroine), he stays on and
when the trick rider deserts to join the rival circus he
does all the trick stunts and wins the admiration of the
troupers as well as of the audiences; also the love of
the heroine.
Children should enjoy the realistic circus atmos-
phere and the fine heroic riding of Maynard. The vet-
eran actor, Maurice Costello, is the proprietor of the
poverty-stricken circus, and Marion Douglas is his
daughter. George Davis, as “Hank,” Maynard’s
buddy, contributes the comedy, and Henry Roque-
more is the “barker.” Tarzan, as usually, brings the
hero through. The story is an original. The picture
was directed well by Harry J. Brown.
“The Man Who Laughs” — with
Conrad Veidt
(Universal Extended-Run Prod.; 10,185 ft.)
It is a wonderful picture from the point of view of direc-
tion and of acting, but it is to be seen whether it will appeal
to the picture-goers of the rank and file. It is too gruesome.
Conrad Veidt shows that he is a master of acting; he im-
personates the role of Victor Hugo’s Gwynplaine, the man
with the disfigured face, admirably. But his large mouth
and projecting teeth make him look hideous. He is sup-
posed to have been disfigured by orders of the King, who
wanted to revenge himself on the disfigured man’s father ;
by an operation, his cheeks were so drawn as to make him
appear as laughing all the time. There is a love affair be-
tween him and a blind girl ; it will wring one’s heart by its
pathos. Gwynplaine had been so kind to her, that the blind
girl had formed a beautiful picture of him in her mind. So
when they are separated she is heart-broken. The separation
is shown to have been caused by the machinations of the
villainous Queen, who, having discovered that The Man
Who Laughs, a circus clown, is a nobleman, designs to
force a noble woman, who had inherited his father’s estate,
to marry him after being ennobled. But Gwynplaine, after
becoming a nobleman, upbraids the Queen and runs away ;
he goes to the docks just in time to be reunited with the
heroine, who was being banished by orders of the Queen.
Miss Mary Philbin, who takes the part of the blind girl,
has never done better work. She is sympathetic in the ex-
treme. The picture has been directed by Paul Leni with
skill.
The literary classes should consider this picture as a
spiritual treat.
May 5, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
71
“Across to Singapore” — with
Ramon Novarro
( Metro-Goldwyn , April 7; 6,805 ft-; 79 to 97 min.)
To ask people to see Ramon Novarro in such an atrosity
is an insult to intelligence. It is about the most assinine
story he has been given. Imagine a father taking the word
of a bum against the word of his own flesh and blood, his
son, and you will realize how ridiculous the action is. The
action in the first two reels is interesting, but when it shifts
to Singapore it becomes disgusting. There it unfolds in a
filthy environment, and shows the characters in saloons,
drinking and fighting.
The story presents four brothers, happy with their
father, in their home on the coast of Maine. The young
brother (hero) wants to go with their ship, commanded
by the elder brother, but he is told he is only a baby yet.
He eventually tricks them into believing that he is a brave
man, and is taken along. The heroine, who loves the hero
and is loved by him, is betrothed to the eldest brother. This
breaks the heart of the young hero. The heroine refuses a
kiss to her betrothed, the Captain, before he departs, and
he broods about it. In Singapore, he abandons himself to
drink. The hero tries to stop him from drinking but he is
unable to do so. The villain, one of the crew, has the Captain
beaten up and abducted by Chinese thugs, and then gets
control of the bark. He has the hero put in irons for sup-
posed cowardice. When the ship returns to the home port,
the villain convinces the hero’s father that the hero had
been a coward, because he had abandoned his brother, the
Captain, and fled when Chinese had attacked him. The hero
is disowned by his father. But with the help of some
friends the hero gains control of the ship, drags the heroine
along with him and takes her to Singapore, telling her that
she is the only person that can reclaim his brother.
The story ends with the death of the Captain, who was
murdered by the villain, and with the marriage of hero and
heroine.
The plot has been founded on the novel by Ben Ames
Williams. It was directed by William Nigh. Joan Crawford
is the heroine; Ernest Torrence, the Captain; Frank Cur-
rier, the father.
“Wild West Show” — with Hoot Gibson
( Universal , May 20; 5,254 ft.; 61 to 75 min.)
A good Hoot Gibson Western. The action holds
one’s interest from the beginning to the end and causes
some thrills here and there. The comedy is contrib-
uted chiefly by the star; he makes a great hit in the
scene where he portrays the part of a human target,
while a cross-eyed knife-thrower hurls one flashing
blade after another at him. Mr. Gibson is also very
funny when he disguises himself as a female bare-
back rider.
The thrills are caused by the hero’s joining a circus,
which comes to the ranch. The cowboys are there in
full force; they think the show is bad and, headed by
the hero, they begin shooting right and left. The ex-
plosion of the bullets causes a runaway, with the
heroine on the box of a stage-coach, the hero pur-
sues and rescues her. Later he joins the circus; he is
unjustly accused of stealing the gate receipts, but
proves his innocence and defeats the villain, who tries
to frame him. The hero’s heroic acts will naturally
please the Hoot Gibson fans. In many situations the
spectator is held in pretty tense suspense. Hoot Gib-
son does his usual good work. Dorothy Gulliver
makes a charming heroine.
The story has been written by Del Andrews and St.
Elmer Boyce, the scenario by Isadore Bernstein; it
has been directed by Del Andrews.-
“The Sunset Legion” — with Fred Thompson
( Parant ., April 21 ; 6,763 ft.; 78 to 96 min.)
Good! It is a western melodrama that unfolds in and
around a gold mine, and revolves around the efforts of the
hero to protect the owner of the mine, and his daughter,
from the machinations of the villain and of his gang of
robbers. There are thrills, these being caused by the sight
of the attempted holdup of the stage that carried the gold,
and by other situations, particularly by the one at the barn
dance, where the hero, in a sleight-of-hand way, disguises
himself as a bandit and after the “holdup,” in which the
only thing stolen was a kiss from the heroine, changes
clothes and again appears as the mild-mannered, timid
stranger. There is considerable horseback riding and chas-
ing. Mr. Thompson again does well in his part. Edna
Murphy takes the part of the heroine well.
Frank Clifton wrote the story. Lloyd Ingram and Alfred
L. Werker have directed it.
“Across the Atlantic” — with Monte Blue
( Warner Bros., Feb. 25 ; 6,052 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
The first half is slow and of not much interest; but the
second half is interesting and pretty appealing. It is an
aeroplane picture, in which the hero is given a Lindbergh
role. He is shown as an amateur aviator, son of an aero-
plane manufacturer. When war is declared he enlists in
the aviation branch of the army. While flying over the
enemy lines, he is struck on the head by a bullet and
downed. He is sent to a hospital. He becomes well, but his
memory is gone; he can’t even remember his own name.
After the war he returns to America and is sent by the
Government to a hospital. But he is soon released. By
chance he obtains a position in his father’s aeroplane fac-
tory, though his father never sees him. His father, who
thinks his son dead, arranges for a non-stop flight to
Paris, to be dedicated to the memory of his “dead” son.
Because of his knowledge of aeroplanes, the hero soon is
given a responsible position in the factory. When it was
decided to test the altitude record in the machine that was
to be used in the Paris flight, the hero is ordered to accom-
pany the pilot. At an altitude of over 30,000 feet the hero
regains his memory. But when he reaches ground none
will believe him when he tells his co-workers who he is ;
it was thought that he had become unbalanced. So he is sent
to a sanitarium for observation. But he escapes, steals the
machine and races to Europe, where he finds his wife, who
wras about to marry his brother.
There is much pathos in the scenes where the hero is
shown regaining his memory but unable to convince any
one that he was the son of the owner of the factory. The
scenes that show him flying to Europe are fairly thrilling.
The story has been written by John Ransome ; it was
directed by Howard Bretherton. Scenario by Harvey Gates.
Monte Blue makes a good hero ; Miss Edna Murphy a good
heroine.
“Horseman of the Plains” — with Tom Mix
{Fox, March 11 ; 4,399 ft.; 53 min.)
Another good Tom Mix Western; it is full of thrills
and suspense caused mostly by Mr. Mix’s efforts to
win the obstacle race, for the purpose of raising the
money to pay off the mortgage on his girl’s ranch.
This time Mr. Mix is the sheriff of a neighboring
county; he is asked to help round up a band of crooks,
who are expected to attend the county fair. The leader
of the crooks is the neighbor of Dawn O’Day (Sally
Blaine), heroine. He is trying to get her’ ranch be-
cause she is unable to meet the mortgage which he
secretly holds. At his suggestion, she hires a certain
man to ride her horse in the obstacle race. This man
is in the employ of the leader, and is to throw the
race. Tom is captured by the crooks and learns that
the race is to be thrown. After a fight and a thrilling
ride, he gets to the races in time to jump on the horse
and be off. He then gets into the hay wagon and by
throwing stacks of hay into the paths of the other
racers, he wins and hops into the waiting autos and
then into the stage-coach race, which was to be a
cross-country race. The crooks again try to prevent
his winning by barring his entrance back into the
track, but by dodging the bar and bringing back only
the chassis attached to the horses he wins both the
races and the girl. The love story between Miss Blaine
and Mix is interesting in that she does not like Tom
at first because he belittles her ability to run the
ranch. Heinie Conklin contributes the comedy and
helps Tom out by wooing the mammy housekeeper
of the heroine so that he might have a chance to learn
who the leader of the crooks really is, he having rec-
ognized him as a rustler. The story was written by
Sinclair Drago and the picture was directed well by
Benjamin Stoloff.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
May 5, 1928
72
claim was for money due them from the theatre I was then
operating and the account was supposed to have been made
in 1919, two years before I purchased it.
During the controversy I discontinued their service under
their complete service contract and at this meeting I agreed
to complete this contract if they would make certain con-
cessions which their manager agreed to and he and I dic-
tated this agreement to the Secretary of the Board and it
was to be entered as an agreed finding of the Board and I
withdrew from the meeting.
July 2nd, I had a letter from them stating that since I
had refused to pay this account they would accept cancel-
lation of the contract and we would have no further deal-
ings. I replied that since I had a large stock of advertising
in store and their pictures were bought very cheap that I
would complete the contract and would make no further
shipments.
Upon advice of counsel I purchased pictures from other
exchanges and charged them to Universal and credited
them with the amount the pictures would have cost from
them and billed them for the difference each week and noti-
fied them that I would proceed to collect if they did not
remit promptly. I sued them each week for 14 weeks and
they were a New York corporation, and under the West
Virginia laws, I attached a picture each week for security
for the debt.
September 1st, they appeared before the Circuit Judge
and took a temporary restraining order against me prohibit-
ing me from further attaching their property, which order
was returnable in ten days. They then filed a complaint
against me daily with the Film Board of Trade of Cincin-
nati.
On September 9th, we gave them notice that we would
ask the court to dissolve the restraining order and at the
same time and place would ask for certain other relief ; but
we did not insist upon the court dissolving this order, but
showed the court what they were attempting to do and asked
for an injunction against the Charleston Joint Arbitration
Board and for one against the Film Board of Trade pro-
hibiting them from hearing cases against me until the final
settlement of the case. We also asked for a mandatory in-
junction against Universal forcing them to submit their
differences to the court for final settlement.
The court granted these injunctions and Universal sent a
Mr. Williams to see me and we settled the difference by him
paying me the amount I claimed they owed me and he paying
all the costs including my attorney’s fee and we had the
settlement entered by the Court as an agreed decree.
About ten days later I saw a copy of the agreement we
had drawn at the Board Meeting on June 8th, and found
that there had been two typewritten pages added to it
after I had withdrawn from the meeting. The records of
the Board were kept in Universal’s office and one of their
stenographers was its secretary.
I took this grievance up with the Hays organization and
they sent Mr. Pettijohn down to investigate and he found
my charges correct, but told me that it was the first serious
mistake this secretary had ever made and that it would cost
too much money to move the records and make the changes
I demanded. I thanked him for his trouble and took my at-
torneys and we put the Charleston Joint Arbitration out of
existence forever.
Since that time my services have been in demand and I
have never lost a case, but recently F. B. O., and Metro-
Goldwyn, closed three houses by default, the exhibitors re-
fusing to arbitrate in Cincinnati, Ohio (which was within
their legal right). I brought suits against them on each of
the three cases and took service on them by attaching their
pictures coming into this section. They did not let it go far
until they all came to see me and agreed to open the three
houses and allow the exhibitors $40 per day for each day
they had them closed and agreed to pay up the costs and set
out their contracts until such time as it would be con-
venient and profitable for the exhibitors to play them.
I have had the interests of my fellow-exhibitors at heart
and have never charged one of them for my services, nor
allowed them to pay me any thing except the actual costs
in each case which amounts to very little since my attorneys
are employed by the year.
The West Virginia exhibitors are fortunate in having
laws that protect them and all they need to meet the unjust
and oppressive methods practiced by the distributors is a
real high-class lawyer and a willingness to go to court and
fight. All the distributors that practice their present high
handed methods will weaken when you fake them in the
court house door.
I have had several of them fined for adding an additional
charge to a C. O. D. shipment by mail. This is a violation
of the U. S. Postal Laws and the Chief Inspector at Wash-
ington will take charge of the picture and make them settle
without trouble or expense to the exhibitor.
Next I am going to make some of them pay for billing
me with more postage than they put on the cans. This is
also a violation of the Postal Laws.
Yours very truly,
J. D. Hoge,
Operating: Rialto Theatre, Madison, W. Va. ; All Coal
Theatre, Wharton, W. Va.
IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE
Last week I stated that of the foreign pictures so far sold
you only “Variety” made any money.
Immediately after the paper was printed I discovered,
by myself, that there were two other foreign pictures that
made money for you : “Les Miserables” and “Michael
Strogoff.” And they would have made perhaps twice as
much money if they had been produced with the American
skill.
In connection with foreign pictures, an executive of
Paramount has informed me that, although their contract
with Ufa calls for the release of five German-made pictures
through their organization yearly (the same number the
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer contract calls for), they are going
to release during the 1928-29 season only one — “Behind the
German Lines.” In fact, they are going to sell next season
only three foreign pictures, one French-made and one Brit-
ish-made being the other two. But they assert that they are
so good that they are willing to let me see them before they
sell them.
I intend to take them at their word soon and ask for a
showing.
If Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer has any statement to make in
reference to the number, and quality, of the foreign pic-
tures they intend to put on their 1928-29 group, I shall be
only too glad to print it.
IN FULL AGREEMENT
“The methods of acquiring stability of character in a
business periodical are not essentially different from the
methods necessary for a man to acquire a good character
and the reputation for upright dealing. It does not happen
overnight, and must endure trials before we know how
much pressure it will withstand without yielding to wrong
impulses and hopes for quick and easy gain.
“The first requisite is a certain ideal goal towards which
its policy directs it. It must be dedicated primarily to its
subscribers. . . .” — Harris Dibble Bulletin.
HARRISON’S REPORTS fully agrees that a paper
is no different from an individual. It is, after all, a piece of
art. And in art, the artist cannot help impressing his own
personality on his work.
There is, however, one thing the writer of that article
did not get quite right; about acquiring character. Char-
acter cannot be acquired — it is inborn in a person, just like
sparkling is in the diamond. A person may have reputation
but not character. And the only way for us to tell whether
a person or a paper has character or not is by studying his
or its work. It is the proof 1
YOU SHOULD BENEFIT FROM THE
REDUCED PRODUCTION COST
The big companies have already started their sales con-
ventions. By the end of this month these conventions will
be over, and the distributors will be primed to let their
salesmen loose.
I don’t know whether the business depression that is now
prevailing has made you realize how careful you must be
in making up your mind what to pay for the next season’s
product.
It is useless for me to try to impress on you now that you
will not be able to pay as much for the next season’s product
as you paid for last season’s ; if you have not learned your
lesson by this time, nothing can make you wake up.
There is just one thing that I wish to call you attention
to — the fact that pictures today cost less than they did a
year ago. The producers, pressed by Wall Street as well
as by the knowledge that you will not pay big prices during
the coming season, have cut out most waste. So you, too,
should benefit from the reduced production costs.
Take it easy this year! Don’t rush to buy! There is
plenty of time !
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, Under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MAY 12, 1928
No. 19
1927-28 SUBSTITUTIONS
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer
THE PATSY (828), with Marion Davies: This pic-
ture is being delivered in place of “Dumb Dora.” “Dumb
Dora” was to have been founded on the comic strip by
Chic Young; “The Patsy” has been founded on the
stage play by Barry Connors. A clear substitution, and
therefore you are not obligated to accept it; but since it
is a good picture there is no harm in accepting it and
keeping the good wdi of the exchange.
UNDER THE BLACK EAGLE (802): This pic-
ture was promised with Bonaparte, the dog; it is being
delivered with another dog, Flash. A star substitution;
but the change in dogs should not make any difference,
although the picture is not being delivered as promised.
Accept it !
ACROSS TO SINGAPORE (830), with Ramon No-
varro. This picture has been founded on a story by Ben
Ames Williams; it is being delivered in place of “The
Prince of Graustark,” by George Barr McCutcheon. A
clear substitution and you are not obligated to accept it.
THE BIG CITY (839), with Lon Chaney: This pic-
ture has been founded on an original story by Tod
Browning; it is being delivered in place of “Hate.” Since
“Hate” was to have been founded on the story “The
Four Stragglers,” which is an Apache story by Frank
Packard, it is a clear substitution and you are not obli-
gated to accept it.
First National
FLYING ROMEOS (455), with Charles Murray and
George Sidney: This is a story by John McDermott;
it deals with two barbers, who get mixed up with areo-
planes and aviators. It is being delivered in place of
“Down Went McGinty,” which was to have been founded
on the popular song of the same name. It is a story sub-
stitution. But since it is a good picture no one is the
loser for accepting it.
THE CHASER (426), with Harry Langdon (No. 1) :
This picture has been founded on an original story by
Harry Langdon himself. “Butter and Egg Man,” in
whose place it is being delivered, was to have been
founded on the stage play by George S. Kaufman. It is
a clear substitution and you are not obligated to ac-
cept it.
CHINATOWN CHARLIE (461), with Johnny
Hines: This picture has been founded on a story by
Owen Davis, and unfolds in New York’s Chinatown.
“A Pair of Sixes,” for which it is being delivered, was
to be a “stage farce comedy.” It is no doubt a substi-
tution, but since it is a good picture no one is the loser
for it.
MAD HOUR (447) : This picture has been founded
on Elinor Glyn’s “Man and the Moment.” The working
sheet described this picture as a Kane No. 4, to be di-
rected by Allan Dwan. But since “Mad Hour” has been
directed by Joseph C. Boyle, it is a director substitution.
It is not bad picture, however, and I don’t think you will
lose anything by accepting it.
THE WHIP WOMAN (44s) : This picture has been
founded on a story by Forrest Halsey and Leland Hay-
ward. It is being delivered for “Golden Calf” (Robert
Kane No. 2), which was to have been founded on Aaron
Davis’ Liberty Magazine story. It is a clear substitution
and you don’t have to accept it. (Note: I am sorry that
I did not discover this before, for the picture is so poor
that it is not worth playing.)
FRENCH DRESSING (446), with H. B. Warner:
This picture was promised with Ben Lyon and is being
delivered with H. B. Warner. Since Mr. Warner is a
celebrity First National is delivering more than it
promised.
Fox
DRESSED TO KILL, with Edmund Lowe and
Mary Astor, directed by Irving Cummings: This is
being delivered in place of “Silk Hats,” which was to
have been directed by Raoul Walsh, and to be acted by
Edmund Loew and Madge Bellamy. It is a star and
director substitution, but the picture has turned out so
good that no one is the loser by such a substitution. It
is great silk-hatted crook melodrama.
GATEWAY OF THE MOON, with Dolores Del
Rio: This picture has been founded on a story by Clif-
ford Bax and has been directed by John Griffith Wray.
“Luna Park,” in whose place it is being delivered, was to be
a story of carnival life, unfolding in Coney Island ; it was
to be directed by Howard Hawks, and to be acted by
Victor McLaglen and Greta Nissen. A story, star and
director substitution and you don’t have to accept it.
SQUARE CROOKS, with Robert Armstrong, John
Mack Brown and Dorothy Appleby; it has been di-
rected by Lew Seiler. It is being delivered in place of
“Widow-in-Law,” which was to be a comedy to feature
Edmund Lowe, Mary Duncan and Sally Phipps, and to
be directed by Albert Ray. It is a director and star and
undoubtedly a story substitution and you don’t have to
accept it. But since it is a pretty good picture you don’t
lose anything by accepting it, thus keeping the good
will of the exchange.
SHARPSHOOTERS, with George O’Brien and
Lois Moran; it has been founded on a story by Randall
H. Faye, and has been directed by J. G. Blystone. It
takes the place of “The Girl Downstairs,” which was
to be an original story by May Edginton, to be directed
by Frank Borzage, and to be acted by Olive Broden
and Edmund Lowe. It is a story, star and director sub-
stitution, but since it has turned out to be such a knock-
out comedy, Fox is delivering as good a picture as he
promised, and better.
LOVE HUNGRY, with Lois Moran, M. Beebe, and
Lawrence Gray; founded on a story by Randall FT
F'aye. This picture is being delivered in place of “The
Comedian,” which was to have been founded on the
stage play by Sacha Guitry, to be acted by Janet Gay-
nor (some working sheets give Greta Nissen as the
( Continued on last page )
IN THE INTEREST OF FAIR PLAY
From time to time in Harrison’s Reports, I have pub-
lished articles concerning the varied activities of Charles
C. Pettijohn in the motion picture field.
Strong representations have been made to me that
these articles reflect upon the character, honesty, integ-
rity and ability of Charles C. Pettijohn.
I sincerely deplore that anybody should have placed
a wrong interpretation upon those articles, because I
had no intention and have no intention of writing any-
thing calculated to or which might injuriously affect
Pettijohn personally or his standing, character, ability,
honesty or reputation.
So that there may be no misunderstanding as to my
intentions expressed in those articles, I now make clear
that they were simply aimed at criticising his activities
solely, but with no aim or purpose to do him any per-
sonal injury or to cast any reflection upon his person.
In the interest of fair play to all, I cheerfully write
this article so as to remove any possibility of any mis-
understanding on this score or my intentions in connec-
tion with those articles.
74
May 12, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Under the Black Eagle” — with
Ralph Forbes, Marceline Day and “Flash”
( Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer , Mar. 24; 5,901 ft.; 71 to 82 min.)
A fair program picture. It is a war drama not particu-
larly original but has action and suspense. And it does give
one side of the war, which other war dramas have over-
looked; that is, how the celebrated German dogs were
trained to fight the enemy and to carry messages.
The story revolves around a young German artist (hero)
who, during his enforced military training, learns to hate
even the thought of war. “Flash,” one of the dogs at the
training barracks, becomes very much attached to the hero,
who rescues him from the tyranny and cruelty of the dog
instructor. The hero and the instructor are in love with
the heroine (Marceline Day), daughter of the Colonel in
charge of the school. She rather favors the hero. The dog
goes home with the hero at the end of the term and when
war is declared he follows his master, the hero, who at first
is very cowardly. But he becomes brave when the former
instructor, now his buddy, is killed. The hero is wounded
in trying to save his sector and is brought back to health
by the heroine, who had become a nurse. After the war
they marry.
There is a thrilling fight in the barracks when the in-
structor wanted to have Flash killed because he would
not obey him. Flash hides under the hero’s bunk and
escapes by jumping through the window. There is tense
suspense when Flash in searching for his master, is picked
up by soldiers bringing the other war dogs to the front, and
when he eventually finds the hero wounded he gets help
and rescues him.
The romance is nicely interwoven. While hatred is
aroused in the spectator for the instructor, it is lost by his
bravery at the front and one feels very sorry when he is
shown killed. William Fairbanks, as the instructor, is very
good; and so is Marc McDermott, as the Colonel. Miss
Marceline Day is charming. The picture has been founded
on an original story by Norman Houston; it was directed
by W. S. Van Dyke. It should please audiences that have
not grown tired of the many war dramas which do not differ
very much.
“Glorious Betsy” — with
Dolores Costello and Conrad Nagel
(IV arner Bros. Extended-Run Production; 6,800 ft.)
Excellently produced! It directs a deep appeal to the
emotions. There is comedy here and there, too. Most of
the comedy is caused by Mr. Nagel, who assumes the role
of Jerome, the brother of Napoleon Bonaparte; Jerome is
shown coming to America with his retinue. Thrice his
body guards are shown announcing the arrival of the
brother of Napoleon; but just as many times do they find
the carriage empty, Jerome having disappeared. They are
thus shown as mortified, and made to offer suitable expla-
nations. The first time this occurred, the comedy is caused
after the incident. But in the other two times, the specta-
tors laugh before the attendants open the door of the car-
riage ; they know in advance that Jerome will be found miss-
ing. The second time this occurred is where Jerome’s body-
guards eventually discover him in the heroine’s home, in
a small town in the interior, posing as a teacher of French ;
he had been teaching the French language to the heroine.
They persuade him to return to Philadelphia. The heroine’s
father receives a request to make his Philadelphia residence
ready to house Jerome. He is naturally proud of it and
departs for Philadelphia. The heroine invites her tutor to
go along but Jerome, whom the heroine still thinks a teacher
of French, refuses to go at that time. The heroine, angered,
goes alone with her father. Jerome naturally goes to
Philadelphia, accompanied by his bodyguard. When they
reach the heroine’s house and make the dignified announce-
ment that the brother of Napoleon is about to exit from
the carriage .they find him missing when they open the
door. This causes roars of laughter.
A great many of the laughs are caused by the heroine’s
ignorance of the fact that the man she loved and whom she
later promised to marry is the brother of Napoleon the
Great.
The scenes in France, where the heroine begs Napoleon
to reconsider his decision of annulling their marriage for
reasons of state, are very pathetic. The subsequent scenes,
which show the heroine back in America, broken in spirit,
too, are deeply moving. But the height of emotional appeal
is reached in the closing scenes, where Jerome makes a
sudden appearance and rushes and embraces the heroine.
He explains to her that he had escaped from France, be-
cause he could not live without her.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by Rida
Johnson Young. It has been directed by Allan Crossland
with great skill. Miss Costello does excellent work. Con-
rad Nagel’s work is good. John Miljan, Pasquale Amato,
Marc McDermott, Michael Vavitch, Andre de Segurola,
Paul Panzer, Clarissa Selwynne, Betty Blythe and others
are in the cast.
Note: Though an excellent picture, it is not setting the
world “afire” at the Warner Theatre, this city, where it is
now playing. The fact that it is a costume play may be one
of the reasons for it.
“Abie’s Irish Rose” — with a Star Cast
( Paramount Superspccial ; 12,103 ft-)
There are many laughs and tears in this Irish-Hebrew
comedy-drama. In the first reel, the action is shifted to
France, where the hero, son of a Hebrew, is shown mor-
tally wounded and the hroine, daughter of a Catholic Irish-
man, who loved him, coming face to face with him, the hero.
The scenes where she is shown kneeling by the unconscious
form of the hero and praying, after her prayers the hero
being shown regaining consciousness, will send thrill after
thrill through a person’s system. There are other moving
situations in the picture, but the one in France is the most
moving. Comedy is caused chiefly by the acting of that
fine actor, Jean Hersholt, who impersonates the hero’s
father. J. Farrell McDonald does not appear very much in
the picture ; but whenever he appears he, too, causes laughs.
The scenes towards the end where both fathers visit the
hero’s home secretly, the Hebrew having been lured there
by the Rabbi and the Irishman by his friend, the Catholic
priest, causes many laughs ; each is shown as having brought
presents for their grandchild. The Hebrew had thought
that the grandchild was a son ; the Irishman, that it was a
daughter. They soon discover, however, that there were
twins, one boy and one girl.
The plot, which has been founded on Anne Nichols’ stage
play, deals with a young Hebrew who meets a young Irish
girl. They fall in love with each other. They return to
America, each hoping to induce his parent to consent to
their marriage. Seeing how hopeless their situation is,
they decide to marry. The ceremony is performed by a
Methodist minister. The hero tells his father, an orthodox
Hebrew, that he has invited a girl to their house for dinner.
When the girl arrives, the father, who was led to believe
that she was a Hebrew, is so pleased with her appearance
and youth that he works towards bringing about a marriage
between her and his son. The two still refrain from setting
the hero’s father right. The day of the Hebrew wedding is
set. The heroine telegraphs to her father to come to New
York for the wedding. The father takes a priest friend of
his along to perform the wedding ceremony. When the priest
and the heroine’s father reach the hero’s house, they find
the couple married. The innocent deception then becomes
known. The Irishman leaves his daughter and goes back to
California, vowing never to recognize her again and to
think her dead. The Hebrew, too, evicts his son from the
house and determines to think him dead to him. The couple
is taken by some kind-hearted Hebrew friends to their
home. The hero obtains a position and they make their own
home. They are soon blessed with a child. On Christmas
eve there is a reunion, the rabbi on the one hand and the
Catholic priest on the other having worked hard to recon-
cile the fathers towards the mixed marriage.
Charles Rogers is the young hero; Nancy Carroll the
young heroine; Jean Hersholt the Hebrew father; J. Far-
rell McDonald the Irish father. Bernard Gorcey, Ida
Kramer, Nick Cogley, Camilus Prestel, Rosa Rosanova
and others are in the cast. All do good work.
The picture is chiefly propaganda for tolerance between
the Jews and the Christians. It is handled delicately.
Note: While it is a very good picture, it is not what
one would call “the greatest picture that has ever been
produced.” It is not drawing at the 44th Street Theatre,
where it is now being shown at $2 top prices. Its failure
to draw may be due to the high price that is charged for
admission; it is possible again that the cause may not be
just that. The fact remains, however, that the picture is
not drawing.
\
HARRISON’S REPORTS
75
May 12, 1928
“Two Lovers” — with
Ronald Colman and Vilma Banky
( United, Artists, Aug. 18; 7,500 ft.; 87 to 107 min.)
This is an excellent drama, produced with extreme care.
Direction and acting are of such a high order, and the action
is so interesting and appealing, that one’s interest never lags
up to the last scene. There is suspense in many of the sit-
uations, caused by the fact that the life of the hero is put
in danger. The hero is shown as being a prominent member
of a Flemish secret society, the aim of which was to
organize the Dutch to drive the Spaniards, who were the
conquerors, out of Flanders, their country. The scenes
that show their secret betrayed by the heroine herself, who
had been forced by her uncle, commander of the armies of
the invaders, to marry the hero, even though she loved
another man, are suspensive in the extreme. One does not
feel antipathy towards her because she had misjudged the
hero. She had learned that the hero had killed her beloved,
but she was unaware of the fact that he had killed him
because he, the dead man, had attempted to assault a young
girl. The scenes that show the heroine, after she had been
informed what the cause of the murder was, rides back
and, by using the secret information to which she had acci-
dentally come into possession, induces the Dutchmen to
come to the aid of the hero and to drive the Spaniards out
of Flanders, are suspensive in the extreme. The suspense
reaches its highest point in the scenes that show the Dutch-
men crossing the morass, which reached their necks and,
by using the drawbridge, which the heroine with super-
human efforts had succeeded in lowering, entering the town
and subduing the invaders, forcing them to sign a treaty
of peace, one of the stipulations being the evacuation of
their land.
The plot has been founded on “Leatherface,” by Baroness
Orczy; it has been directed with intelligence by Fred
Niblo. Ronald Colman and Vilma Banky do excellent
work. Noah Beery, as the commander of the Spanish forces,
is good, too. Nigel de Brulier, Virginia Bradford, Helen
Jerome Eddy, Eugenie Besserer, Paul Lucas and others are
in the cast.
Note : This picture, too, is not drawing at the Embassy,
on Broadway, this city, where it is now playing. Perhaps
the fact that it is a costume play accounts for it.
“Vamping Venus” — with
Charles Murray and Louise Fazenda
( First National, May 13; 6,027 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
Produced most lavishly, and with an expenditure of a
large amount of money, but it is doubtful if the picture will
appeal to the masses. It is a high-class picture ; it unfolds
chiefly in the days of ancient Greece, and shows the hero
(Charles Murray) as a modern person who finds himself
among ancient people, just like the cowboy in “A Connecti-
cut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court,” who found himself
in ancient England. There is comedy here and there but
not enough to hurt anybody’s sides. The hero is transported
to the days of ancient Greece by a beer bottle, with which
he was struck on the head, while he was trying to be gay
with another person’s sweetheart, at the cabaret where
this girl was working. During his unconsciousness, he sees
the “sweetheart” as Venus, the Goddess; the man who had
struck him on the head with the beer bottle as Hercules ;
his wife, as Circe. Young Spec O’Donnell impersonates
Mercury, the messenger of the Gods; Fred O’Beck is Vul-
can ; Gustav von Sefferitz is Jupiter. Mr. Murray sees
his wife and is frightened. But he regains his composure
when he is told by Mars, his guide, that she is not his wife
but Circe, the enchantress. Some comedy is caused by
Miss Fazenda, as Circe, when she uses her "baton” to make
people come to her, even though they tried to escape her
“charms.” Some more comedy is caused when Mr. Murray
regains consciousness and is faced by his wife, who, having
learned accidentally from a radio that he was at that
cabaret, rushed to twist his ear.
The picture has been directed by Eddie Cline.
“Harold Teen” — with ,
Arthur Lake and Mary Brian
(First National, April 29; 7,439 ft.; 86 to 106 min.)
Not much to it. It is a silly college play, in which nothing
extraordinary happens, the action consisting mainly of
college boy pranks, a college boy love affair, and of a foot-
ball game, in which the hero, like in all pictures of this
kind, appears at the last minute to save the game for his
college. In most of the film Arthur Lake is made to act
as a simpleton. A mild thrill or so is offered near the closing
scenes by the bursting of a dam.
The story shows the hero going to Covina, California, to
attend high school. He was glad to go there because the
heroine, whom he loved, moved to that town, too. His
cousin, in whose house he lived, did everything he could
to make things uncomfortable for the young hero. Even-
tually, however, the hero gains so much popularity that he
overshadows the popularity of his cousin.
Some amateur pictures are shown being taken by the
school boy characters and thrown on the screen. It is
hardly likely that they will cause any laughter.
The story has been founded on the comic strip by Carl
Edwards. It has been adapted by Tom Gerathy, and directed
by Mervyn LeRoy. Lucien Littlefield, Jack Duffy, Alice
White, Hedda Hopper and others are in the cast.
“After the Storm” — with Hobart Bosworth
(Columbia, April 19; 5,459 ft.; 65 to 74 min. )
Mediocre ; not even the usual good acting of Hobart Bos-
worth in his familiar role of sea captain and the one or two
thrilling scenes of a fight in a dive in Singapore and the
storm-tossed ship, can make this tiresome picture enter-
taining.
The action is very slow and story is so unoriginal. It
revolves around a sea captain (hero) who in his youth was
a smuggler in love with the girl who he supposed had
betrayed him to the police. Hating all women as a result,
he opposed the match of his son when he fell in love with
the heroine (Eugenia Gilbert), daughter of the woman he
was to marry once, when she came on board at her dying
mother’s request that she be taken to San Francisco. But
after finding out from his dying wife (a beach- walker)
in Singapore, who had divorced him right after the police
had sent him to prison for five years, that it was she that
had betrayed him and not his sweetheart, he exerted every
effort to rescue the young couple when they were caught in
a violent storm while eloping in a small boat. After the
rescue he consents to their marriage.
Miss Gilbert is a pleasing heroine and Charles Delaney
is likeable as the son who is exceedingly fond of his father.
George Kuwa contributes the comedy as the superstitious
Chinese cook. The picture was directed by Joe Nadel under
the supervision of George Seitz. No author is credited
with the story. Most of the action is on board and some of
it is along the waterfront of Singapore though only the
one Chinese character appears in the cast.
You might get by if Hobart Bosworth is a favorite or if
you play it as a double feature.
“Easy Come, Easy Go” — with Richard Dix
(Paramount, April 21 ; 5,364 ft.; 64 to 73 min.)
It is an amusing farce comedy. Though the plot is a
pretty weak story, it has made good entertainment. The
subtitles as well as the situations cause the laughs. Mr.
Dix, as the hero, is fired by his father, a radio station owner,
because he used profane language in his broadcasting.
Angry at the world, he is almost run over by a truck
driven by another “swear-artist.” At this time he meets
the heroine (Nancy Carroll), who, with her father, a mil-
lionaire, is on his way to a sanitarium for his (the father’s)
health, and immediately falls in love with her. Out of grati-
tude for having been rescued by the stranger crook, he helps
the crook, who had just stolen the payroll of the heroine's
father, make his get-away, and with him, they travel on the
same train as the heroine to the sanitarium. Mr. Dix has
difficulty in making everyone realize that he is not the
crook and after many misunderstandings and mixups, the
real crook is caught. He wins the heroine and the friend-
ship of the millionaire.
While Mr. Dix does good work as the poor but mis-
judged honest young man, the acting honors go to Charles
Sellon whose burlesquing of a veteran crook made the
audience chuckle considerably. Others in the cast are Ar-
nold Kent as the would-be fiance of the heroine and the
late Frank Currier as the heroine’s father.
The picture is founded on the stage play by Owen Davis,
scenarized by Florence Ryerson and directed with skill by
Frank Tuttle.
76
HARRISON’S REPORTS
star), and to be directed by Victor Schertzinger. It is a
story, star, and director substitution; but since the pic-
ture has turned out pretty good, you can’t lose by ac-
cepting it.
Columbia
BROADWAY DADDIES: Promised as a story by
Grace Atkinson. The finished product has been founded
on a story by Victoria Moore. A story substitution. It
is a fair drama and you can use your own judgment
whether you want to accept it or not.
THE DESERT BRIDE: An Arabian desert story
by Ewart Adamson. It was promised as a “Frances
Marion story of an international vampire — a gold-
digger of Europe and America (not a bad program pic-
ture). It is a clear story substitution.
MATINEE IDOL: A comedy-drama of stage life
by Ernest Pagano and Robert Lord. It is being deliv-
ered in place of “Come Back to Aaron,” which was
promised as “A sure-fire racial hit — pathos, comedy,
love and hate.” Manifestly a story substitution.
A WOMAN’S WAY : This is a picture of Paris life
by Izola Forrester; the original title given to it by the
author was “Paris Nights.” It was promised originally
as a picture to be found on the Thompson Buchanan
stage play. A story substitution. (It is only a fair
picture.)
SO THIS IS LOVE: A pugilistic picture, the qual-
ity of which is very good. It was originally promised
as the story of a gold-digger, by Gertrude Atherton. It
is a story substitution, but since it is a good picture you
should accept it.
LADY RAFFLES: The finished product has been
founded on a story by Jack Jungmeyer and Fred Stan-
ley. It was promised as a picture to be founded on a
story by Alfred Henry Lewis. It is a clear story sub-
stitution; but since the picture is very good, no one will
be the loser by accepting it.
THE OPENING NIGHT: The finished product
has been founded on a story by Albert Payson Terhune.
It was promised as a picture to be founded on a story
by Owen Davis. A clear story substitution. But since it
is a good drama you don’t lose anything by accepting it.
THE TIGRESS, with Dorothy Revier: It was prom-
ised with Priscilla Dean. It is a star substitution.
THE COLLEGE HERO : The finished product has
been founded on a story by Henry Simonds. The origi-
nal story was to be by Willard Mack. A story substi-
tution.
SECTION 4A OF THE NEW YORK
ARBITRATION ACT
The two articles on judgments by default, one of
which was printed last week, have aroused so much in-
terest among the exhibitors that I asked Mr. Harry
Suchman, as said last week a lawyer and prominent
member of Theatre Owners Chamber of Commerce, to
give me his opinion on Section 4A of the New York
State Arbitration Act. Mr. Suchman has written me as
follows:
“My dear Pete:
“I have given special study to Section 4A of the Arbi-
tration Law of the State of New York and my opinions
in the matter based on such study, are as follows:
“The purpose of the section obviously, is to do away
with the necessity of obtaining a court order as pro-
vided for in Section 3, to compel a reluctant litigant to
arbitrate and in its place, to permit the awarding of a
default judgment upon the failure of either of the liti-
gants to appear; the belief being, that such defaulting
litigant may, upon motion of his opponent to confirm
the award, set forth his objections to the award proce-
dure, etc., as provided for in this Section.
“At first blush, this proposition seems harmless and
the worst interpretation might be that which shifts the
burden from the plaintiff to the defendant. However,
were all the defendants in arbitration cases to be served
personally as required in a court of law, due and proper
notice would be given to prevent any fast ones being
put over on defendants. According to present procedure,
a registered letter is directed to a theatre in which the
litigant is interested and such letter may or may not
reach the hands of the party for whom it is intended and
very often a default judgment may be taken against
such litigant even though he may be unaware of the
May 12, 1928
pendency of a case aganst him. Nor can this condition
be remedied upon an argument of a motion to confirm
the award, because the question of service, etc., would
be matters for the judge to determine and if such deter-
mination would be adverse to the alleged defaulting
party, he would be deprived of his day in court on the
merits of the controversy.
“This is one of the most glaring pitfalls confronting
the exhibitor if arbitration boards should operate in
accordance with Section 4A. The Section permits the
granting of default awards but it is still discretionary
on the part of the arbitrators whether or not they, under
the circumstances, desire to hand out such awards. I,
for one, will state positively at the present time, that
under the present conditions of service and enforcement,
I would never sit as an arbitrator in a case where only
one of the litigants appears.
“Section 4A intimates the procedure of enforcement
of the award, namely, by confirmation of the award on
motion. If all awards were enforced in this way instead
of the manner now pursued by the distributors, which
in my opinion, is illegal and I trust will be so held by
the Government at the conclusion of its present action,
and were the method of service amended so that there
would be no doubt as to the proper notice being brought
to the attention of the litigants, I would be strongly in-
clined in favor of the Arbitration Board operating in
accordance with Section 4A. Of course, this method of
procedure would be more costly and more cumbersome
to distributors, but on the other hand, it would be more
equitable which in my humble opinion, should be the
only basis up on which arbitration boards should op-
erate.
“So, to sum up, it is my opinion that arbitration
boards should not issue default awards unless the entire
machinery of service and enforcement is brought within
the confines of law and equity.
“Sincerely yours,
“HARRY SUCHMAN.”
Mr. Suchman is right: if the awards were to be en-
forced through legal channels, perhaps there could be
no objection to working under Section 4A, for the ex-
hibitor would, after all, be given his day in court. But
they are not enforced that way; the producer-distribu-
tors use the Film Boards as a club against the exhibi-
tors; through them, they demand penalties, in the form
of additional securities, an act which is, as Mr. Suchman
says, and as many other lawyers have stated, in viola-
tion of the law. No one can stop a distributor from re-
fusing film service to an exhibitor against whom he has
secured an award, which such exhibitor refuses to carry
out; but it is different when other distributors, persons
with whom this exhibitor has had no quarrel, join the
one distributor to force the exhibitor to “come through.”
No one would blame even the other distributors for re-
fusing him service if such exhibitor went to them for
product afterwards; but they have no right to refuse
him service on the existing contracts. And I am sure
that if an exhibitor who has been so treated went to the
courts, he would most surely get redress.
Section 4A affects almost solely this industry. In
other industries, the arbitration agreements provide,
with perhaps an exception here and there, that each of
the parties shall appoint an arbitrator, the two arbitrators
to select a third arbitrator. To such arbitration agree-
ments, Section 4A is meaningless, for there are no arbi-
trators to render a judgment by default; these must be
appointed. In this industry, however, it is different; the
arbitrators are appointed, not by the parties to an arbi-
tration agreement, but by outsiders.
I again urge the exhibitor-arbitrators to refuse to sit
in cases where one of the parties fails to appear. There is
nothing in the arbitration law that compels members of
a board to act. According to the Minneapolis judge, the
one who heard the case of Warner Bros, against the
Minneapolis arbitration board, which refused to hear
any cases because Warner Bros, took court action to
compel the arbitration board to hear its cases, an arbi-
tration board is a voluntary body and cannot be com-
pelled to hear a case. The exhibitor-arbitrators, in refus-
ing to sit in such cases, would be refusing to lend them-
selves to furthering the oppressive measures the pro-
ducer-distributors are resorting to in order to gain
monetary advantage. Harrison’s Reports is and al-
ways has been in favor of arbitration. But it is in favor
of voluntary arbitration, conducted along fair lines. And
the present system is neither voluntary nor fair.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MAY 19, 1928
No. 20
THE MASTERS ARE BECOMING SLAVES
The men who for several years have been the
masters of the moving picture industry are about
to become the slaves. The invention of synchro-
nized sound and motion in pictures is bringing this
condition about.
The new master is to be the Radio Corporation
of America.
In order for you to realize fully the significance
of the late developments as a result of this inven-
tion, it is necessary that certain things be made
clear to you : First, the synchronization of sound
and motion will, according to predictions, supplant
the silent drama. In other words, in a short time no
theatre will be able to show the pictures in their
present form ; they will have to show them with
the modern invention — accompanied by mechani-
cally reproduced music. And the pictures will have
to be produced with that end in view. This will
naturally bring about changes also in the production
of pictures ; the directors will have to possess the
knowledge necessitated by the new invention, and
the screen actors will have to possess the training
of the stage actors so as to enable them to speak
their lines not only clearly but also effectively.
The second thing for you to bear in mind is the
fact that the Radio Corporation of America, by vir-
tue of the patents it controls in the recording, repro-
duction and transmission of sound, has the moving
picture industry in its grip.
What is the Radio Corporation of America?
Let me quote from the testimony of Mr. Nathan
Burkan, the eminent New York attorney, so well
known and respected by all in the moving picture
industry, which he gave before the Senate Commit-
tees that held the joint hearings on the Copyright
Bills, S. 2328 and H. R. 10353, last year :
* * *
“The General Electric Co., the Western Electric
Co., and the Westinghouse Manufacturing Co., are
the largest manufacturers of radio and electrical
products in the world. During the years 1919, and
1920, these corporations signed a number of con-
tracts, under which some 2,000 patents relating to
radio were pooled. I have mentioned the American
Telegraph & Telephone Co., so often, that I nearly
forgot to add that the American Telephone & Tele-
graph Co., is also a party to these agreements. . . .
‘‘The American Telephone & Telegraph Co.,
owns the \\ estern Electric. The Western Electric
Co., is the manufacturing and sales company for
the American Telephone & Telegraph Co., and
manufactures all the devices used in connection
with radio broadcasting transmission. This com-
pany owned or was licensed under various patents
covering inventions useful both in radio and in wire
telephony. Under these patents it manufactures
and sells apparatus principally to the parent com-
pany, the American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
“The Radio Corporation of America was caused
to be organized by the General Electric Co., on Oc-
tober 17, 1919. Thereafter, the General Electric Co.,
the Western Electric Co., the Westinghouse Elec-
tric & Manufacturing Co., the Radio Corporation
of America, and the American Telephone & Tele-
graph Co., and others, the companies which own or
control practically all patents — approximately
2,000 in number — covering radio devices consid-
ered important to the art — entered into agreements
for the pooling of such patents and for the control
and domination of the radio field in America.
“With certain minor limitations, the Radio Cor-
poration under these agreements has secured an ex-
clusive right to sell and use the radio devices cov-
ered by the patents involved, or by patents which
these companies may acquire before the termination
of the agreements. . . .
“The Radio Corporation of America, under these
agreements, is made the selling company for prac-
tically all the radio devices to be sold to the public
under the hundreds of patents involved. The Gen-
eral Electric Co., and the Westinghouse Electric &
Manufacturing Co., are to manufacture and sell to
the Radio Corporation only these devices and ap-
paratus, the Radio Corporation agreeing that 60
per cent of its annual requirements be purchased
from the General Electric Co., and 40 per cent from
the Westinghouse Co.
“The Radio Corporation has practically a monop-
oly in the sale of vacuum tubes. In the sale of re-
ceiving sets, the Radio Corporation predominates
in the field. The Western Electric Co., is manufac-
turing and selling only transmitting apparatus to
commercial purposes.
“Having pooled their 2,000 patents, which gives
them almost absolute, complete, and positive domi-
nation of the radio industry of America, they have
parceled out among themselves the whole field of
radio activity in the United States. To each one
has been allotted its own particular and special field
and department of activity. And the others are re-
quired to respect such field and not to encroach
upon that particular field, but each guaranteeing the
other protection against invasion by outsiders. . . .
“ . . . The General Electric Co., organized the
Radio Corporation of America. On December 31,
1922, there were outstanding and issued by the Ra-
dio Corporation of America, 3,955,974 preferred
shares, par value $5 per share and 5,734,0000 shares
of common stock, no par value. . . .
( Concluded on last page )
78
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Hold ’Em Yale” — with Rod La Rocque
( Pathe-DeMille , May 14 ; 7,056 ft.; 82 to 100 min.)
Not much to it ! It is another college play in which the
saving of a football game by the hero for his college has
been depended upon to put the picture over. The different
characters’ doings that lead up to the game are of no par-
ticular interest. The trouble with it is chiefly the lack of
color in the heroic characters. Neither Mr. La Rocque
nor Jeanette Loff, his leading woman, does anything to
arouse the spectator’s interest or to make him feel sym-
pathetic towards either of them. The football scenes, in
which the hero is shown as saving the game at the last min-
ute, are painful in the extreme ; the hero is shown as having
been injured in an automobile accident and as having been
taken to a hospital where a doctor performs an operation
on his arm. It was immediately after the operation that the
hero is shown as having run away from the hospital and
as having gone to the field and joined the game. The spec-
tator feels squeamish because the hero plays with an in-
jured arm. These scenes are somewhat inhuman. There is
supposed to be some comedy in the scenes where a student
plays a practical joke on the hero when he arrives at the
station, Yale-bound ; he had been fooled into entering a
police patrol wagon to go to the campus ; but the comedy
misses fire. Some comedy may be caused in the scenes
where the stupid detective is shown as seeking to arrest the
hero, whom he mistook for a criminal. The love affair
between the hero and the heroine is no different from the
hundreds of other love affairs in pictures ; it offers no
extraordinary features.
The plot has been founded on the story “At Yale,” by
Owen Davis. The picture has been directed by Edward H.
Griffith.
The hero is presented as an Argentine youth, who goes
to Yale, falls in love with the heroine, becomes a football
star, tries to save his sweetheart’s brother from trouble at
the expense of his disobeying the orders of the coach on the
eve of the great football game, becomes injured in an auto-
mobile accident while at his good-hearted mission, is taken
to the hospital where a doctor performs an operation on
his arm, “steals” out of the hospital, rushes to the field,
joins the game and helps win it.
“Gypsy of the North” — with Georgia Hale
and Huntley Gordon
( Rayart , released, in April; 5,976 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
If it were not so discomiected at first, this would have
been a very good melodrama of Alaska, for it is thrilling
and suspensive and the photography and snow scenes are
quite good. The scenes in the dance hall where the fights
take place are thrilling as are the scenes of the fight between
the gambler and the villain in the snow-covered valleys and
woods. The suspense is caused by the fact that the gambler
had been suspected all along of the killing although he was
likeable and liked by everybody. The pathos is caused by
the fact that the Frenchman who had formerly sung and
laughed continuously is made sorrowful by the plight of his
only child.
The story concerns a young girl (heroine) who has a
very small part in a show in San Francisco. On the night
her brother is expected back from Alaska with a fortune,
she is given the part of the star who had become ill. But
before the performance she learns from her brother’s pal
that her brother had been robbed and killed. After the
show, she returns with him to Alaska to avenge her brother’s
death. She meets the gambler who rescues her after she
had fallen from her sleigh into the snow and he takes her
to her brother’s cabin though he doesn’t disclose his iden-
tity. The heroine had fallen in love with him. But as
soon as she finds out that he was suspected of killing her
brother she shoots him. In the meantime, the real killer is
sought by the hunter whose daughter he had betrayed.
Just before the villain had a chance to kill the gambler, he
is killed by the Frenchman.
Georgia Hale plays the dual role of the San Francisco
show girl and her twin brother, a rather weak gambling-
fevered youth. Huntley Gordon is the honest gambler
(hero), who is suspected as being the killer of the youth.
May 19, 1928
Jack Daugherty is the dance hall proprietor (villain), who
was the real robber and murderer. He had also seduced
the daughter of the French hunter and had attempted to win
the heroine when she took a job from him as a dancer, so
that she might find the murderer.
The picture is based on a story by Howard Emmett and
it was directed by Scott Pembroke. As it is a great deal
like a serial thriller, the action being mysterious and ex-
ceedingly melodramatic at times, it should please audiences
who like this type of entertainment in spite of the fact that
the story does not run smoothly at all times ; it is gripping
and holds one’s attention.
“The House of Scandals” — with Dorothy
Sebastian and Pat O’Malley
( Tiffany-Stahl , April 1; 5,321 ft.; 61 to 76 min.)
Not a bad crook melodrama. It is suspensive, thrilling,
humorous and romantic.
The story revolves around an Irishman (hero), a New
York cop, whose brother, who had landed from Ireland on
the day the hero had been decorated for bravery, causes all
kinds of mischief by donning his brother’s uniform and
parading as a cop. While wearing the uniform he rescues
a girl that had been in a taxi collision. He falls in love
with her at first sight. He calls on her supposed-home,
which really is a nest of crooks. A jeweller, whose pearl
necklace the crooks had substituted with a paste string, asks
him to arrest them but he refuses to do so because he is not
a cop. The jeweler tears a button off his uniform and re-
ports the matter to police headquarters. The hero’s su-
periors grill the hero in an effort to make him tell the
name of the person that had worn his uniform and his shield.
It is eventually revealed that all the trouble had been caused
by the young brother unthinkingly.
The scenes where the young brother refuses to make the
arrests are suspensive. There is pathos in the scenes in the
girl’s own home when she asks her sweetheart^ who had
traced and arrested her, not to tell her mother who she
really is. The hero awakens sympathy for refusing to give
the name of his brother.
Dorothy Sebastian as the crook that reforms and marries
her sweetheart after serving out her sentence is good. Pat
O’Malley, as the hero, is good, too. Harry Murray has a
winning personality and is likeable as the young brother.
The plot has been founded on a story by E. Morton
Hough ; it was directed by King Baggott.
“Terror Mountain” — with Tom Tyler,
Frankie Darro and Jane Reid
(To be released in the Fall)
A good picture of the program grade. There is a great
deal of heart interest in it, this being caused by the unselfish-
ness of the hero, a famous actor, who, responding to an
appeal from a little boy, goes to the mountains and protects
him and his sister from the machinations of the villain and
his gang, who were trying to frighten them into leaving
their home and going away. The cause of the villain’s
machinations was his desire to find out where a wallet con-
taining money had been hidden by the heroine’s and the
young boy’s father’s partner, who had been shot by him,
the villain; he had fallen dead after entering the heroine’s
house and hiding the money in a jar. He had died, how-
ever, before he had an opportunity to tell the heroine where
he had put the money. There are several fights, of course,
between the hero and the villains, the hero winning always.
The situations where these take place will naturally please
the Tyler and Darro fans.
The plot has been founded on the original story “The
Western Star,” by Wyndham Bitten ; it has been directed
by Louis King, from a scenario by Frank Howard Clark.
Tom Tyler does well. So does Miss Jane Reid, as the
heroine. Frankie Darro is as charming as he always is.
The picture has been photographed in the Big Bear moun-
tains, near Los Angeles. The outdoor scenery is beautiful.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
79
May 19, 1928
“The Fifty-Fifty Girl” — with Bebe Daniels
( Paramount , May 12; 6,402 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
The interesting and entertaining part of this picture is
centered in the last two reels. The rest of it is pretty tire-
some.
Ihe first five reels deal with the way the hero and the
heroine had met and with the way their meeting had led up
to their falling in love with each other. The heroine is
shown as having undertaken the work of a man, and the
hero as having agreed to perform the duties of a housewife.
While the idea is original, it missed fire in its development
and in its transfer to the screen. The interesting and en-
tertaining part of the picture (the last two reels) is highly
melodramatic ; it unfolds in the tunnel of a gold mine, where
the hero and the heroine had been imprisoned by the villain,
who schemed to take away the mine, which was owned
jointly by the hero and the heroine. The suspense is tense
in that part, because the lives of the hero and the heroine
are placed in danger. The scenes that show a mysterious
wild man ready to wrap his claws around the heroine’s neck
are the most suspensive of them all. The sight of the hero
falling down a “well,” and disappearing; the mysterious
disappearance of the heroine and her reappearance ; the mad
ride of the two in the underground mine railroad, the engine
of which was driven by a demented person ; the explosion
of the dynamite when the speeding cars hit the shack where
it was stored — all these hold one in suspense.
The plot has been founded on a story by John Mc-
Dermott. The picture has been directed by Clarence Bad-
ger. James Hall plays opposite Miss Daniels; the two do
good work. William Austin furnishes considerable comedy
as the Eastern tenderfoot. George Kotsonaros takes the
part of the gorilla man in the mine.
If your patrons should happen to come in the middle of
the picture they will undoubtedly like it better than if they
came in the beginning.
“Circus Rookies” — With Karl Dane and
George K. Arthur
( Metro-Gold.-Mayer March 13; 5,661 ft; 65 to 80 min.)
Not very intelligent but it is a good entertainment just
the same, although not nearly as good as “Rookies.” There
is mild comedy almost all the way through. Now and then
it is stronger. The stronger comedy is caused in the scenes
where Karl Dane, as the simple-minded tall man, who was
pursuing a circus until he finally got a job in it, is shown
ordered by the manager to clean a cage. He goes to the
cage where a man-eating gorilla was kept, opens it, enters
it with his brooms in hand, and cleans it. Every one ex-
pected to see the gorilla tear Mr. Dane to pieces ; but it does
not happen so, for the gorilla and Mr. Dane immediately
establish a friendship, which endures. In these scenes, the
spectator is also held in tense suspense ; the ferocity of the
gorilla had been impressed on the mind of the spectator by
showing him kill one of his keepers, and by having it im-
plied that he had killed many more. Whoever impersonated
the gorilla, he did so well; at times he is taken for a real
gorilla. Other comedy is created in the latter part of the
picture ; it is chiefly horseplay between Karl Dane and
George K. Arthur. The scenes, for example, where Mr.
Arthur is shown splashing mud on Mr. Dane, spoiling his
new suit, causes immediate laughs; the mud had been
splashed when Mr. Arthur went by in his Ford and Mr.
Dane was standing near a water pool.
The plot has been founded on a story by Lew Lipton and
Edward Sedgwick ; it has been directed by Mr. Sedgwick.
Louise Lorraine, Sydney Jarvis, Fred Humes' and others
are in the cast.
“A Thief in the Dark” — with
George Meeker
(Fox, May 20; 5,937 ft. ; 69 to 84 min.)
A pretty good crook melodrama, of the program grade.
There is a great deal of suspense in the situations in the
old recluse's home, where the crooks are shown trying to
discover the place where the old man had hidden his valua-
ble jewels. Trap and revolving doors, sliding panels, and
the like help to hold the spectator in suspense. The old
recluse is shown as having fitted up his home that way in
order to make it impossible for thieves to find the hiding
place of the jewels and to steal them. There is a love affair
between George Meeker and Doris Hill ; but because Mr.
Meeker is shown as a crook, he does not awaken sympathy
at any time, not even afterwards when he turns honest.
The situation where Mr. Meeker is shown entering the
home of one of the victims of his seance-holding employer
and stealing his money, which the victim had hidden under
his pillow, is not very edifying; it sets a bad example to
young men. The fact that he later returns the wallet, again
unperceived, hardly helps to erase the bad impression that is
created in one’s mind.
The story has been written by Albert Ray and Kenneth
Hawks ; it has been directed by Mr. Ray. Gwen Lee, Mar-
jorie Beebe, James Mason, Tom McGuire and others are in
the supporting cast.
“The Yellow Lily” — with Billie Dove
(First National, May 20; 7,200 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
Not much to it !
It is evident that what induced director Alexander Korda
to write this story was the success “The Stolen Bride” has
made; for “The Yellow Lily,” too, revolves around Hun-
garians. But “The Yellow Lily” misses fire for the rea-
son that the acts of the characters are not very sympathetic,
whereas the characters in “The Stolen Bride” were.
In “The Stolen Bride” the sympathy was awakened by
the fact that two young folk loved each other, but because
the hero was a peasant, the parents of the heroine, a Princess,
considered a match between them unthinkable. Love, how-
ever, eventually triumphs.
In “The Yellow Lily,” a Hungarian Archduke (prob-
ably Archduke Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary, who com-
mitted suicide), meets the heroine, sister of a doctor, be-
comes infatuated with her, pursues her, and eventually falls
in love with her. No marriage takes place between them,
for no marriage would in real life be possible between such
persons. That is why not much sympathy is awakened ; no
love story can awaken sympathy unless pure motives ani-
mated from lovers.
The production end of the picture is very good. Miss
Dove again does good work. Clive Brook does the best he
can in an unsympathetic part ; he is shown as having many
“flames.” Gustave von Seyffertitz, as the Archduke’s ser-
vant, the man who does his “dirty” work, is very good.
Marc McDermott, as the hero’s father, is good, too.
Nicholas Soussanin, Eugenie Besserer, Jane Winton,
Charles Purdy and others are in the cast.
“Women Who Dare” — with
Helene Chadwick
(Excellent, Alar. 30; 6,521 ft.; 78 to 85 min.)
A fair program picture; it has some thrills and heart
interest but it is rather long and not very original. The
thrills are caused by the fight in the dive and the heart in-
terest by the pathetic scenes in the slums.
The story revolves around a wealthy young woman
(heroine), who is tired of the pampered life. Not telling
who she is, she becomes a trained nurse and also does set-
tlement work in the slums. Because she writes articles
exposing the dreadful conditions in the slums, she is cap-
tured and put in a dive by the agents of the property who
wanted to get rid of her. She is rescued by the hero, also a
millionaire, whom she had nursed back to health when he
had been injured in an automobile accident. But because
he was a ne’er-do-well, she would not marry him though
each was in love with the other. Because the dive owner
wanted the girl for himself, his own girl, jealous, notifies
the police and the hero. Later the young folk marry.
There is a thrilling fight in the dive.
It is based on a story by Langdon McCormick and it was
directed by Burton King. Others in the cast are Frank
Beale, Jack Richardson and Henry A. Barrows.
80
HARRISON’S REPORTS
. . The stock of the Radio Corporation of
America was divided. . . as follows :
“The General Electric Co., 620,800 preferred
shares and 1,875,000 common shares ; the Westing-
house Co., 1,000,000 preferred and 1,000,000 com-
mon; and the American Telephone & Telegraph
Co., 400,000 preferred and 500,000 common.
“Then came a proposition for representation on
the board. So the General Electric Co., took four
members of the board, and those four offiecrs of the
General Electric Co. The Westinghouse Co., took
two, and the American Telephone & Telegraph Co.,
took two upon this board of directors of this Radio
Corporation of America.
“And under the agreements that were entered
into there were turned over to the Radio Corpora-
tion of America the sole right to sell vacuum tubes.
. . . And these devices, the complete outfits, under
the arrangements would be manufactured by the
W estinghouse Co., and the General Electric, 60 per
cent by the General Electric Co., and 40 per cent
by the Westinghouse, but the sole sales company
was to be the Radio Corporation of America.
“. . . I might say that when this radio regulation
bill first came up, there was developed the fact that
this radio industry was in the grasp and clutches of
an absolute monopoly, controlled by this very small
group. The revelations were staggering and alarm-
ing—
“The American Telephone & Telegraph Co. con-
trols the patents for use and sale of apparatus in
commercial wire telephony ; and it has the exclusive
right to the sale of broadcasting apparatus.
“It is protected from wireless telephone com-
petition in the United States because it controls all
of the patents in that field ”
s|c jfc 5|c
In plain words, the Radio Corporation of Amer-
ica is a combination of the General Electric Co.,
the American Telephone & Telegraph Co., the
Western Electric Co., and of the Westinghouse
Electric &Manufacturing Co., and by virtue of the
2,000 patents it either owns or has a right in for
the use of them through agreements either with in-
dividual owners or companies, has complete con-
trol in the field of reproduction, recording and
amplification of sound and in the sound reproduc-
ing, recording, amplifying, and synchronizing de-
vices. This Corporation, through its subsidiary the
RCA Photophone, Inc., has now entered the mov-
ing picture field.
Talking pictures and pictures accompanied by
mechanically reproduced music are here to stay.
As said, moving picture theatres will, in a short
time, be all fitted up with sound reproducing and
synchronizing devices. These devices must be ob-
tained from the Radio Corporation of America or
from any other company in this combination. It
will also mean this, that every producer who would
want to make talking pictures or pictures with me-
chanically reproduced music accompaniment must
do so under a license obtained from the RCA
Photophane, Inc. This will mean that the Radio
Corporation of America will have the right to say
how much a producer shall pay for the right to make
such pictures. The bill will be naturally footed by
you, the theatre owners. It is assumed that the pub-
lic will ultimately have to pay it. But whether this
public will be willing to be taxed any more than it
is now being taxed in the form of high admission
May 19, 1928
prices is a question that only the future can answer.
HARRISON'S REPORTS is making a deep
study of the new situation and will from time to
time print articles for your enlightenment. In the
meantime, it will be to your interest to make a study
of this problem, too; for the sooner or later you
will be compelled to take action of some sort. In
the meantime, do not be hasty ; don’t rush to install
an instrument until you know what is going to de-
velop. You would want to know, for example, if
the instruments will be of standard manufacture;
what the prices of the instruments will be; the
price of the subjects; the additional charge for the
“musical” film, and about one hundred and one
other details.
If you have any suggestions to make ; if you have
anything to say that would help the other exhibitors,
send it along.
1927-28 SUBSTITUTIONS
Pathe-DeMille
MIDNIGHT MADNESS (324): Promised
with Jetta Goudal, delivered with Jacqueline Logan.
It is a star substitution and you don’t have to ac-
cept it.
THE LEOPARD LADY (304) : The original
story was to have been written by Clara Beranger,
and Jetta Goudal was to star in it ; the story of the
finished product is by Edward Childs Carpenter,
and Jacqueline Logan is starred in it. It is a story
and star substitution and so you don’t have to ac-
cept it.
Warner Bros.
THE LITTLE SNOB (206), with May Mc-
Avoy: The original story was to have been, “A
Jewish-Irish story of humor, pathos and action”;
the story of the finished product revolves around
an American girl, whose father conducts an amuse-
ment concession at Coney Island. He sends her to
a boarding school. She becomes a snob but she soon
mends her snobish ways and becomes a regular girl.
A CASE THAT MAY DETERMINE
THE LEGALITY OF THE
“ADDITIONAL SECURITY”
U. B. Theatrical Enterprises, Inc., of Cleveland,
Ohio, has applied to the District Court of the
United States for Northern Ohio for an injunction
against United Artists and other film concerns, as
a result of an arbitration controversy with United
Artists.
Through such an injunction, U. B. T. E., seeks to
restrain United Artists from refusing to furnish
pictures it has under contract ; the other distributors
from refusing to furnish pictures under contract as
a result of its controversy with United Artsits ; and
all the members of the Film Board from enforcing
an award rendered against it.
According to the petition, U. B. Theatrical En-
terprises contracted for two pictures from United
Artists. It played the one picture but it lost so
much money that it refused to play and pay for the
other.
United Artists brought U. B. T. E., before the
board and secured an award, which U. B. T. E.,
considers as having been rendered illegally. And so
it seeks relief in the courts through injunction
proceedings.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
lingered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, Under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions .■ • • • 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, MAY 26, 1928
No. 21
WHAT YOU SHOULD PAY FOR FILM NEXT SEASON
The sales conventions are over. The artistic press
books are out. The salesmen will soon be let loose on
you in an effort to sell their product ahead of the other
companies’ salesmen.
As in former years, they will ask you for an increase.
Again they will tell you that this year their pictures are
better than at any time in the past.
In this editorial, 1 shall endeavor to lay the situation
before you as it exists so that you might he guided ac-
cordingly as to whether you should "rush” to buy your
film or wait for a more opportune time, or whether you
should pay the same price as you paid the current sea-
son or to make a "cut,” and the extent of such a “cut.”
It is hardly necessary for me to tell you that business
is bad now. You know it better than the editor of any
picture publication. The only thing new that I might
say to you is that immediate improvement is not looked
for. In fact it may get much worse, because of the ab-
normal conditions in the stock market. The New York
newspapers are condemning the gambling craze that
has seized almost everybody in the United States and
predict a crash. If a crash should come, the picture
business will be affected more than any other business
because when people haven’t money to buy food with,
the first thing they do is to do away with the expense
of entertainment. For these reasons, you will not be
able to pay even what you have paid for the current
season’s product and get by. If you pay the same price,
you will be forced to dig into your pocket. Fifty per
cent of the exhibitors in this zone are “shaky,” because
of the high prices they paid for film. And I would not
be surprised if most of them were unable to survive until
the time when conditions will improve. And I am sure
that what is true of this zone is true of all other zones.
So, for any one of you to think of paying for the new
season’s product as much as you paid for the current
season’s will be suicide.
But here is another situation that makes it necessary
for you, not only not to pay as much for the next sea-
son’s product, but also not to be hasty in buying your
pictures, until such situation has been cleared up.
The advent of the “musical” and of the talking pic-
tures has bewildered everybody in the moving picture
industry. Up to the production of “The Jazz Singer,”
the success of this invention was negligible. In some
territories the Vitaphone made a success, and in many
others it made a failure, so “miserable” in some in-
stances, that the theatre was not taking in even as much
as it did before the installation of the instrument. But
“The Jazz Singer” made such a success wherever it wTas
shown with the “voice” that all calculations have been
upset. Then the biggest of the producer-distributors
began to do some thinking about this invention. The
fact that the Fox Film Corporation had on Broadway,
this city, two or three big pictures that were accom-
panied by this mechanical music, all playing at the
same time, made them shiver. This situation made
them shut their eyes and sign up with the R. C. A. Pho-
tophone.
But no one yet knows what is going to develop in the
next few months. Is the new device going to supplant
the silent drama entirely? If so, what instrument will
be adopted mainly? There are two modes of reproduc-
ing sound for picture purposes: The disk way, which
is the Vitaphone, and the film way, which is the Pho-
tophone. The cost of the Vitaphone installation now is
from $8,000 to $16,000; the Photophone, from $4,000
to $15,000. Will it be possible for the smaller exhibitors
to stand the extra charge for the film, seat tax, for the
talking and singing subjects, and for whatever other
charges are demanded for the use of the instrument
and of the films? Will he be able to take in enough to
pay for all this expense in addition to his other expenses?
The inability of any one to answer these questions
just now and the uncertainty of the future of the busi-
ness during this period of transition makes it absolutely
necessary that you delay buying pictures until you
are reasonably sure what trend events will take. Be-
sides, fitting music to pictures is a new art. The experts
in this new device are very few. So we must naturally
expect many “lemons” before we arrive to a point where
the new style films will be as good as the present films. Re-
member that the fact that a picture is fitted with mechani-
cally reproduced music or that its characters talk is not
sufficient to make such a picture draw. “Tenderloin” is the
best proof of it — it made a rank failure at the Warner
Theatre, on Broadway, this city. Nor is the fact that a
picture is so fitted an excuse for the exhibitors to charge
two-dollar prices, or any kind of increased prices. The
quality must be there before the picture-goers will like.it.
So this paper urges you to go slow this year. Don’t rush to
buy film 1 Wait 1 It is better to lose a good film or two by
being slow than to find yourself with films in your hands
that you cannot use. Bear also in mind that, if you buy
“talking” pictures before you install your instrument you
will lose much money, for the pictures that are produced
to “talk” or to be accompanied by mechanical music, are
“flat” when shown plain.
TOWN HALL THEATRE AND GARDENS
Kalgoorlie, Australia, 11th April, 1928.
P. S. Harrison, Esq.,
Harrison’s Reports,
New York, U. S. A.
Dear Sir:
I am pleased to receive your issue each week. The criti-
cisms of releases are very acceptable, and the balance of
your paper is read with much interest, as it enlightens one
as to what is really going on at the “root” of the industry.
I am an independent exhibitor, up against a “chain,” so
can appreciate your efforts.
I wish you and your journal every success.
Yours faithfully,
W. K. CLEMENGER.
IS THIS ONE OF GABE HESS’S BRIGHT
IDEAS?
A Virginia exhibitor received the following letter ;
* * * *
“COPYRIGHT PROTECTION BUREAU
“representing national and regional distributors of
MOTION PICTURES IN THE UNITED STATES.
“469 Fifth Avenue,
“New York City.
“Washington, D. C., April 21, 1928.
“I wish to call your attention that an investigation
made by the field representative of this Bureau discloses
that you have been using pictures in excess of the number
of days contracted for. It is somewhat apparent that this
condition existed for some time prior to our investigation.
“When you contract for picture for a specific day, or
days, and use the film for one or more extra days, you do
not only violate your contract, but you violate the United
States. Copyright law and subject yourself to the penalty
prescribed thereunder.
“The Bureau was inaugurated to stamp out the evils that
now exist, such as switching and holding over film, and not
( Concluded on last page )
HARRISON’S REPORTS
May 26, 1928
82
“Steamboat Bill, Jr.” — with Buster Keaton
( United A rtists, M ay 12 ; 6,400 ft. ; 74 to 91 min. )
The plot is nonsensical, but the spectators at the Rialto
Theatre, where it is now shown, went into hysterics laugh-
ing. Mr. Keaton again takes the part of a sap, and every-
body gives his father “the laugh,” causing him (the father)
to become disgusted with him. But in the end, circumstances
so shape themselves that the sap son saves the life of the
wise father ; he had been swept away by the flood waters,
caused by a cyclone, and was in danger of drowning. There
are many situations all the way through that cause laughs,
these being the result of Mr. Keaton’s acting. The scenes
of the cyclone are the best part of the film; they cause
thrills. In these scenes, trees are shown uprooted and
blown away ; houses are lifted from their foundations, some
of them being shown as collapsing like houses of cards,
some of them deposited in another place intact. Most of the
action takes place on board an old river steamer, a relic of
the past. The story revolves mostly around the love affair
of the hero, son of the captain of the river boat, with the
heroine, daughter of the owner of another river boat, only
more modern; he was trying to drive out of business the
hero’s father. The father of the heroine will under no con-
ditions permit his daughter to marry the sap, son of his
rival ; but love eventually triumphs.
The picture has been directed by Charles F. Reisner,
from a story by Carl Harbaugh. Tom McGuire takes the
part of the millionaire steamship owner, father of the
heroine, and Marion Byron that of the heroine. Ernest
Torrence takes the part of the hero’s father.
The satisfaction this picture will give will, no doubt,
depend on whether the theatre is full or empty when it is
shown. If it is full, they will like it well ; if it is empty, they
may go away dissatisfied. But in making up your mind as to
what you should pay for it, don’t fail to take into consid-
eration the performance of Keaton’s last two or three pic-
tures ; they are bound to affect the drawing powers of this
one. In other words, if his past two or three pictures drew
well, this one, too, may draw well, in proportion to the
business conditions that prevail now as compared to the
business conditions that prevailed when you showed the
others ; if the others failed, it is doubtful if “Steamboat
Bill, Jr.” will fare better, particularly because business
conditions are poor now.
“Clothes Make the Woman” — with
Eve Southern and Walter Pidgeon
{Tiff any -Stahl, May 1 ; 4,983 ft.; 57 to 70 min.)
A pretty good program picture. The story is a mixture
of the real and the fantastic. The real is taken from the life
of Anastasia, the Russian Princess, whom some people
take for the real daughter of the Czar while others for an
imposter. The fantastic is naturally whatever has been con-
ceived to make the drama with the material of the real.
The story unfolds in Hollywood, and shows the hero, a
famous star, telling the director that he has the material for
a wonderful picture story. The director asks him to tell him
this idea. When the star starts telling the story the scene
fades out and St. Petersburg, Russia, appears, the time of
the action being during the days preceding the revolution.
It shows how Princess Anastasia, who had, along with the
entire famly of the Czar, been escorted to exile by a Rus-
sian soldier (hero — the same person who tells the story to
the director), and was saved from being shot to death on the
orders of the revolutionists, the hero firing his shot at her
arm. After the shooting, in which the entire Imperial family
was wiped out, with the exception of Anastasia, the hero
hides her in a load of hay and escorts her to a neighboring
state. There she becomes separated from the hero. Months
later the hero recognizes the Princess among some extras
in Hollywood. He persuades the director to give her a part
on account of her “resemblance” to the real Princess; he
at no time revealed the fact that she was the real Princess.
The story takes the same twist the real events took during
the shooting, and closes with the marriage of the hero and
the Princess, who was thankful to be just the hero’s wife.
The idea of this story is a fair copy of the idea in “The
Last Command,” the Paramount picture, with Emil Jen-
nings. There, too, the real was mixed with the fantastic.
Only that the attempt in “Clothes Makes the Woman” is
often inconsistent.
Tom Terris wrote and directed the picture. The direction
is good. Eve Southern and Walter Pidgeon do good work.
Others in the cast are: Corliss Palmer, Charles Byer,
George E. Stone, Adolph Millar and others.
“Hangman’s House” — with Victor McLag-
len, June Collyer, Larry Kent, Hobart
Bosworth and Earle Fox
{Fox, May 13; 6,518 ft.; 75 to 93 min.)
There is no question that “Hangman’s House” has been
produced excellently by Mr. Jack Ford. But there is no
question that it is a gruesome picture, either. The scenes
that show the old judge seeing in a vision a noose and the
faces of many of those he had sent to death are anything
but cheering. But Mr. Ford’s masterful handling has robbed
it of much of its offensiveness by making it interesting.
Some sympathy is awakened for the heroine, who had been
forced by her father to marry a man she despised (villain) ;
also for her young sweetheart, as well as for the hero, whose
sister the villain had wronged and had caused her death.
The action unfolds in Ireland. The scenes of the horse
races are suspensive and thrilling. Thrilling are also the
scenes of the fire, where the villain perishes.
The plot has been founded on the popular novel by Donn
Byrne. It opens in Algeria, where the hero is an officer
of the Foreign Legion. He receives a letter telling him that
a man (villain) had wronged his sister and asks permission
to go to Ireland to kill him. He reaches Ireland disguised,
because he was sought by the police to be arrested. He
learns that the villain had married the daughter (heroine)
of a judge. The heroine despised her husband, whom she
married against her will ; she was in love with a young man.
The story ends with the villain’s perishing in a fire. The
hero helps the two young lovers, who eventually find happi-
ness in their marriage.
The direction is good. So is the acting of all. The con-
tinuity is smooth.
The picture ought to take well with those who do not
mind gruesome pictures. The popularity of the novel ought
to help the picture draw.
“The Scarlet Dove” — with a Special Cast
{Tiffany-Stahl, April 16; 5,102 ft.; 59 to 72 min.)
Not much to it. It is another Russian story but what the
characters do, do not interest much and hardly awaken any
sympathy.
It is the story of a dissolute Russian aristocrat villain,
Commander of the garrison near the Austrian border, who
is about to marry a young girl, not because he loved her, but
because she had barrels of money. But the hero, subordinate
of the villain, meets her accidentally and falls so deeply in
love with her, that he is willing to risk court martial if he
could only save her from the villain’s hands. The Com-
mander marries the heroine and the hero is heart-broken.
But she soon finds out what a beast he was and leaves him,
going to the hero. The hero takes her to his cabin out in
the woods, and there hides her. A shawl, found near the
river, leads the villain to believe that the heroine had either
committeed suicide or been killed by drowning. The hero
is accused of having murdered the heroine. He is court
martialed, but he does not defend himself, preferring shoot-
ing rather than to reveal where the heroine had been hid-
ing ; he did not want her disgraced. But the heroine appears
in the nick of time and the hero is exonerated. The Com-
mander challenges him to a duel. It would have meant cer-
tain death for the hero, because the Commander was a crack
shot, but for the fact that the ice over which the Com-
mander was standing broke and he disappeared in the cold
waters of the river.
The picture has been directed by Arthur Gregor, from a
story by the director himself. Lowell Sherman takes the
part of the Commander; Margaret Livingston of his
“flame,” Robert Frazer of the hero, and Shirley Palmer
of the heroine. Others in the cast are: Josephine Borio,
Julia Swayne Gordon, and Carlos Durand.
83
HARRISON’S REPORTS
May 26, 1928
‘Tempest” — with John Barrymore
( United Artists, Aug. 11 ; 9,400 jt.; 109 to 134 min.)
Those of producers who look to the stage, to the maga-
zines, or to the books from which to get their material for
their’great pictures, had better take a look at “Tempest,”
an original story; they will know, then, that an original
story can make as great a picture as can a stage play, a short
story, or a novel.
"Tempest” is one of the greatest pictures that has been
produced since the picture business came into being. Mr.
Barrymore makes the character of Sergeant Ivan Markov
so real that one feels as if he is about to step off the screen
to greet one. The scenes of the reception in the General s
home, where the hero was being humiliated by his fellow-
officers, who avoided him because he had risen from the
ranks and felt that he was still a peasant, are gripping. The
later scenes, where he is shown in the room of the General’s
daughter (heroine), having wandered in while intoxicated,
are suspensive. The scenes that follow, showing him being
arrested and stripped of his rank, are interesting and sus-
pensive, too. The scenes that show the hero languishing in
the underground prison during the years of the World
War; those of the revolution, showing his liberation, and
later his promotion into the membership on the committee
that tried the members of the old aristocracy; his escape
with the heroine into Austria — all these and others are
dramatic in the extreme. The most powerful situation,
however, is that which shows the hero, holding the heroine
in his arms and discovering that she loved him; she had
been arrested and brought to him, so that her fate might
be decided. It will be hard for one to suppress his emotions
in these scenes. Mr. Barrymore is superb in that part.
The plot has been founded on a story by C. Gardner
Sullivan, the old reliable screen writer, of the Triangle
days. The story’s action unfolds in Russia, at a town near
the Austrian border, and shows the hero, a soldier, getting
a commission by hard study. The old General, commander
of the garrison, took a liking to him and helped him get
the commission. He falls in love with the General’s daugh-
ter (heroine). The heroine snubbed him several times and
humiliated him when he dared speak to her, because he came
from peasants. But down in her heart she loved him because
of his manly qualities and fine bearing. The heroine’s
fiance, an officer, member of the aristocracy, resented the
hero’s attentions to the heroine and humiliated him at every
occasion. When the hero is found in the heroine’s room
intoxicated, he is court martialed and reduced to the ranks.
He is also imprisoned. During his imprisonment the World
War is declared. His prison record is expunged and he is
ordered to join his regiment, but the heroine’s fiance so
arranges things that when every one was going to the front
he was kept in prison. The revolution takes place and the
hero is freed. He is made a leader of the Bolshevist forces.
The heroine is detected and brought before the tribunal for
trial. The hero, however, who had found out that she really
loved him, knowing that death would have been the verdict
for her, succeeds in escaping with her to Austria, where
they marry.
Camila Horn does excellent work as the heroine. Louis
Wolheim, as the hero’s pal, is excellent ; he arouses con-
siderable sympathy by the loyalty he shows towards the
hero. George Fawcett is good as the old General. Others
in the cast are Boris de Fas, Ullrich Haupt and Michael
Visaroff.
John Considine, Jr., produced it; Sam Taylor directed it.
It should give one hundred per cent, satisfaction any-
where.
“The Hawk's Nest” — with Milton Sills
and Doris Kenyon
( First National, May 6; 7,390 ft.; 85 to 105 min.)
The first half is pretty interesting; the second half be-
comes luridly melodramatic, to such an extent that spec-
tators will, no doubt, laugh at the action. The action is too
exaggerated to be convincing, even for a melodrama. In the
first part the hero is shown with a hideous face ; he is sup-
posed to have been disfigured in the World War, when a
shell exploded near him. It is not a very pleasant sight but
it would get by were it not for the “tumble” the film takes
in the second half.
The sum and substance of the story is the hero’s efforts
to rescue from the electric chair a friend of his, who had
been convicted for murder, even though he was innocent of
the crime. To accomplish his object, the hero goes to a
surgeon that specialized in mending faces and has an opera-
tion performed on his face. The operation proves a success
and the hero once again becomes a regular human being. His
appearance is so changed that his old friends and acquaint-
ances do not recognize him. This enables him to establish
a friendship with the murderer, a political power, and
eventually to trap him into confessing.
The wildly melodramatic action takes place in what is
supposed to be a Chinatown. The Chinese are shown as
helping the hero to trap the murderer, because the innocent
man was their friend.
The physical end of the production is very good, the
photography being of the highest order. The settings, too,
are good.
The plot has been founded on a story by Wid Gunning;
it has been directed by Benjamin Christensen; Montagu
Love, Stuart Holmes, Mitchell Lewis, Sojin and others are
in the cast.
“Ramona” — with Dolores Del Rio
( United Artists, February 11 ; 7,650 ft.; 88 to 109 min. )
Very good ! It is tragedy, showing the harrowing details
of how Indians were persecuted in the days following the
annexation of California, and how the heroine’s sweetheart,
an Indian, was shot to death in cold blood by a white man.
Other harrowing details are an attack by whites on an In-
dian village, the whites shooting indiscriminately women
and children. But the picture has been handled so well that
it seems to have pleased those who have already seen it at
the Rivoli, this city, where it is playing at 99c admission.
There is deep appeal to the emotions of sympathy in almost
every one of the situations. Miss Del Rio is sympathetic as
the heroine, who loved an Indian ; the spectator’s sympathy
for her becomes warmer, because of the austerity of her
aunt, who would under no circumstances permit her to
marry an Indian. The strongest pathos is revealed in the
scenes where the child of the heroine and of her Indian
husband dies, because the white doctor would not treat In-
dians. Miss Del Rio is an excellent choice as Ramona;
Warner Baxter as Alessandro; and Roland Drew, as
Phelipe. John J. Prince portrays the role of Father Salvier-
derra with feeling. Vera Lewis is good as the austere aunt.
The plot has been founded on Helen Hunt Jackson’s
novel of the same name. It was put into pictures once before,
by the late W. H. Clune, with only fair success. The pres-
ent version, however, is far superior to the old yersion, and
it is drawing well at the Rivoli. It should make a success
this time.
WHERE ARE THE CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTORS?
The exhibitors are all in an uproar as a result of the non-
theatrical situation. Minneapolis went on record that it will
refuse to arbitrate the cases of any distributor that rents
pictures to such non-theatrical places as show film unlaw-
fully. Pittsburgh has followed suit. Oklahoma has, accord-
ing to advices from there, succeeded in convincing the ex-
changes that it is wrong for them to rent pictures to places
that create unfair competition to regular theatre owners.
No doubt explosions will occur in other zones.
Wise Gabe Hess is trying to lock horns again in Min-
neapolis with A1 Steffes in the non-theatrical question. He
locked horns with him once before, in the case of Warner
Bros. vs. a South Dakota exhibitor and got “licked,” the
courts deciding in favor of the exhibitors’ stand ; he is now
looking for another licking by trying again to meddle in
the arbitration matters of the Minneapolis zone ; he is trying
to get non-organization exhibitors to act as arbitrators in
the non-theatrical serving distributors’ cases, which the
organization refuses to hear.
Fred Herrington, the Secretary of M. P. T. O. of West-
ern Pennsylvania, informs this paper that his organization
has given the distributors of his zone until July 1 to accept
their demands.
Where are those of the exhibitors that told us that the
Brookhart Bill would open the way to non-theatrical com-
petition? Let them tell us if the non-theatrical door was
ever closed.
84
HARRISON’S REPORTS
May 26, 1928
for the purpose of harassing or embarrassing exhibitors.
Our policy is to advise the exhibitor we find indulging in
these practices and seek an amicable adjustment rather than
to give publicity to such acts by submiting such cases to the
Joint Board of Arbitration for their hearing, determination
and assessment of damages
“Sincerely yours,
(Signed) “Jack Levine,
“COPYRIGHT PROTECTION BUREAU.”
* * *
The Copyright Protection Bureau is nothing but the
Hays organization in a different dress. In fact I understand
that the thought of creating such a bureau was conceived
by Gabriel Hess. Mr. Hess is a bright lawyer, particularly
when he wears his white spats.
Let us see what the letter implies : “Unless you settle
this matter privately, it would be necessary _ for this
BUREAU to bring the case before the arbitration board
and humiliate you.”
Now, this paper has never encouraged bicycling; on the
contrary, it has condemned it severely, because it is nothing
but taking the other person's property without paying for
it ; provided, of course, that the exhibitor who bicycles a
film does not do so with the consent of the salesman, the
film company’s representative. You know that quite often
a salesman, pressed by the home office, will condone such
an act.
But, although bicycling is unlawful, the means the Hays
organization is adopting to make the exhibitors be good
are just as reprehensible, or even more so.
If bicycling is criminal, as Mr. Hays’ new child asserts
it is, then how can Gabriel Hess even think that an arbitra-
tion board can try a bicycling case, brought before it on
copyright law violation? Who has ever told him that an
arbitration board can assume the functions of a criminal
court?
Of course, I am not a lawyer, and Gabe Hess is, or at
least is supposed to be. Therefore, he might enlighten you
on the subject. But let me tell this to you, who may be act-
ing as arbitrators : If you want to go to jail, you cannot go
quicker than by appropriating the functions of the criminal
courts. A law professor of the Indianapolis University put
this matter right about a year ago :
An exhibitor was brought before the board, charged with
having violated the Copyright Law. The Board was dead-
locked, the exchanges voting for the exchange and the ex-
hibitors against it. This professor was chosen as the
seventh arbitrator, in accordance with the rules governing
arbitration in the motion picture industry.
After reading the minutes the professor said that he could
not try the case, because he would be appropriating the
functions of the courts, a criminal act in itself. The pro-
fessor was asked by the exhibitor members of the board to
dismiss the case. “No !” the professor replied ; “I wouldn’t
do even that ! That, too, would be violating the law !”
So you can take the opinion of Gabriel Hess, if you want
to, in preference to the opinion of that professor. I didn’t
remember his name, but Charlie Metzger, President of
Associated Theatre Owners of Indiana, a professor of Law
himself, can give it to you.
POWERS CINEPHONE EQUIPMENT CORP.
Powers Building, 723 Seventh Avenue
New York, N. Y.
May 18, 1928.
Mr. Peter S. Harrison,
Harrison Reports,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
Dear Mr. Harrison :
The editorial in your May 19th, 1928, publication was
read by me with great interest, but I disagree with you in
your main title: “THE MASTERS ARE BECOMING
SLAVES,” and am venturing the prophecy that it will
simply be a change of masters and the exhibitors will be-
came the slaves, for history will repeat itself in the motion
picture industry as it has in the talking machine business
and other lines of endeavor in which a combination, such
as you refer to, becomes interested.
Being quite familiar with the personnel of the phono-
graph business since its inception practically, I fail to see
on the horizon any of the old pioneers. They have all been
pushed aside and representatives of the electrical combina-
tion are practically dictating the affairs and policies of these
various companies. The same condition will occur in the
picture industry inasmuch as the principal producers have
now become licensees of the electrical companies, and the
agreement entered into places all the future developments of
the industry in the hands of the new masters. The present
officials of these producing companies may not realize this
fact yet but they will soon discover it, if for no other reason
than that they have no particular knowledge of the new
technique that has come into the business, and conse-
quently, they will be unnecessary.
The Radio Corporation of America, the General Electric
Company, the Western Electric Company and the Westing-
house Electric & Manufacturing Company at this writing
do not control the patents essential to the recording or
photographic reproduction of sound. They have the facili-
ties to manufacture these devices and are doing so; this no
doubt was the governing thought of the producers when
they entered into the license agreement. However, I am
not familiar with, or have I been able to ascertain just what
they are licensed under but the fact that they accepted a
license which limits the introduction or exploitation of any
device in the recording and reproduction of sound with
motion pictures, only through the licensors, gives the licen-
sors absolute control of the industry and will enable them
to dictate the future policies of the motion picture business,
which they will do as soon as the theatres are equipped
with the devices manufactured and licensed by them.
There are at the present time many patents owned by
numerous inventors, applicable to this invention, from
which sources it is possible to secure installations in the
theatres for the reproduction and amplification of sound.
However, the license agreement which the principal pro-
ducers entered into, prevents them from doing business
through any other masters now and for the next five years,
which is ample time for the new masters to get control —
this being a new art, many improvements are bound to
come ; the trade itself will develop this art of sound repro-
duction on film.
I cannot conceive of anything at present that can help the
situation, as we have voluntarily and without justification,
after all the years of hard work and strife, placed the mo-
tion picture industry in the position of doing business by
sufferance, which condition it emancipated itself from in its
litigation with the old Motion Picture Patents Company.
The old Motion Picture Patents Company, however, had
ample justification for existence as it wras fortified with
some basic and fundamental patents.' No such condition
exists today and regardless of that fact, we have deliber-
ately sold our independence, as these very devices could be
acquired by the industry itself, at very little expense and
this would encourage the inventors and scientists, respon-
sible for this invention, to continue their efforts to perfect
these devices.
There are no patents on the photography of sound ; this
invention is an old one and the patents have expired. How-
ever, a great many patents have been issued by the Patent
Office for improvements of this art of sound recording and
reproduction, no particular patent being essential to the idea
as there are many ways and means of accomplishing the
same results.
The exhibitor is at present in a position to install any one
of four devices for projecting sound from film, and all of a
dozen different devices to project sound from disk records,
but the adoption of one particular manufacturer’s device
with restrictions, prevents the real inventors, who are re-
sponsible for the development of this idea, from receiving
any remuneration for their efforts.
This is a serious situation and more serious than the
members of the industry realize, and it behooves the ex-
hibitor at large to investigate this matter thoroughly so
that he does not enter into any license agreement which will
prevent him from being free to choose his sound projectors
as he does his picture projectors; that is, without any re-
strictions whatsoever, as there are no patents at present to
justify any manufacturing concern in any way to control the
motion picture business through the use of devices neces-
sary for this purpose.
About two years ago the writer organized a company to
develop recording and reproducing devices for sound in
connection with motion pictures. We have at present ar-
rived at the point where we feel our devices are equal, if not
superior, to any device being used but we are confronted
with the situation that our market is practically shut off
caused by the action of the principal producers in entering
into this license agreement, which if I am correctly in-
formed, prevents the exhibitor from using any other device
than the one manufactured by the licensors.
Very truly yours,
P. A. Powers.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
HARRISO N’S REPORTS
Vol. X SATURDAY, MAY 26, 1928 No. 21
(Partial Index No. 3 — Pages 57 to 80)
Abie’s Irish Rose — Paramount 74
Across the Atlantic — Warner Bros 71
Across to Singapore — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 71
Adorable Cheat, The — Chesterfield-Reg 67
After the Storm — Columbia 75
Big Noise, The — First National 58
Blue Danube, The — Pathe-deMille 59
Broadway Daddies — Columbia 62
Canyon of Adventure — First National 58
Circus Rookies — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 79
Crimson City, The — Warner Bros 66
Crooks Can’t Win — F. B. 0 66
Desert Bride, The — Columbia 62
Devil’s Skipper, The — Titfany-Stahl ,58
Easy Come, Easy Go — Paramount 75
Escape, The — Fox 70
Fifty-Fifty Girl — Paramount 79
Glorious Betsy — Warner Bros 74
Gypsy of the North — Rayart 78
Harold Teen — First National 75
Hold ’Em Yale — Pathe-deMille 78
Honor Bound — Fox 70
Hot Heels — Universal 70
Horseman of the Plains — Fox 71
House of Scandals — Tiffany-Stahl 78
Little Yellow House, The — F. B. 0 66
Love Hungry — Fox 66
Man Who Laughs, The — Universal 70
Midnight Madness — Pathe-deMille 63
Night of Mystery, A — Paramount 62
Partners in Crime — Paramount 59
Patsy, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 67
Play Girl, The — Fox 67
Road to Ruin, The — Regional 59
Simba — Motion Picture Capitol Corp 63
Skyscraper — Pathe-deMille 58
Speedy — Paramount 58
Street Angel — Fox 63
Sunset Legion, The — Paramount 71
Tenderloin — Warner Bros 62
Terror Mountain — F. B. 0 78
Their Hour — Tiffany-Stahl 59
Thief in the Dark — Fox 79
Three Sinners — Paramount 67
Tillie’s Punctured Romance — Paramount 62
Two Lovers — United Artists 75
Under the Black Eagle — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 74
Vamping Venus — First National 75
Wagon Show, The — First National 70
Wild West Show, The — Universal 71
Women Who Dare — Excellent-Regional 79
Yellow Lily — First National 79
FIRST NATIONAL PICTURE
EXHIBITION VALUES
377 The Sunset Derby— June 5. . . .$ 700, OOOB— $ 700.000P
418 Land Beyond Law — June 5... 500,00OB — 600,000P
407 Dance Magic— June 12 9O0,OOOB— 8OO,OO0P
404 Framed— June 19 950,OOOB— 950,000P
391 Naughty But Nice— June 26. . . 1 , 300, 000B— 1,300, 00OP
385 Lonesome Ladies — July 3 700.000B — 700.000P
422 Devil’s Saddle— July 10 500,00OB— 550,000 P
443 Prince of Headwaiters— July 17 900.000B— 900, OOOP
413 White Pants Willie— July 24.. 800, OOOB— 800.000P
409 For the Love of Mike— July 31 900,000B— 950,OOOP
548 Poor Nut— Aug. 7 1, 000, 000B— 1,000, 000P
432 Stolen Bride— Aug. 14 1, 100, 000B— 1,200, 000P
405 Hard Boiled Haggerty— Aug. 21 950,000B— 950,00OP
428 Three’s a Crowd— Aug. 28. . . . 1,000,000B— 900,00OP
368 Camille — Sept. 4 Special
465 Red Raiders— Sept 4 700,OOOB— 7OO,O0OP
450 Smile, Brother, Smile— Sept. 11 900,0OOB— 900,000P
453 Life of Riley— Sept. 18 1, 100, 0O0B— 1,000, 000P
400 The Drop Kick— Sept. 25 1, 100, 000B— 1,100, 000P
545 Rose of the Golden West — Oct. 2 Special
433 American Beauty— Oct. 9 1, 100, 000B— 1,000, 000P
379 Crystal Cup— Oct. 16 9OO,000B— 900,000 P
319 Breakfast at Sunrise — Oct. 23 Special
457 No Place to Go— Oct. 30 8GO,OOOB— 800,OOOP
469 Gun Gospel— Nov. 6 600,OOOB— 60O,0O0P
547 The Gorilla — Nov. 13 Special
462 Home Made— Nov. 20... 8OO,0OOB— 800,000P
452 Man Crazy— Nov. 27 900,OOOB— 950.000P
549 A Tex^s Steer — Dec. 4 Special
441 Valley of the Giants— Dec. 11 . . 950, 00OB— 1,000, OOOP
544 The Love Mart — Dec. 18 Special
393 Her Wild Cat— Dec. 25 1, 300, 000B— 1,300, OOOP
1928
546 Shepherd of the Hills — Jan. 1 Special
542 Helen of Troy — Jan. 8 Special
446 French Dressing — -Jan. 15 900,00GB
459 Sailors’ Wives — Jan. 22 800,00GB
437 The Noose— Jan. 29 1.300.000B
445 The Whip Woman— Feb. 5 900.000B
426 The Chaser — Feb. 12 1,000, 000B
464 The Wagon Show — Feb. 19 700.000B
455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 1,100, OOOB
447 Mad Hour — March 4 900, OOOB
440 Burning Daylight — March 11 950, OOOB
434 Heart of a Follies Girl — March 18 1,100, OOOB
448 The Big Noise — March 25 900, OOOB
451 Ladies’ Night — April 1 1,000, OOOB
436 Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — April 8 1,300, OOOB
461 Chinatown Charlie — April 15 800, OOOB
468 Canyon of Adventure — April 22 700, OOOB
444 Harold Teen— April 29 900, OOOB
449 Lady Be Good— May 6 900, OOOB
456 Vamping Venus — May 13 1,100, OOOB
435 The Yellow Lily— May 20 1,100, OOOB
442 The Hawk’s Nest — May 27 950, OOOB
467 Upland Driver — June 3 700, OOOB
460 Three Ring Marriage — June 10 800, OOOB
438 Roulette— June 17 1,300, OOOB
429 Happiness Ahead — June 24 1,300, OOOB
FEATURE PICTURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
1927-28 Product
(The lists in this Section supercede the lists given in the
Blue Section of April 14.)
Columbia Features
That Certain Thing — Viola Dana Jan. 1
The Wife’s Relations — Shirley Mason Jan. 13
Lady Raffles- — Estelle Taylor Jan. 25
So This Is Love — S. Mason-Wm. Collier, Jr. .Feb. 6
A Woman’s Way — W. Baxter-M. Livingston. .Feb. 18
The Sporting Age — Belle Bennett Mar. 2
The Matinee Idol — Bessie Love-J- Walker Mar. 14
The Desert Bride — Betty Compson Mar. 26
Broadway Daddies — Jac. Logan-A. Francis Apr. 7
After the Storm — Hobart Bosworth Apr. 19
Golf Widows. .V. Reynolds-H. Ford May 1
Modern Mothers — H. Chadwick-D. Fairbanks, Jr. May 13
Name the Woman — A. Stewart-H. Fordon May 25
Ransom — L. Wilson-Ed. Burns June 7
Virgin Lips — O. Borden-J- Boles June 19
Excellent Features
Satan and the Woman — Windsor-Keefe Jan. 20
The Stronger Will — P. Marmont-R. Carewe. . Feb. 20
Women Who Dare — Helene Chadwick Mar. 31
Inspiration— Geo. Walsh-G. Frazin May 5
A Bit of Heaven — L. Lee-B. Washburn May 15
Your’re in the Army Now — Santschi-Daugherty . June 25
Making the Varsity June 25
Power of the Press July 15
May 26, 1928
F. B. O. Features
8233 Driftin' Sands — Bob Steele Jan. 1
8207 Coney Island — Lois Wilson Jan. 13
8215 Dead Man's Curve — D. Fairbanks, Jr Jan. 15
8243 Wizard of the Saddle — Buzz Barton Jan. 22
8209 Little Mickey Grogan — Frankie Darro Jan. 30
8294 Fangs of the Wild.. Ranger the Dog... Feb. 5
82111 Her Summer Hero — Blane-Trevor Feb. 12
82012 Wallflowers — Trevor-Scott Feb. 16
8234 Riding Renegade — Bob Steele Feb. 19
8226 When the Law Rides — T. Tyler Feb. 26
82011 Chicago After Midnight — Ince-Mendez Mar. 4
8244 The Little Buckaroo — Buzz Barton Mar. 11
82110 Beyond London Lights — Shumway-Elliott.Mar. 18
82015 Freckles — G. Stratton-J. Fox, Jr Mar. 21
S235 Breed of the Sunsets — Bob Steele Apr. 1
82016 Crooks Can’t Win — R. Lewis-T. Hill Apr. 7
8295 Law of Fear — Ranger, the Dog Apr. 8
8218 Red Riders of Canada — Miller-Lease Apr. 15
8225 Phantom of the Range — Tyler-Thompson. . Apr. 22
82014 Little Yellow House — Caldwell-Sleeper. . . Apr. 24
8245 The Pinto Kid — Buzz Barton Apr. 29
82018 Skinner’s Big Idea — Washburn-Sleeper. . .May 11
8217 Alex the Great — R. (Skeet’s) Gallagher. . .May 13
8236 Man in the Rough — Bob Steele May 20
82017 The Devil’s Trademark — Bennett-Mont . . . . May 28
8296 Dog Justice — Ranger, the dog June 20
8214 Loves of Ricardo— Geo. Beban-S. Lee June 17
8224 Texas Tornado — Tom Tyler June 24
8246 The Fightin’ Redhead — Buzz Barton July 1
8237 The Trail of Courage — Bob Steele July 8
8219 Sally of the Scandals — B. Love-A. Forest July 15
8247 The Bantam Cowboy — Buzz Barton Aug. 12
Fox Features
Daredevil’s Reward — Tom Mix Jan. 15
Soft Living — Madge Bellamy-John M. Brown Feb. 5
A Girl in Every Port — Victor McLaglen Feb. 26
Square Crooks — Robt. Armstrong Mar. 4
Horseman of the Plains — Tom Mix Mar. 11
Dressed to Kill— Ed. Lowe-Mary Astor Mar. 18
Why Sailors Go Wrong— N. Stuart-S. Phipps.. Mar. 25
Love Hungry — Moran-Gray Apr. 8
The Play Girl — Bellamy Brown Apr. 22
The Escape — Russell-Valli Apr. 29
Honor Bound — O’Brien-Taylor May 6
Hangman’ House — Collyer-L. Kent May 13
Hello Cheyenne — Tom Mix May 13
A Thief in the Dark — Meeker-D. Hill May 20
The News Parade — Stuart-Phipps May 27
Don’t Marry — L. Moran-N. Hamilton June 3
No Other Woman — D. Del Rio-D. Alvardo June 10
Wild West Romance — Rex Bell June 10
Chicken A La King — N. Carroll -G. Meeker June 17
None but the Brave — C. Morton-D. Knapp June 24
Road House — M. Alba-W. Burke July 1
Painted Post — Tom Mix July 8
The Farmer’s Daughter — M. Beebe-W. Burke July 15
Fleetwing — B. Norton-D. Janis July 22
Gotham-Lumas Features
San Francisco Nights — Percy Marmont Jan. 1
Bare Knees — Virginia Lee Corbin Feb. 1
Turn Back the Hours — Myrna Loy Mar. 1
The Chorus Kid Apr. 1
Hell Ship Bronson — Mrs. W. Reid May 1
United States Smith May
The Man Higher Up June 1
The Man Higher Up June
The Head of the Family July
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Features
853 Love — Garbo-Gilbert Jan. 2
817 West Point — Haines-Crawford Jan. 7
832 Divine Woman — Garbo-Hanson Jan. 14
812 Baby Mine — Arthur-Dane Jan. 21
846 Law of the Range — McCoy-Crawford Jan. 21
805 Wickedness Preferred — Cody-Pringle ....Jan. 28
854 Student Prince — Novarro-Shearer Jan. 30
825 Latest From Paris — Shearer-Forbes Feb. 4
843 Rose Marie — Crawford-Murray Feb. 11
839 The Big City — Chaney-Compson Feb. 18
855 The Enemy — Gish-Forbes Feb. 18
816 Smart Set — Haines-Day Feb. 25
841 The Crowd — Boardman-Murray ..Mar. 3
Partial Index, No. 3
828 The Patsy — Marion Davies Mar. 10
819 Bringing Up Father — McDonald-Moran. . Mar. 17
802 Under the Black Eagle — R. Forbes Mar. 24
848 Wyoming — McCoy-Sebastian Mar. 24
813 Circus Rookies — Dane-Arthur Mar. 31
830 Across to Singapore — Novarro-Crawford. . Apr. 7
840 Laugh, Clown, Laugh — L. Chaney Apr. 14
849 Riders of the Dark — Tim McCoy Apr. 21
824 The Actress — N. Shearer Apr. 28
822 Diamond Handcuifs — E. Boardman-C. Nagel. .May 5
852 Skirts — Syd Chaplin-B. Balfour May 12
647 A Certain Young Man — R. Novaro-R. Adoree.May 19
806 Mile, from Armentieres — E. Brody-J. Stuart. .June 2
814 Detectives — K. Dane-G. K. Arthur June 9
730 Forbidden Hours — R. Novaro-R. Adoree June 16
842 The Cossacks — J. Gilbert-R. Adoree June 23
810 Telling the World — Wm. Haines-A. Page June 30
821 White Shadows — M. Blue-R. Torres July 7
845 The Adventurer — Tim McCoy-D. Sebastian. .July 14
Paramount Features
2745 The Secret Hour — Negri-Hersholt Feb. 4
2754 Under the Tonto Rim — Arlen-Brian. . . . Feb. 4
2717 Sporting Goods — R. Dix Feb. 11
2737 Doomsday — F. Vidor Feb. 18
2761 The Showdown — Geo. Bancroft-E. Brent.Feb. 25
2727 Feel My Pulse — B. Daniels Feb. 25
2783 Tillie’s Punctured Romance — Fields. ... Mar. 3
2786 Old Ironsides — W. Beery-E. Ralston. .. Mar. 3
2708 Red Hair — Clara Bow Mar. 10
2787 The Legion of the Condemned — Cooper.Mar. 10
2703 Partners in Crime — Beery-Hatton Mar. 17
2742 Something Always Happens — Ralston. . Mar. 24
2750 Adventure Mad — U. F. A. Prod Mar. 31
2789 Speedy — Harold Lloyd Apr. 7
2733 A Night of Mystery — A. Menjou Apr. 7
2746 Three Sinners — P. Negri-W. Baxter Apr. 14
2714 Sunset Legion — Fred Thomson Apr. 21
2718 Easy Come, Easy Go — R. Dix Apr. 21
2712 Fools for Luck — W. C. Fields-C. Conklin. . .May 5
2728 The Fifty-Fifty Girl — B. Daniels May 12
2704 The Big Killing — Beery-Hatton May 19
2762 The Drag Net — Bancroft-Brent May 26
2782 The Street of Sin — E. Jannings-E. Brent. . . .May 26
2738 The Magnificent Flirt — F. Vidor June 2
2734 His Tiger Lady — Menjou-Brent June 9
2743 Half a Bride — Ralston-Cooper June 16
2755 The Vanishing Pioneer — Holt-Blaine June 23
2709 Ladies of the Mob — Bow-Arlen June 30
2723 The Racket — Meighan-Prevost June 30
2729 Hot News — B. Daniels-N. Hamilton July 14
2775 Kit Carson — Fred Thompson July 21
Pathe Features
1230 A Perfect Gentleman — Monty Banks Jan. 15
1183 What Price Beauty — Nita Naldi Jan. 22
1208 Boss of the Rustler’s Roost — Don Coleman. Jan. 22
1251 The Cowboy Cavalier — Buddy Roosevelt... .Jan. 29
1234 Crashing Thru — Jack Padjan Feb. 5
1206 The Apache Raider — Leo Maloney Feb. 12
1192 Valley of Hunted Man — Buffalo Bill, Jr.Feb. 19
1209 The Bronc Stomper — Don Coleman Feb. 26
1224 Marlie, the Killer — Flame, dog Mar. 4
1217 The Bullet Mark — Jack Donovan Mar. 25
1225 The Avenging Shadow — Klondike, dog Apr. 15
1225 The Law’s Lash — Klondike, dog May 20
Pathe-DeMille Features
304 The Leopard Lady — Jacqueline Logan Jan. 22
323 The Night Flyer — Wm. Boyd Feb. 6
321 Stand and Deliver — Rod LaRocque Feb. 20
325 A Blonde for a Night — Marie Prevost Feb. 27
336 Chicago — P. Haver- V. Varconi Mar. 5
334 The Blue Danube — Leatrice Joy Mar. 12
324 Midnight Madness — Logan-Brooks Mar. 26
309 Skyscraper — Wm. Boyd Apr. 9
333 Plold ’Em Yale — Rod LaRocque May 14
311 Walking Back — Sue Carroll-R. Walling May 21
Rayart Features
The Danger Patrol — Wm. Russell-V. B. Faire Apr.
Trail Riders — B. Roosevelt Apr.
Trailin’ Back — B. Roosevelt Mar.
A Midnight Adventure — C. Landis-E. Murphy May
The Lightnin’ Shot — B. Roosevelt May
The Devil’s Tower — B. Roosevelt June
Mystery Valley — B. Roosevelt July
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Partial Index, No. 3
HARRISON’S REPORTS
May 26, 1928
Sterling Features
Burning Up Broadway — H. Costello-R. Frazer. , Jan. 30
Marry th* Girl — B. Bedford-Bob Ellis Mar. 1
A Million for Love — M. Carr-J. Dunn-R. Howe. ..Apr. 15
Undressed June 1
It Might Happen to any Girl July 15
Tiffany-Stahl Features
Jan. 1 — “A Woman Against the World”. . Harrison Ford
The Tragedy of Youth — W. Baxter-R. Miller .... Jan. 15
The Devil's Skipper — Belle Bennett-M. Love Feb. 1
Nameless Men — A. Moreno-C. Windsor Feb. 15
Their Hour — J. Harron-D. Sebastian Mar. 1
Bachelor’s Paradise — S. O’Neil-R. Graves Mar. 15
House of Scandal — D. Sebastian-P. O’Malley Apr. 1
The Scarlet Dove — R. Frazer-J. Borio Apr. 15
Clothes Make the Woman — Southern-Pidgeon. . .May 1
Ladies of the Nightclub — B. Leonard-R. Cortez.. May 15
Stormy Waters — E. Southern-M. McGregor June 1
Green Grass Widows — W. Hagen-J. Harron June 10
Lingerie June 20
A Grain of Dust July 1
The Albany Night Boat July 10
Prowlers of the Sea July 20
Universal Features
A5724 That’s My Daddy — Denny Feb. 5
A57U2 Finders Keepers — L. LaPlante Feb. 5
A5698 The Shield of Honor — All Star Feb. 19
A5701 Midnight Rose — DePutti-Harlan Feb. 26
A5705 Surrender — Philbin-Mosjukine Mar. 4
A5729 Love Me and the World is Mine — Philbin. .Mar. 4
A5707 Stop That Man!— All Star Mar. 11
A5703 A Trick of Hearts — Hoot Gibson Mar. 18
A5712 Thanks for the Buggy Ride — LaPlante. Apr. 1
A5714 13 Washington Square — -All Star Apr. 8
A5725 Good Morning, Judge — Denny Apr. 29
A5715 We Americans — All Star May 6
A5699 Hot Heels — G. Tyron May 13
A5713 The Wild West Show — Gibson June 20
A5711 Buck Privates — DePutti June 3
A5720 The Count of Ten — Ray-Ralstou June 17
A5718 The Flying Cowboy — Gibson July 1
A5722 Riding for Fame — Gibson Aug. 19
United Artists Features
The Gaucho — Douglas Fairbanks Jan. 1
Sadie Thompson— Gloria Swanson Jan. 7
The Garden of Eden — Corrine Griffith Feb. 4
Ramona — Dolores Del Rio Feb. 11
Drums of Love — M. Philbin-L. Barrymore Mar. 31
Steamboat Bill, Jr. — B. Keaton-E. Torrence May 12
Tempest — John Barrymore-C. Horn Aug. 11
Two Lovers — R. Colman-V. Banky August
Hells Angels — B. Lyon-G. Nissen not set
Revenge — D. Del Rio-L. Mason not set
The Woman Disputed — N. Talmadge-G. Roland not set
The Battle of the Sexes — J. Hersholt-P. Haver. . . .not set
The Awakening — V. Banky- W. Byron not set
A Tale of Two Cities — R. Colman-L. Damiti not set
La Paiva — Wm. Boyd-L. Velez not set
Warner Bros. Features
200 Beware of Married Men — Irene Rich Jan. 14
216 A Race for Life — Rin-Tin-Tin Jan. 28
206 The Little Snob — May McAvoy Feb. 11
193 Across the Atlantic — Monte Blue Feb. 25
192 Powder My Back — Irene Rich Mar. 10
202 Domestic Troubles — Cook-Fazenda Mar. 24
213 The Crimson City — Loy-Miljan Apr. 7
209 Rinty of the Desert — Rin-Tin-Tin Apr. 21
211 Pay As You Enter — Fazenda-Cook May 19
201 Five and Ten Cent Annie undetermined
Extended Runs
The Jazz Singer — Al. Jolson
Noah’s Ark — Dolores Costello
Glorious Betsy — Dolores Costello
Tenderloin — Dolores Costello
Black Ivory (Withdrawn)
The Lion and the Mouse — McAvoy-L. Barrymore
RELEASE SCHEDULE FOR
COMEDIES
Educational — One Reel
Felix the Cat in Comicalamities Apr. 1
Green-Eyed Love — Geo. Hall-Cameo Apr. 8
Felix the Cat in Sure-Lock Homes Apr. 15
Off Balance — Monty Collins-Cameo Apr. 22
Felix the Cat in Eskimotive Apr, 29
Never Too Late— W. Lupino-Cameo ’.May 6
Felix the Cat in Arabiantics May 13
Three Tough Onions — M. Collins-Cameo May 20
Felix the Cat in In- and Out-Laws May 27
Crown Me — W. Lupino June 3
Felix the Cat in Outdoor Indore June 10
Sailor Boy — M. Collins-Cameo June 17
Felix the Cat in Futuritzy June 24
Educational Two Reels
Whoozit — Bowers Apr. 1
No Fare — Big Boy-Juvenile Apr. 8
Kitchen Talent — Geo. Davis-Mermaid Apr. 15
Blazing Away — Hamilton Apr. 22
Slippery Head— Johnny Arthur-Tuxedo Apr. 29
Fandango — Lupino Lane May 6
At It Again — M. Collins-Mermaid May 13
You’ll Be Sorry — Bowers May 20
Navy Beans — Big Boy-Juvenile May 27
Rah Rah Rah — Dorothy Devore June 3
Who’s Lying — Davis-Collins-Mermaid June 10
A Homemade Man — Lloyd Hamilton June 17
Hectic Days — Lupino Lane June 17
The Gloom Chaser— Big Boy- Juvenile June 24
Fox — One Reel
Jungles of the Amazon Feb. 5
Ship Ahoy! Feb. 19
The Vintage Mar. 4
The Desert Blooms Mar. 18
On a South Sea Shore Apr. 1
America’s ittle Lamb Apr. 1 5
Spanish Influence Apr. 29
Sea Breezes May 13
Lords of the Back Fence May 27
Thar She Blows June 10
The Dude Ranch June 24
Land of the Storks July 8
Oregon — The Trail’s End July 22
The Lofty Andes Aug. 5
Fox — Two Reels
Old Wives Who Knew — Imperial Apr. 8
T. Bone For Two — Van Bibber Apr. 22
Follow the Leader — Animal May 13
Jack and Jilted — Imperial May 27
A Knight of Daze — Van Bibber June 10
A Cow’s Husband — Animal June 24
Daisies Won’t Tell— Imperial July 8
His Favorite Wife — Van Bibber July 22
F. B. O. — One Reel
Newslaff Apr. 2
Newslaff Apr. 16
Newslaff Apr. 30
Newslaff May 14
Newslaff May 28
Newslaff June 11
Newslaff 81622 June 25
Newslaff 81623 July - 9
F. B. O. — Two Reels
Are Husbands People — Karnival Apr. 2
Mickey’s Little Eva — Mivkey McGuire Apr. 2
All Alike — Standard Apr. 9
My Kingdom For a Hearse— Karnival Apr. 16
After the Squall Is Over — Karnival Apr. 30
Mickey’s Wild West — Mickey McQuire May 7
Restless Bachelors — Karnival May 14
Big Bertha — Standard May 14
Silk Sock Hal — Karnival May 28
Mickey in Love — Mickey McGuire June 4
Heavy Infants — Standard June 11
Come Meal — Karnival June 11
Almost a Gentleman — Karnival jjune 25
Mickey’s Triumph — Mickey McGuire July 2
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
Sanctuary — Oddity . May S
Golden Fleeces — Oddity May 19
Tokens of Manhood — Oddity June 2
Palace of Honey — Oddity June 16
Sleeping Death — Oddity June 30
A Happy Omen — Oddity July 14
Nature’s Wizardry — Oddity July 28
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Limousine Love — Chase Apr. 14
Your Darn Tootin’ — Stars Apr. 21
Tell It to the Judge — Davidson Apr. 28
Fair and Muddy — Gang May 5
The Virgin Queen — Events May 12
The Fight Pest — Chase May 12
Their Purple Moment — Stars May 19
Should Women Drive? — Davidson May 26
Crazy House — Gang June 2
Cleopatra — Events July 7
Paramount — One Reel
Tong Tied — Krazy Kat Apr. 7
Koko’s Hot Dog — Inkwell Imps Apr. 14
A Bum Steer — Krazy Kat Apr. 21
Koko’s Haunted House — Inkwell Imps Apr. 28
Gold Bricks — Krazy Kat May 5
Koko Lamps Aladdin — Inkwell Imp May 12
The Long Count — Krazy Kat May 19
Koko Squeals — Inkwell Imps May 26
The Patent Medicine Kid — Krazy Kat June 2
Koko’s Field Daze — Inkwell Imps June 9
Stage Coached — Krazy Kat June 16
Koko Goes Over — Inkwell Imps June 23
The Rain Dropper — Krazy Kat June 30
Koko’s Catch — Inkwell Imps July 7
The Companionate Marriage — Krazy Kat July 14
Koko’s War Dogs — Inkwell Imps July 21
Paramount — Two Reels
Cruising the Arctic — Novelty May 5
Love’s Young Scream — Christie May 12
Horse Shy — Horton May 19
A Gallant Gob — Dooley May 26
Hold ’Er Cowboy — 'Vernon June 2
Say Uncle — Christie-Duffy June 9
Slippery Heels — Adams June 16
Alice in Movieland — Par. Novelty June 23
Scrambled Weddings — Herton June 30
Slick Slickers — Christie July 7
Sea Food — Dooley July 14
Universal — One Reel
Money! Money! Money! — Hall-Har. Highbrow. May 7
Hungry Hoboes — Oswald Cartoon May 14
Summer Knights — Lake Drugstore May 21
Oh! What a Knight — Oswald Cartoon May 28
The Trickster — Hall-Harold Highbrow June 4
Poor Papa — Oswald Cartoon June 11
The Speed Shiek — Lake Drugstore June 18
Fox Chase — Oswald Cartoon June 25
Her Haunted Heritage — Hall-Highbrow July 2
Tall Timber — Oswald Cartoon July 9
Sandwiches & Tea — Lake Drugstore July 16
Off His Trolley — -Hall-Highbrow July 30
Universal — Two Reels
A Big Bluff — Stern Bros May 2
Newlywed’s Imagination — Jr. Jewels May 3
Sailor George — Stern Bros May 9
Women Chasers — Stern Bros / May 16
Buster’s Whippet Race — Stern Bros May 23
George’s School Daze — Stern Bros June 4
Whose Wife — Stern Bros June 6
A Full House — Stern Bros June 13
George Meets George — Stern Bros June 20
Buster Minds the Baby — Stern Bros June 27
Newlyweds False Alarm — Jr. Jewels July 3
Reel Life — Stern Bros July 4
NEW YORK RELEASE DATES OF THE
DIFFERENT NEWS WEEKLIES
International
38 Even Number Saturday, May 12
39 Odd Number Wednesday, May 16
40 Even Number Saturday, May 19
41 Odd Number Wednesday, May 23
42 Even Number Saturday, May 26
43 Odd Number Wednesday, May 30
44 Even Number Saturday, June 2
45 Odd Number Wednesday, June 6
46 Even Number Saturday, June 9
47 Odd Number Wednesday, June 13
48 Even Number Saturday, June 16
49 Odd Number Wednesday, June 20
50 Even Number Saturday, June 23
51 Odd Number Wednesday, June 27
Pathe
Saturday, May 12
Wednesday, May 16
Saturday, May 19
Wednesday, May 23
Saturday, May 26
Wednesday, May 20
Saturday, June 2
Wednesday, June 6
Saturday, June 9
Wednesday, June 13
Saturday, June 16
Wednesday, June 20
Saturday, June 23
Wednesday, June 27
Fox
Saturday, May 12
Wednesday, May 16
Saturday, May 19
Wednesday, May 23
Saturday, May 26
Wednesday, May 30
Saturday, June 2
Wednesday, June 6
Saturday, June 9
Wednesday, June 13
Saturday, June 16
Wednesday, June 20
Saturday, June 23
Wednesday, June 27
Kinograms
Saturday, May 12
Wednesday, May 16
Saturday, May 19
Wednesday, May 23
Saturday, May 26
Wednesday, May 30
Saturday, June 2
Wednesday, June 6
Saturday, June 9
Wednesday, June 13
Saturday, June 16
Wednesday, June 23
Saturday, June 23
Wednesday, June 27
Paramount
83 Odd Number Saturday, May 12
84 Even Number Wednesday, May 16
85 Odd Number Saturday, May 19
86 Even Number Wednesday, May 23
87 Odd Number Saturday, May 26
88 Even Number Wednesday, May 30
89 Odd Number Saturday, June 2
90 Even Number Wednesday, June 6
91 Odd Number Saturday, June 9
92 Even Number Wednesday, June 13
93 Odd Number Saturday, June 16
94 Even Number Wednesday, June 20
95 Odd Number Saturday, June 23
96 Even Number Wednesday, June 27
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
78 Even Number Saturday, May 12
79 Odd Number Wednesday, May 16
80 Even Number Saturday, May 19
81 Odd Number Wednesday, May 23
82 Even Number Saturday, May 26
83 Odd Number Wednesday, May 30
84 Even Number Saturday, June 2
85 Odd Number Wednesday, June 6
86 Even Number Saturday, June 9
87 Odd Number Wednesday, June 13
88 Even Number Saturday, June 16
89 Odd Number Wednesday, June 20
90 Even Number Saturday, June 23
91 Odd Number Wednesday, June 27
41 Odd Number .
42 Even Number
43 Odd Number
44 Even Number
45 Odd Number
46 Even Number
47 Odd Number .
48 Even Number
49 Odd Number
50 Even Number
51 Odd Number
52 Even Number
53 Odd Number
54 Even Number
66 Even Number
67 Odd Number
68 Even Number
69 Odd Number .
70 Even Number
71 Odd Number
72 Even Number
73 Odd Number
74 Even Number
75 Odd Number
76 Even Number
77 Odd Number
78 Even Number
79 Odd Number
5395 Odd Number
5396 Even Number
5397 Odd Number
5398 Even Number
5399 Odd Number
5400 Even Number
5401 Odd Number
5402 Even Number
5403 Odd Number
5404 Even Number
5405 Odd Number
5406 Even Number
5407 Odd Number .
5408 Even Number
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s
Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JUNE 2, 1928
No. 22
A WRONG WAY-AND A RIGHT
The Tenth Clause of the New Standard Exhibition
Contract reads as follows :
“The Exhibitor shall not be required to accept for any
photoplay described in the Schedule as the photoplay of a
star, or of a director, or based upon a specified story, book
or play, or by an identifying description, any other photo-
play of a different star or different director, or based upon
a different story, book or play, or not corresponding to such
identifying description, as the case may be. . .
In other words, when a distributor offers you a picture
that is not based on the story you bought, or is not acted by
the star or directed by the director specified in the contract,
or, if the picture is not, in general, such as can be identified
as the picture you contracted for, you are not obligated to
accept it.
In its trade paper inserts, by which it announces its pro-
gram for the 1928-29 season, Paramount has the following
notation :
“NOTE TO EXHIBITORS. A new world. Tastes
ever changing. Paramount wants to take advantage of
new developments for your benefit. This announcement,
being made in part in advance of the photoplays announced,
is necessarily based upon present plans and must not be
considered part of any written exhibition contract.’’
In other words, the Paramount executives say that
they do not promise to deliver the pictures as described in
the announcement, because they may change them, “as
tastes change’’ ; but they do promise that whatever changes
they may make they will make them for your benefit.
Now, in this article, I am not going to question the sin-
cerity of the Paramount executives, who assure you that
they will make whatever changes they find necessary to
make for your benefit. But I will question their right to
impose on you substitutes without your consent.
O11 January 28, 1927, the Appellate Division of the Su-
preme Court for the Southern District, New York City, in
the case of Continental Insurance Company and Fidelity
Fire Insurance Company vs. Equitable Trust Company, de-
cided that the defendant Equitable Trust Company was re-
sponsible for the statements made in its prospectus by which
it offered for sale stock of the Green Star Steamship Com-
pany. The Equitable Trust Company had printed at the
bottom of the prospectus, in small type, the following:
“Although the information contained herein is not guar-
anteed, it has obtained it from sources we believe to be
reliable and is the information on which we have acted in
this matter.”
I am not a lawyer, but common sense ought to tell one
that the case of Paramount is analogous to that of the
Equitable Trust Company, and therefore, if Paramount
cannot produce the pictures according to the descriptions in
the Annual Announcement, on the strength of which they
are offering their pictures for sale to you, at least they
cannot force you to accept them, if they should be delivered
to you different from the description.
There is, in my opinion, only one way for Paramount to
be relieved from the obligation of delivering their pictures
not in accordance with the description in that announce-
ment : they must furnish another description to the ex-
hibitor at the time he signs the contract, so that he will
know what he is contracting for.
To sum it all up, the distributor must furnish the pic-
tures in accordance with the description in the contract or
in prospectuses, or in the announcements issued at the time,
or prior to the time, the exhibitor signed the contract. If
they cannot so furnish them, they cannot force them on the
exhibitor, for such pictures are substitutes. And substitutes
are forbidden by Clause Ten of the New Standard Exhi-
bition Contract.
What is true of Paramount is true of the other producer-
distributors.
The evil of substitutions is not as bad now as it was two
years ago and before. The expose that this paper has been
making of the substitutions has proved somewhat of a check.
But under the block-booking system, this evil cannot be
eliminated entirely. The producers find themselves up
against it often.
At times, substitutions are justified; at times they are
not. You have no way of knowing when they are justified
and when they are not. Substitutes have often been made
so that the producer might refrain from delivering to you a
picture, just because it turned out to be good, to sell it to
you the following season at high prices. That is why it is
necessary for you to refuse all substitutions.
In case a distributor comes to you with a hard-luck tale
in an effort to induce you to accept substitutes, tell him
that you will be glad to do so on condition that they be sub-
ject to screen examination, either by yourself or by your
representative. This paper will be glad to act as your
representative in substitution matters, screen-examining the
substitutes and making a report to you through these col-
umns. In this manner you will not be taking any chances.
This season more than ever you must use wisdom in your
purchase of pictures. Exercise good judgment !
WHERE IS THAT PROSPERITY?
In the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1928-29 announcement in
the trade papers, Mr. Nicholas M. Schenck says:
“The present era of prosperity means that the public
has plenty of money to spend. . . .”
1 wonder where Mr. Schenck got his prosperity informa-
tion from! From the books of his company? Yesl But
not from the books of the exhibitors.
The trouble with Mr. Schenck is that he does not dis-
tinguish a prosperity from a prosperity. We know that his
company is prosperous. But he does not tell us how many
exhibitors’ box offices had to be depleted in order to make
it so.
Take it from me ! If you pay to Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
and to the other producers the coming season as much as
you paid them the current season, next year the poorhonses
of the country will be full of exhibitors.
Here are some of the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1927-28
“lemons” :
“Annie Laurie,” with Lillian Gish ; “The Road to Ro-
mance,” with Ramon Novarro; “Body and Soul,” with
Norman Kerry; “I11 Old Kentucky,” with James Murray;
“The Garden of Allah” (good picture but poor drawing
card) ; “Becky,” with Sally O’Neil and Owen Moore ; “Man,
Woman and Sin,” with John Gilbert; “London After Mid-
night,” with Lon Chaney; “Lovelorn,” with Sally O’Neil;
“Quality Street,” with Marion Davies (a good picture but
‘flat’ as a drawing card) ; “Wickedness Preferred,” with
Lew Cody and Aileen Pringle; “The Student Prince,” with
Ramon Novarro; “Rose Marie,” with Joan Crawford;
“The Big City,” with Lon Chaney ; “The Enemy,” with
Lillian Gish ; “Under the Black Eagle,” with Ralph Forbes ;
“Across to Singapore,” with Ramon Novarro; “A Certain
Young Man,” with Ramon Novarro. Eighteen so far !
And there are more to come until the end of the present
season.
There is one thing you can say about Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer : they have a wonderful ad writer ; he can make black
look white. But if it is black, it can’t be white.
This year the intelligent exhibitors are going to look for
performances, not promises. And the M-G-M performances
this season have been, in my opinion, anything but what
they promised. Read the list of M-G-M lemons I have
just given you and you will know what I mean.
86
HARRISON’S REPORTS
June 2, 1928
“Lady Be Good” — with Dorothy Mackaill
and Jack Mulhall
( First Xat., May 6; 6,615 ft.; 77 to 94 min.)
Not a bad comedy-drama ! There is some interest and
several mild laughs throughout. The heart interest is
created by the loyalty the heroine shows towards the hero,
whom she is unwilling to abandon when hard luck stared
him in the face. There are a few tilts between them now
and then, the cause of them being a villain (John Miljan),
a married man, who pursued the heroine. These are no
different from the tilts between lovers in real life. The
story is backstage life, and presents the hero as a magician,
and the heroine as his assistant, who puts pep into his act.
They are in love with each other but they have a hard time
keeping the wolf from the door. A misunderstanding
creeps in between them and they become separated. The
hero engages another assistant; but she is dumb. The
heroine becomes the villain’s dancing partner, but when he
tries to get fresh with her she throws a can of powder on
his face and leaves him flat. (The villain’s wife, arrived
on the scene and stepped into the breach just in time to get
a powderful, too.) The heroine obtains a position in a
restaurant. The hero arrives in that town with his act.
The heroine calls on him. Each puts up a bluff so as to
make the other believe that everything was “jake.” Just
as she was about to leave the theatre she overhears the hero
scolding his assistant. The heroine quietly calls her to one
side, drags her into the room, undresses her, puts on the
dress herself, and appears in the act, the hero being unaware
of it until he sees her appear. They embrace and vow never
again to part.
The plot has been founded on the musical comedy by Guy
Bolton. Fred Thompson and George Gershwin. The picture
was directed by Richard Wallace.
“The News Parade” — with Nick Stuart and
Sally Phipps
(Fox, May 27 ; 6,679 ft.; 77 to 95 min.)
Evidently some one at the Fox studio wanted to have some
fun and made this picture. But I doubt if it will be fun to
those that will book it, or to those that will pay to see it.
It is nothing but the experiences of a Fox News cameraman
and other cameramen — the troubles they have in getting
their stuff. But it is hardly possible that people other than
those connected with the making of newsreels will feel
much interest in what is unfolded. The only noteworthy
part of the film is where the young hero is shown high up
on the side of a skyscraper, sitting on a projecting plank,
and trying to get some “shots.” He is shown as being in
danger to fall any minute. The effect this scene has on the
spectator is the same as the effect similar scenes in “Safety
Last” had ; they keep one frozen from fear lest the hero
fall off the plank and be dashed to pieces on the pavement
below.
The plot has been founded on a story by William Con-
selman ; it has been directed by David Butler. Earle Fox,
Truman H. Talley, Brandon Hurst, Cyril Ring, and Frank-
lin Underwood are in the cast.
Note: This picture is being offered in place of “French
Ankles.” Inasmuch “French Ankles” was sold with Madge
Bellamy, “The News Parade” is a star substitution and
therefore you are not obliged to accept it. I think that Fox
has the nerve to sell a picture with Madge Bellamy and to
deliver it with Sally Phipps.
“Fazil” — with Charles Farrell and
Greta Nissen
(Fox Special ; 7,217 ft.; 83 to 103 min.)
If conditions were today what they were two or three
years ago, “Fazil” would, I venture to say, cause long lines
in front of the theatres where it would be playing. Even
as bad as conditions are right now, one would not go wrong
in predicting that it will prove the best drawing card on
the board, with the exception, perhaps, of “Tempest,” with
John Barrymore.
“Fazil” is entirely different from what has been pictured
in the past. It is an interesting revelation of the Oriental
mind. It is manifest that Pierre Frondaie, a Frenchman,
author of “L’lnsoumise,” on which “Fazil” has been
founded, understood the workings of the Oriental mind
thoroughly well. The theme is the woman’s place in the
Mussulman world, — her place in the home and in the
heart of her husband. The Oriental wants his woman all
to himself; he will not tolerate to the Occidental ways in
her. Merely to be seen in company with other men, even
though such men may be friends, and even though her con-
duct may be above reproach, is the worst violation of their
moral code on the part of such woman.
The relations of the hero, a chieftain Arab, towards his
wife (heroine), a Parisian young Christian girl, forms the
foundation of the story.
There is genuine drama all the way through, caused by
the conflicting ways of the two principal characters — by
the efforts of the hero to dominate the heroine, and by the
heroine’s determination to resist his domineering ways, un-
successfully, however.
The most dramatic situations is that in the closing scenes
where the hero, shot and dying, exerts his greatest will
power to live a few moments longer in order for him to kill
his wife, whom he loved with all his heart, so that they might
not be separated again, even in afterlife. He accomplishes
this by putting on her finger his poison carrying ring; he
twisted a screw and pricked her finger. It is as powerful a
situation as has ever been seen on the screen. It is real
drama, fascinating in the extreme. The desert scenes have
been done very well. The entire picture has, in fact, been
directed with great skill.
Mr. Charles Farrell, as the Arab Prince, does so well
that if “The Seventh Heaven” and “The Street Angel”
have not yet made him famous, “Fazil” certainly will.
Miss Nissen fits in her part well. It was good judgment on
the part of Winfield Sheehan to put her in the part instead
of Janet Gaynor, who co-stars in pictures with Mr. Farrell.
May Busch, Tyler Brooke, John Boles and all the others
that appear in the supporting cast, do good work.
The picture has been directed by Howard Hawks. This
work puts him in the very front rank of first-line directors.
“The Drag Net” — with George Bancroft
. (Paramount, May 26; 7,866 ft.; 91 to 112 min.)
A powerful underworld melodrama, of the “Underworld”
type. Only that Mr. Bancroft this time is not a criminal :
he is a captain of the detective force, bent upon extermi-
nating the crooks and cleaning out the town. For this, he
awakens considerable sympathy. In many respects “The
Drag Net” comes up to the standard of the “Underworld.”
So powerful its situations are. The scenes, for example,
where the hero enters the lair of the crooks alone, having
been lured there by the crooks themselves, who used the
hero’s bodyguard as a decoy, is extremely suspensive. But
the most suspensive of them all are the scenes where the
hero, having been told by the heroine that it was not he
that had kiiled his pal but the leader of the crooks, goes
up the stairs into the lair. He is wounded by a shot, fired
by one of the crooks, but he is not deterred from going right
into the room. This situation reminds one of the situation
in “The Big Parade,” where the soldiers, including the
hero, with fixed bayonets were marching right into the
jaws of death. There is considerable shooting, in engage-
ments between the police and the crooks, causing thrills.
The scene where the hero is shown picking up the dead
form of his young associate and squeezes the young man’s
head against his breast, indicating deep sorrow at his loss,
is deeply moving. The courage of the heroine in telling
the hero who had killed his pal, fully knowing that such a
confession meant her death, is suspensive in the extreme.
The heroine awakens considerable sympathy in that scene.
The love affair between the detective-hero and the crook-
heroine has been done well. The acting reminds one of the
Giicago machine-gun shootings.
The plot has been founded on the story by Oliver H. P.
Garrett. It has been directed with great skill by Joseph
von Sternberg, the very same director who directed
"Underworld.” Mr. Bancroft is as good in this picture as
he was in “Underworld.” So is Evelyn Brent, as the
heroine. William Powell is the villain; Fred Kohler the
villain’s pal ; Leslie Fenton the hero’s pal.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
87
June 2, 1928
“The Upland Rider”— with Ken Maynard
( First National, June 3; 5,748 ft.; 66 to 82 min.)
Not as strong as some of Mr. Maynard’s former con-
tributions, but it is a good western melodrama, just the
same. Mr. Maynard is again given an opportunity to dis-
play his riding skill. His horse Tarzan, too, again displays
intelligence. There is considerable heart interest ail the
way through, caused by the fact that the hero again takes
up 'the cause of the abused. There are several thrills,
caused by encounters betwen the hero and the villain. But
the most' thrilling situation is that of the relay horse races,
in which the hero unexpectedly appears and wins the race
for the father of the girl he loved.
The plot has been founded on the story by Marion Jack-
son. Marion Douglas takes the part of the heroine, and
Lace McGee that of her father. Sidney Jarvis, Robert
Walker, Bobby Dunn and others are in the supporting cast.
Many fine horses appear in the picture.
“Adventure Mad” — with a German cast
( Ufa-Paramount , March 31; 5,897 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
It is an imposition on the part of Paramount to force this
picture on you. It is good only for adults with the in-
telligence of five-year-old children. It is about a wealthy
Englishman, a lord, who is bored with the quite life he is
leading in his villa in Italy, and craves for adventure. His
butler is a confederate of some crooks, who want to take
as much money away from him as they could. Another of
the confederates is a woman, with whom the lord-hero seems
to be infatuated, much to the chagrin of his wife. The
crooks succeed in luring the hero to Cairo, Egypt, where
they had sent him in search of a “coo-coo’ clock, which
would give him a clue to a code that would uncover a
treasure hiden homewhere. The crooks, of course, had
their connections with other Cairo crooks, and the Lord is
made a prisoner in a den in Cairo, where crocodiles were
kept. They tried to force him to give them the combination
of his safe at home, where he had been keeping valuable
jewels. His wife, however, who had followed the crooks
disguised in man’s clothing, with the aid of the police
rescues him.
It is a wild tale fit not even for children. Lothar Mendez
directed it. It was produced in Germany.
Paramount will show big nerve if they were to force any
exhibitor to play it :
“Dont Marry” — with Lois Moran and Neil
Hamilton
{Fox, June 3 ; 5,708 ft.; 66 to 81 min.)
Mildly amusing. It is a comedy-drama, in which the
heroine (Lois Moran) is presented as a young lady, who is
under the protection of her puritanically-minded aunt.
But the heroine likes the life her aunt denies her; she likes
to swim, to be dressed in a tight-fitting bathing suit, and to
smoke a cigarette now and then as well as to dance ; in
short to do everything the other young women do. She
meets a young man (Neil Hamilton), and is attracted by
him. But he does not like modern women ; he prefers the
old-fashioned ones. He is shocked by the heroine’s free
ways, but he is soon cured of his old-fashioned ideas about
women ; the heroine, helped by his uncle, brings this result
about.
There is a laugh here and there. The interest is main-
tained fairly tight. But no one will remember it very long
after leaving the theatre.
The plot has been founded on a story by Philip Klein
and Sidney Lanfield ; it was directed by James Tingling.
Henry Kolker, Claire McDowell, and Lydia are in the cast.
“Man in the Rough” — with Bob Steele *
(F. B. 0., May 20; 4,785 ft.; 55 to 68 min.)
Not much to it. This is another formula Western, with
mild suspense and action. This time the hero saves the
heroine and her father’s gold mine from being bought very
cheap by the villain. When the hero loses his horse and
ropes a wild one, he wins in a game of poker a complete
outfit and also the wallet from the notorious outlaw, who,
too, lost his horse. After meeting the heroine and learning
that her father was suspicious of all strangers, he looks
up the villain who has sent a letter to the outlaw asking
him to come and do a dirty job for him. This letter the hero
finds in the wallet. The hero poses as the outlaw and learns
that the villain wishes to kill the old mine-owner and to
take the gold mine. The hero dashes away to warn the
heroine and her father and in the meantime the real outlaw,
having told the villain that he had been fooled, goes with
the villain after the hero. They meet in the cabin and a
wild fight takes place. The outlaw is licked and the
villain chased out of the country. Hero and heroine become
sweethearts.
The usual hard riding and fighting takes place, to, in this
tame western. The picture is based on the Adventure
Magazine story “Sir Piegan Passes,” by W. C. Tuttle. It
was directed by Wallace Fox. Other in the cast are
Marjorie King, Tom Lingham, Wm. Norton Bailey and
Jay Morley.
“Laugh, Clown, Laugh !” — with Lon Chaney
{Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, April 14; 7,045 ft.; 81 to 100 min.)
It is doubtful if Mr. Chaney has ever appeared in as good
a picture. It is full of heart throbs. The story from the
very beginning impresses one deeply ; one feels that some-
thing worthwhile will happen in it. And one is not dis-
appointed. The story idea is that of a clown who was forced
to laugh while his heart was breaking ; and of a nobleman,
who, because of continuous dissipation, had laughing
spasms, from which he could not control himself. Both
loved the same girl. With this thought as a foundation,
the author built up a plot which at times tears one’s heart
out. Mr. Chaney is superb as the clown. He makes one
realize his mental state vividly. The closing scenes, where
he is shown performing his death-defying act, and com-
mitting suicide, are the most pathetic of them all ; particu-
larly the one that shows his old pal holding his head in his
arms showing the hero expiring. The plot has been
founded on the stage play by Tom Cushing and David
Belasco. It has been directed by Herbert Brenon with
great skill. Mr. Chaney is sympathetic in the part of the
clown in hopeless love. Loretta Young does very well as
the heroine. Bernard Siegal is good as the hero’s partner
in the act. Cissy Fitz-Gerald, Nils Asther and Gwen Lee
are in the cast
A clown, working for a travelling circus in Italy, finds a
baby girl abandoned in the woods. He takes her and
rears her. The girl grows to womanhood and blossoms into
a beautiful woman. He falls in love with her, but realizing
that he is too old to be her husband, keeps his love to himself.
The heroine meets accidently a dissolute Italian Count,
while she was in his garden plucking a rose. She escapes
from him, but her beauty leaves an indelible impression in
his memory. Months later the clown and the count meet
accidentally in a neurologist’s office ; the clown was afflicted
with crying spells, because of the love he could not realize,
and the count with laughing spells, because of the dissolute
life he had led. The doctor advises both to fall in love and
win the woman as the only cure. The heroine misinterprets
the motives of the count while she was in his home and
after upbraiding him she leaves him. The hero, thinking
that the count wanted to make a plaything out of the heroine,
upbraids him and then insults him. The count resents it
and upbraids the clown. A note, sent by the count to the
heroine with a string of pearls, had not been read by her.
When she reads it and finds out that the pearls were the
hero’s mother’s, and that the hero had asked her to wear
them as his wife, she realizes that she had misjudged him
and begs his forgiveness. The clown realizes that the count
loved the heroine. He then confesses to the count that he,
too, loved her. The count suggests to him to propose to her
first. The clown induces the hero to be the first to propose.
The heroine accepts the count. But soon she feels lonesome
for the hero ; she calls on him, and finding him sad, realizes
what was the cause of his sadness. She tells him that she
loves him and that she would not be parted from him again.
The hero, thinking that the heroine had told him that she
loved him only to make him happy, decides to commit
suicide and thus make it possible for the heroine to be
happy. He lets himself drop from a great height while
performing his death-defying act. He is killed.
It should draw big crowds in any theatre and please them.
88
HARRISON’S REPORTS
WARNER BROS. AND THEIR NEW
PRODUCT
I notice that the Warner Bros, insert in the trade papers,
announcing their 1928-29 product, is just like the announce-
ment for the 1927-28 products. It offers 18 pictures for
sale; but it does not state what these 18 pictures are going
to be. Xo stories, stars or directors are given. I hope that
you will take this fact into consideration when you make
up your mind to buy that product.
Oh, yes ! It promises four Extended Run pictures :
“Tenderloin,” with Dolores Costello and Conrad Nagel;
“Glorious Betsy,” with Dolores Costello and Conrad Nagel ;
"The Jazz Singer,” with A1 Jolson, and “The Lion and the
Mouse," with May McAvoy and Lionel Barrymore.
Now, “Tenderloin" is not a very good picture, in that
the hero, as I said in the review, is unsympathetic ; he is a
crook. And it is hard for any one to sympathize with a
crook.
"Glorious Betsy” is a good picture ; with the Vitaphone,
it could be classed as Big, although it cannot be put in the
two-dollar class. But it is not setting the world afire at
the Warner Theatre, this city, where it is now playing. The
reason for it is, in my opinion, first, the high admission
prices charged for it, and secondly, the fact that it is a
costume play.
"The Jazz Singer” is a great picture when accompanied
by the Vitaphone; it makes A1 Jolson appear as if he were
before one in the flesh. The scene where he sings to his
mother, sitting in the orchestra, is the greatest combination
of talking and moving screen shadows one will see for a
long time. But without the “voice,” the picture has fallen
flat.
“The Lion and the Mouse” is founded on the stage
play by Charles Klein. The play was very good. This
play was put into pictures once before, by Vitagraph. It
was good at that time and it will, no doubt, be good also
this time. With the Vitaphone, it ought to make a very,
very good entertainment. In my opinion, it is a sure bet,
even without the Vitaphone.
In reference to the Warners’ 18, I may say that if you
want to take a chance at buying a pig in a bag, go to it ;
if you want to know what you are buying, then ask Warner
Bros, what the stories are going to be, who will be the
stars that will appear in them, and who the directors that
will direct them. Get this information now so that you may
not regret it afterwards ; no one will be able to help you
then.
A TEMPORARY SUBSTITUTE FOR THE
BROOKHART BILL
We have tried hard to bring about the passage of the
Brookhart Bill during this session of Congress, but we
have not been successful. The opposition we met has been
stiff. But the bill is not dead ; it is in committee, and in all
probabilities Senator Brookrart will not make an attempt
to have it reported out until the next session.
But you should not get discouraged ; work for it when-
ever you have an opportunity. Try to influence your
women’s clubs and other organizations.
The Brookhart Bill would have made blind-booking un-
lawful, just as it is in Great Britain now; no foreign pro-
ducer can sell pictures there unless he has made them.
Under this bill, you, too, would be given an opportunity to
see the pictures before buying them, or at least to receive a
report on them from some reliable source.
Since you are not able to see, by law, the pictures that
you want to buy, why not make it a rule to do so without a
law ? The producer-distributors this year are again boost-
ing their ware to the sky limit. Why not make them show
you the pictures that they have already made? Make them
do it before you buy ; you will at least have a chance to
judge the remainder by what the quality of the completed
product is. Let them SHOW you! Tell them you are
from Missouri.
I am writing to all the producer-distributors informing
them that I shall be only too glad to review all the pictures
from the new product that they have completed. I am
willing to devote most of my time in the next eight weeks
looking at the new product. If they should be afraid to
show it to your representative, why should you take their
word for it ?
Wait for a report before you buy pictures ! My time is
yours ! Let the producer-distributors take advantage of it
to prove to you that what they say IS so !
June 2, 1928
POOR BUSINESS IS NO EXCUSE FOR
BEING RELIEVED OF THE CONTRACT
From time to time I receive letters from exhibitors ask-
ing me if, in case they close their theatres down for lack of
business, they are obligated to pay for the film left un-
played.
The closing down of a theatre for lack of business is no
excuse for cancelling either all or part of a contract. Clause
18 of the Standard Contract specifies the causes for which
an exhibitor may be relieved either of part or of the whole
contract. And poor business is not one of the causes.
Most of this kind of letters come to this office just as
summer approaches.
It has often been a wonder to me why you book pictures
in advance for twelve months ! Why not buy only for nine
months, and, when the summer approaches, you may buy
whatever you need for the summer months in case you
should decide to keep open during the summer? A plan
such as this should prove of the greatest benefit for two
reasons: If you should decide to close down, you would
not be burdened with contracts which you must carry out
when you reopen, thus playing stale pictures ; in case you
should decide to remain open, you would then be able to
buy pictures at a price commensurate with the possible
summer business.
I have always advocated the closing down of theatres
during July and August. Such a policy is beneficial for
many reasons. It gives you an opportunity : to clean and
redecorate your theatre, thus causing an impression of
prosperity ; to select a ten-month program out of twelve-
month offerings ; to rest ; it gives your customers an op-
portunity to rest, so that, when you reopen, they come to
jour theatre "hungrier” than ever.
Try it ! Do not be influenced by the fact that your com-
petitor may keep open. Keep on your newspaper adver-
tisements during the shut-down period, so that you may
continue to keep in touch with your custom, and I am sure
that, when you reopen, they will all come back to you to a
man.
FOX OVERSTATEMENT
In the Fox 1928-29 announcement, which has just ap-
peared in the trade papers, two pages are devoted to the
six pictures, “Street Angel,” “Four Sons,” “Mother
Machree,” "Sunrise,” “Mother Knows Best,” and “The
Red Dance,” in a combined advertisement. The following
line is contained in the one page : "Big Broadway Hits.”
What are the facts?
“The Red Dance” and “Mother Knows Best” have not
yet been shown on Broadway ; so a statement such as this
is not representing the facts correctly.
Of the others, “Sunrise” has not made a hit ; it is a first-
class big production, well enough, but in its 28 weeks it
lost money at the Times Square Theatre, where it played.
“Mother Machree” was withdrawn from the Globe, in
order to make room for the “Street Angel,” and put in the
Times Square. It is not making what one would call a hit
to entitle it to be classified as a “Broadway Hit.” Perhaps
the fault lies in the theatre, for the picture is the best
mother-love story that has ever been filmed ; perhaps it is
another reason. The fact remains, however, that it is not
making a hit, in the sense that “The Big Parade,” “What
Price Glory,” “Seventh Heaven,” “The Ten Command-
ments,” and “The Covered Wagon” made.
“Four Sons” is standing up only fairly well at the Gaiety ;
it is not setting the world afire.
“Street Angel” is making a good Broadway hit.
Fox has one picture that he has not told you very much
about it yet : "Fazil.” I am predicting that this picture will
make a great hit, unless it is “muffed” in the handling, a
thing which I doubt; it will stand quite a little “rough”
handling. Now, if they had made overstatements about this
picture, HARRISON'S REPORTS would have forgiven
them ; it deserves anything that may be said about it.
I want to be fair towards Fox just as I want to be to-
wards every other producer-distributor. But it is neces-
sary for Fox to be fair with you, too. And telling you that
“Sunrise” and “Mother Machree” have been Broadway
hits, and that “The Red Dancer” and “Mother Knows Best”
have been shown on Broadway and have made a hit, when
they have not yet been shown there, it is not treating j-ou
fairly. (“Mother Knows Best” has not even been made yet.)
Another article on “ Talking Pictures ” will be printed in
these columns next week.
i&atared as second-ciaas matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United 8tates $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.60
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JUNE 9, 1928
No. 23
TWO-DOLLAR “HITS” AND "FLOPS"
As in former years, the producer-distributors will again
use their so-called two-dollar pictures to help them, not
only to sell their program stuff, but also to “jack up” the
prices. For this reason it is necessary for you to know
how these pictures performed at the box office in this city
and in other cities where they have been shown, so that
you might not be left at the mercy of the producer-distribu-
tors’ representatives, who will no doubt present you with
fictitious figures, such figures being what their Home Of-
fices will have furnished them. Accordingly, 1 am keeping
in close touch with such pictures, with a view to presenting
you with actual figures, or with figures that are as nearly
accurate as is humanly possible for one to obtain through
independent sources.
This week I present you with the information that I
have been able to secure of pictures that have so far been
shown in this city and in some cases in other cities.
In order to furnish you with a foundation on which to
stand in determining what price should be fair for you to
pay for the different two-dollar pictures, I am pressing
into service “What Price Glory” and “The Big Parade.”
If we should assume that you paid $1,000 for “What Price
Glory” or for “The Big Parade,” then a good price for
you to pay for “Street Angel” should, in my opinion, be
$500.
Let us now give “The Street Angel” 100 points and give
the other two-dollar pictures the points they, in the opin-
ion of this paper, deserve by how they performed at the
box office in comparison with “The Street Angel” :
STREET ANGEL 100 P
FOUR SONS 70 P
SUNRISE 35 P
MOTHER MACHREE 45 P
ABIE’S IRISH ROSE 35 P
UNCLE TOM’S CABIN 70 P
THE MAN WHO LAUGHS 90 P
TEMPEST 125 P
TWO LOVERS 50 P
RAMONA 70 P
GAUCHO 50 P
DRUMS OF LOVE 25 P
WINGS 150 P
TENDERLOIN 25 P
GLORIOUS BETSY 45 P
TRAIL OF ’98 100 P
FAZIL (Only at its first week) Probably 85 P
According to this schedule, if instead of having paid
$1,000 for “What Price Glory" or “The Big Parade” you
paid only $200, then you will naturally make up your mind
(provided you accept the opinions expressed in this edi-
torial) to pay for the “Street Angel” only $100. With this
as a basis, you should pay $35 for “Sunrise,” $125 for
“Tempest," $25 for “Drums of Love,” $45 for “Glorious
Betsy,” and so on.
Let me now give you the reasons that prompted me so to
classify them :
“STREET ANGEL,” Fox, with Charles Farrell and
Janet Gaynor : “Street Angel” is doing well at the Globe
Theatre, this city, where it is playing. According to my
information, not obtained from Fox, in the first two weeks
it grossed nearly capacity, which is $16,000. But it fell
off with the opening of “The Man Who Laughs,” which
is yet playing at the Central Theatre, next door to the
Globe. The Globe has 200 more seats than the Central.
Since it opened, “Street Angel has averaged $9,000. It is
a good picture, and the kind that can hold out on a long
run without dropping perceptibly, but also without increas-
ing perceptibly. Under normal business conditions, this
picture ought to have played to capacity houses for several
months ; under the conditions that prevail now, the busi-
ness it is doing may be considered very good. In the small
towns it ought to do well if it should be exploited in the
different key cities as it is being exploited in this city. If
so, exhibitors paying fifty per cent, of what they paid for
“What Price Glory” or for “The Big Parade” would be
paying a good price for it. It is an extremely well made
picture ; it was reviewed on page 63.
“FOUR SONS,” Fox: This picture closed its engage-
ment at the Gaiety last Sunday, after a run of 16 weeks ;
it opened February 13 and closed June 3. According to my
private information, obtained from independent sources,
in the first eight weeks of its engagement this picture aver-
aged $10,000. During the week ending May 26, $6,800
were taken in. The closing week was around $6,000. To
make it look big, many free tickets were given away.
People willing to pay cash had to be turned away that
week. Its average in the 16 weeks was around $7,500. So
70 points for this picture is a liberal classification. In
other words, if you should pay $100 for “Street Angel,”
then $70 should be a very good price for “Four Sons.” It
is a good picture, well enough, but its production is not as
high class as that of “The Street Angel,” and hasn’t big
names in it. The story is not as smooth, and much of it is
illogical. It is, nevertheless, a good entertainment. You
will find the review on page 39.
“SUNRISE,” Fox: In the issue of March 3, under the
caption “Flops and Hits,” I printed the following about this
picture : “ ‘Sunrise’ ” has been given a forced run in this
city. It is reported that in Newark, at the Fox Terminal,
it drew big crowds ; but it is reported also that it is ‘dying’
in Detroit. It is an extremely artistic production but it will
no doubt appeal to a limited number ; the rank and file will
hardly care for it.” As a result of this statement, James R.
Grainger, General Sales Manager of Fox Film Corporation,
wrote me a letter complaining that my statement was wrong
and not fair to the picture. He asked me to call at his
office to show me the figures so that I might get the facts..
(I printed this letter in the issue of March 17.) I called at
his office and was given by him a table of figures showing
that “Sunrise” averaged in the 28 weeks of its engagement n
figure between $7,500 and $8,000 a week. I have now been
informed that those figures were padded, and that the cor-
rect average of this picture has been between $4,500 and
$5,000 a week. At such a figure as the average, “Sunrise”
has not made a “Broadway Hit,” as the Fox advertisement
asserts. The opening day was for the trade. The second
day it drew 1,500; the third day it drew about 1,600; the
fourth about 1,700. But it started sliding from that day on,
until the last few weeks it was pitiful. The closing week
was about $3,000. The house seats 1,033. At the $2 scale,
it can gross $18,000 a week. At the average of between
$4,500 and $5,000, the picture must have lost a fortune.
The weekly expense for advertising was not less than
$3,500 and in the opening weeks more. With normal ad-
vertising in the newspapers this house cannot be run for less
than $10,000 a week. The rent alone is $4,500 a week. In
Detroit I don’t know what it took in the first three weeks
but I do know that the fourth week it drew only $5,300.
The Fox salesmen were asserting that it drew $10,000 ; but
$5,300 is the correct figure; they bank weekly in that city
and I have been able to get the correct figures for that
week.
Fox claims that in Newark it drew big business —
$20,000 the first week, in a “dump,” as they call Fox’s
Terminal, in that city. I have no independent figures, and
so I cannot say that the figures given me by Fox are
wrong. But I do know this, that my secretary was in that
( Continued on Last Page)
90
“Home James” — with Laura LaPlante
( Univ- Jewel , Sept. 2; 6,307 ft. ; 73 to 90 min.)
A good comedy, with a farcial twist in it. The interest is
held well all the way through. The comedy is caused by
the heroine’s efforts to hide from her stepmother and lier
stepsister, who had gone to New York to pay her a visit,
being under the impression that she had made a success as
a portrait painter, the fact that she had been working in a
department store for a living. More comedy is caused by
the complications that arise when the hero, son of the
owner of the department store, falls in love with the
heroine, whom he had met accidently ; she had taken him for
a chauffeur. Of course, all the entanglements are disen-
tangled in the end, causing no little merriment.
The picture has been directed by Mr. William Beaudine
with skill, from a story by Gladys E. Johnson. Charles
Delaney does well as the hero. Miss La Plante is good
as the heroine. Aileen Manning, Joan Standing, George
Pearce, Arthur Hoyt, Sidney Bracy and others are in the
cast. Arthur Hoyt contributes a share of the comedy.
A good light entertainment.
“Wild West Romance” — with Rex Bell
{Fox, dime 10; 4,921 ft.; 57 to 70 min.)
This is the first picture in which Rex Bell appears as a
star; and if one is to judge him by his work in it, he will
become popular with the followers of Western melodramas
if Fox should give him good stories. He has a pleasant
personality and is a good actor, particularly a good rider.
His former experience in pictures was when he appeared
in a dozen or so Buck Jones pictures.
“Wild West Romance” is a good program melodrama,
with pretty fast action and fairly tense suspense. It shows
the hero finding a stray boy of seven and adopting him.
Later he and the “kid” notice some Indians holding up the
stage. Evidence left on the scene of the holdup reveal to
the hero that the hold-up men were not Indians, but white
persons masquerading as Indians. The hero is accused
of having held up the stage. But he eventually proves his
innocence, catching the real thieves.
There is a love affair in it, of course, which is fairly
charming. The plot has been founded on a story by John
Stone. R. Lee Hough has directed it.
“The End of St. Petersburg”
( Regional ; releasing arrangements not yet made )
This is a picture for cracaloos and other nuts, of whom
this city abounds. And the evidence of it is the fact
that they have been crowding into the Hammerstein The-
atre, where it is now playing. It is an amateurishly pro-
duced picture; it reminds one of the days when pictures
first came into existence, and no one knew how to make
them. The direction is crude, the acting cruder, and the
continuity without any connection ; it is just like language
without connectives to enable one to express himself coher-
ently. The atmosphere is sordid, to such an extent that it
leaves ''one in a frame of mind one finds himself after
returning from a funeral. The characters start eating
potatoes with their coverings, and end eating potatoes with
their coverings. The picture is supposed to be a repre-
sentation of the events that led up to the revolution in
Russia, when Kerensky formed a government ; and later
when the Bolsheviki overthrew Kerensky and established
the Soviet Republic. It is propaganda pure and simple. It
no doubt would have been acceptable in this country, if it
had been produced artistically. It is manifest that the
Russian producers have a long way to travel before reaching
a point where they can make a picture that could prove pre-
sentable to American audiences.
“A Midnight Adventure” — with Edna
Murphy and Cullen Landis
( Rayart ; May; 5,262 ft.; 61 to 65 min.)
A good program picture. It is a mystery melodrama,
full of thrills and suspense. The spectator’s interest is held
tight throughout because of the fact that real murderer is
not disclosed until the end. The thrills are caused by the
mysterious persons appearing and disappearing from the
scene of the murder, and by the fight behind a curtain when
the real murderer is captured by the hero.
The story revolves around a villain who had won the
affections of many women only to blackmail them later.
At a week-end houseparty, where are two of his victims,
the wife of his host, and a guest, he is murdered. The
heroine is suspected because she had been the last person
seen to enter his room ; she had gone there to retrieve the
letters sent to him by her sister, the hostess, which letters
June 9, 1928
he refused to give up. The district attorney and the hero
are both in love with the heroine, but when the heroine is
under suspicion the district attorney believes her to have
had relations with the villain because she would not tell
him why she had been in his room. The hero, however,
has faith in her and finds out that the real murderer is a
burglar who had gone to steal the $5,000 which the villain
had collected from his victims. He had posed as a detective
after he had trapped the real detective and locked him in a
closet when he, the burglar, was about to make his escape,
after having shot the villain.,
The scene where the district attorney questions all the
guests is very suspensive ; everyone suspects everyone else,
each having a motive for wanting the villain out of the way.
Sympathy is aroused for the heroine, who refuses to tell
the real reason tor her having been in the villain’s room,
and also for the hero, who assumes blame for the murder,
so that his sweetheart might be cleared of guilt. The
spectator is greatly relieved when the burglar is revealed
as the real murderer of the villain, who is a thoroughly
detestable fellow and deserves his punishment. The story
was adapted by Arthur Hoel and was directed well by Duke
Woerne. Others in the cast are Ernest Hilliard as the
villian, Jack Richardson, Allan Sears and Virginia Kirkley.
“Has Anybody Here Seen Kelly?” — with
Bessie Love and Tom Moore
( Universal-Jewel , Sept. 16; 6,243 ft.; 72 to 89 min.)
A good comedy-drama. It is a story of a buck private,
who told every girl lie met while in France that he would
marry her if she would go to America. The heroine took
him at his word ; after the death of her mother, she embarks
as a stewardess and, when she reaches New York, runs
away from the boat while the guards were not looking.
She has the time of her life finding the hero, but as he was
a policeman she chanced to come upon him. To get rid of
her he gives her his card, and she goes to his home and
settles there. When he arrives in the evening, he is shocked
to find her there ; but he cannot shake her off. Some gossip
goes around among the neighbors, because the heroine lived
under the same roof with the hero without being married
to him; but the landlady, who is convinced that the hero-
ine is a good girl, takes care of the gossipers with the
rolling pin. The heroine makes a real home for the hero,
until the hero realizes it and decides to marry her. But
the heroine, who had been hurt by an inadvertent remark
made by the hero, takes her “belongings” and heads for the
immigration bureau. The hero, however, rushes there,
grabs her, and takes her to the justice of the peace, by w'hom
they are married.
Most of the comedy is caused by Miss Love’s good acting.
Tom Moore, too, does good work. Tom O’Brien, Kate
Price, Alfred Allen and others are in the cast; they do
good work. The plot has been founded on a story by Leigh
Jason ; it has been directed by William Wyler well.
“Freedom of the Press” — with Marceline
Day, Lewis Stone, Malcolm McGregor,
and Henry B. Walthall
{Univ. -Jewel, Oct. 28; 6,479 ft.; 75 to 92 min.)
This picture reminds one of the story of the murder of
Mr. Mellet, editor of a newspaper in Canton, Ohio. It is
a melodrama with a newspaper office as the background,
in which a crooked politician tries to intimidate an honest
editor from carrying on his expose, and an honest editor
refuses to be intimidated, death being his reward. The plot
is complicated by the fact that the son of the editor is in
love with the politician’s ward, whom the politician was
greatly fond of. In consequence, the young man tries to
interfere with his father’s work, because he did not want
to cause pain to the girl he loved. After his father’s death,
however, he takes up the work himself, and carries it to a
conclusion. The crooked politician commits suicide, but
not until after he had advised the young folk to marry.
There is a thrilling fire in the picture, the newspaper office
being shown as having been blown up, and the hero sticking
by the press until most of the issue, which contained proof
of the politician’s guilt, had been printed, all remaining
at their post until the fire nearly reached them.
There is good heart interest all the way through. One
feels sympathy with the young hero’s father for being willing
to risk his life rather than give up his expose of crooked
politics and crooked politicians. The plot has been founded
on a story by Peter B. Kyne ; it has been directed by George
Melford with skill. Lewis Stone, as the politician, does
good work. So does Henry B. Walthall, Marceline Day,
Malcolm McGregor, and all those that appear in the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
June 9, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
91
“Dawn” — with Sybil Thorndike
( Selwyn-Regiorial )
So much controversy had been created by this picture
that when I went to the Times Square to see it I expected to
find a picture that offended the Germans “terribly.” My
surprise, therefore, was great when instead of finding a
picture offensive to Germans I found one that is derogatory
to the Allies, for it was an Allied soldier that betrayed
Nurse Cavell to the German military authorities. The
Germans are held in a wonderful light all the way through.
The first person to do credit to the German people was the
German officer who had refrained from giving Nurse
Cavell away when he discovered her harboring an Allied
aviator, who had been downed by the Germans inside the
German lines, and who had been taken from his hiding place
by Nurse Cavell to her hospital. The second German to
show the great heart of the German people was the keeper
of Miss Cavell during her incarceration. Several times
this soldier appeared with a sad face, showing that he sym-
pathized with Miss Cavill for her fate. But the one character
that shows the German people in their truest light is a sol-
dier Rammler, one of the members of the firing squad, who
is shot and killed by his officer, because he refused to shoot,
preferring death for himself to shooting a woman.
The picture contains real drama. There is deep heart
interest and suspense. The scenes that show Miss Cavell
hiding in the cellar of her hospital Allied refugees, soldiers
as well as civilians, and spiriting them out of Belgium
through the “underground” channels that she had created,
hold one in tense suspense. Miss Sybil Thorndike, a
famous English actress, who came out of her retirement to
take the part of Nurse Cavell, does marvellous work; she
makes one feel as if nurse Cavell had come back to life.
The picture is impressive in the extreme. It has been
handled by Herbert Wilcox with the delicacy with which
the nation he belongs to is noted. No bitterness against
the Germans is evidenced anywhere in the film. The slur
is against militarism, not only the German but of all nations.
Madame Bodart, who takes the part she played in that
drama in real life, imparts to the picture a realism that it
would be hard to impart otherwise; one feels as if the
picture espisodes represent the actual episodes in which she
was present. Gordon Craig, Marie Ault, Micky Bradford
and many others are in the cast ; all do good work.
None of those that will see “Dawn” will be disappointed.
“His Tiger Lady” — with Adolphe Menjou
( Paramount , June 9; 5,038 ft.; 58 to 72 min. )
As boresome a picture as Mr. Menjou has ever been in.
There is really nothing to the story, which deals with a
hero, super in a theatre, who falls madly in love with a
beautiful woman, occupying a box every evening. The
members of the company become aware of his infatuation
for the beautiful woman and “kid” and taunt him as well
as play jokes on him. The hero, who had been taking the
part of a Maharajah in the cast, is so broken-hearted over
their taunting and over the fact that he could not get near
the woman he loved, that he puts on his Maharaja’s suit,
goes to the hotel where the beautiful heroine was being
entertained constantly by dukes, counts, and other nobles,
and poses as a Maharajah. The heroine becomes attracted
by his fine bearing. He makes her acquaintance deliberately,
follows her to her apartment, and eventually makes her fall
in love with him. Soon, however, the hero discovers that
the beautiful woman he took for a wealthy woman is none
other than a chorus girl, working in the same theatre. Each
is surprised, but pleasurably. The hero is glad that she is
not wealthy. They marry.
A fortune must have been spent on it, but in vain. The
plot has been founded on Alfred Savoir’s play, “Super of the
Gayety.” It has been directed by Hobart Henley. The
locale is Paris, France. Evelyn Brent is the heroine.
“The Street of Sin” — with Emil Jannings
( Paramount , May 26; 6,218 ft.; 12 to 88 min.)
This is the first picture that Mr. Emil Jannings made in
America, and the executives of Paramount held it back un-
til this time. Judging by its quality, one feels that they did
a wise thing to hold it back, for if they had not, they might
have killed Mr. Jannings’ popularity. It would have, in fact,
been wiser for them if they had never released it, pocketing
their losses and saying nothing about it ; for it is not an
entertainment, and much is shown in it that had better not
been shown. The story unfolds in London’s Limehouse
district, and the misery of that district, its filth, its im-
morality, is paraded in the picture. Mr. Jannings is
presented as an underworld character, whom every other
underworld character feared because of his great physical
strength. He lives with a woman of the lowest type
imaginable. A Salvation Army lass goes into the saloon
to convert the sinners and the hero becomes fascinated by
her beauty. He plans to discard his woman and to make the
Salvation Army lass (heroine) as his new woman, because
she looked better. In the end, he falls in love with her and
his thoughts towards her change ; instead of planning evil,
he guards her and protects her. His old mistress becomes
so incensed at his giving her up for, what she thought, the
other woman, that she goes to the police and gives the hero
and his confederates away for robberies they had committed.
The police rush to the district. The crooks and murderers,
in order to save themselves from being shot and killed by the
police, who had surrounded them, take the babies the heroine
had been caring for while their mothers were working and
use them as shields. The hero, who had already been
arrested, begs the police to free him so that he might go
into the room and save the babies from being shot. They
free him, he goes in, saves the babies, but he himself is
shot by one of his confederates. He expires in the arms of
the heroine.
The situation where the hero is shown entering the
heroine’s room at night with evil intentions is not very
edifying. The whole story is sordid, and leaves an un-
pleasant taste. Benjamin Glazer and Josef von Sternberg
wrote the story. Mauritz Stiller directed it. Fay Wray is
a beautiful heroine. Mr. Jannings does excellent work.
Perhaps it is too expensive for you to pass over, but it will
pay you to say as little about it as possible.
ABOUT BICYCLING
It seems as if my article attacking the Hays COPY-
RIGHT PROTECTION BUREAU, which was printed
in the issue of May 26, has been misunderstood.
By that article I did not mean to imply that a distributor
has no right to bring before the board of arbitration a
bicycling case; for he has, provided he brings it as a
breach of contract. What I said was that such distributor
has no right to bring it on the ground that the exhibitor had
committed a crime by violating the copyright law.
Just to make this matter clear, let me say this to those of
exhibitors who are acting, or may act, as arbitrators: If
the exchange brings the exhibitor before the board on the
ground that he breached the contract by playing a picture
in a theatre other than the one the contract calls for, it is
perfectly legitimate for them to try such a case in accordance
with Clause 20 of the old Standard Exhibition Contract, or
18 of the revised contract; but if the exchange brings
such exhibitor before the board on the grounds that he has
committed a crime by violating the copyright law, let them
keep out of it.
Brooklyn, N. Y., May 18th, 1928.
Mr. Peter Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City, N. Y.
My dear Pete :
Again we are indebted to you, for your very generous
cooperation in helping us fight the Fox Film Corporation
in the matter of substitutions.
I am glad to be able to report to you, that the Joint
Arbitration Board threw their case out yesterday, on the
picture, “Square Crooks.” They could not disprove that
“Square Crooks” is a substitution of “Widow in-Law.”
This producer seems to be the most consistent offender
in respect to substitutions. Earlier in the year they tried
to substitute “Colleen” for “Mother Machree” and then
a little later, they insisted upon us taking “Madame Wants
No Children,” a poorly made French picture as a sub-
stitution for another picture shown on the contract.
Since then, they have offered us five (5) other sub-
stitutions and there isn’t a business in the world, in which
you agree to pay real money, where the other party of the
contract, makes an attempt to deliver at will, substitutions.
Can you visualize, Hart Schaffner & Marx, delivering
shoddy suits instead of all-wool, just because they could not
produce the all-wool, according to contract, or Cluett Pea-
body & Company, delivering pink shirts instead of blue,
according to the order ?
There is only one way of stopping this abuse, and that
is to have exhibitors positively refuse to accept a substitu-
tion, then the producer will stop this abuse.
Cordially and sincere yours,
William Brandt.
92
HARRISON’S REPORTS
June 9, 1928
theatre Sunday afternoon, the opening day of the fifth
week of the engagement, between the hours 2 :30 and 4 :00
o’clock, and has reported to me that there were about fifty
persons downstairs ; she did not observe how many there
were in the balcony. When she came out of the theatre at
4 o'clock, two other persons came out with her. I have
no figures of the business for this picture in other cities.
As I said in the review, which I printed in the issue of
October 1, 1927, on page 158, “Sunrise” is one of the most
artistic pictures that have ever been produced. But it is
too gruesome for the average picture-goer. Its theme is
unpleasant ; it deals with a hero, who, for the sake of a
prostitute, with whom he was infatuated, decides to mur-
der his wife; but he changes his mind. It is a wonderful
study of the inner workings of the human mind. But it is a
picture chiefly for the intellectuals ; the masses will not, in
my opinion, care for it. So 35 points should be a fair clas-
sification for this picture for the small towns. The big
town exhibitors have naturally seen it and have decided
what it is worth to them ; it may not hurt them to pay at a
higher classification. But they are the judges.
Note: As I was writing this, I received a letter from
Jimmy Grainger, General Sales Manager of Fox Film Cor-
poration, who wrote it from Chicago, challenging my state-
ments made in last week’s article, entitled “FOX OVER-
STATEMENT.” He gives me $7,854 as the average re-
ceipts of “Sunrise” in its 28th week engagement at the
Times Square. He gives me also figures for Philadelphia,
Newark, Detroit, and other cities, as well as names of ex-
hibitors, to whom I might apply for correct information.
The next figures that I shall accept from Jimmy Grainger
or from any one else either connected or not connected with
the Fox organization will be those of my accountant, Mr.
H. M. Horton, former professor of Mathematics in the
DeWitt Ginton High School, this city, provided they
allow him to examine their books, without any restrictions.
No other figures will do. In the meantime, I stand by my
figures, which I have obtained from reliable sources.
“MOTHER MACHREE,” Fox: This picture was
opened on March 5 at the Globe, this city, and after five
weeks (April 9) it was transferred to the Times Square
and stayed there until May 27, when “Dawn” started its
engagement. In the five weeks at the Globe, it grossed less
than $5,000 a week. At the Times Square, week ending
May 27, it took in $3,200. The previous week it took in
$3,100. On the entire engagement at this theatre it aver-
aged $3,200. These figures are accurate ; they have not
been taken from any other paper. As I said in the review,
“Mother Machree” is the best mother-love story that has
ever been filmed. But it is not a two-dollar picture, as the
receipts prove. At regular prices of admission it ought to
draw well and satisfy them, particularly in neighbor-
hoods where the Irish element predominates. It will re-
quire much exploiting to draw people in, but it is sure to
please them. I am sure that 45 points for this picture is a
fair classification. In other words, if you should happen to
pay $100 for “The Street Angel,” $45 should, in my opin-
ion, be more than a good price for “Mother Machree.” This
may, however, be noted, that it is a very good small-town
picture, and not a good big town, in contrast to “Sunrise,”
which is, in my opinion, a better big town picture than a
small town.
“ABIE’S IRISH ROSE,” Paramount: In my ten-year
career as a reviewer, I have not known another so-called
two-dollar picture to make as complete a failure at the
box office in this city as has “Abie’s Irish Rose,” which Mr.
Jesse L. Lasky, one of the older producers in the business,
dared call “the greatest picture Paramount has ever pro-
duced.” It was pitiful to see the slim crowds that have
been going to the 44th Street Theatre, where it is playing.
If you had shot a cannon ball at them, it -is doubtful if you
would hit any one. In the first three weeks of the engage-
ment, it grossed $4,545.75. Last Sunday, June 3, only $40
was taken in at the matinee. The producers plan to take
it off in two weeks and try to fit it with synchronized music.
In other words, they will have the characters talk when-
ever this will, in their opinion, strengthen the picture, and
fit the remainder with photomusic. The business capacity
of this house is $21,000. It has grossed this amount in
the old days with Griffith pictures, in the heyday of Griffith’s
popularity. The cost of running this house is tremendous :
$4,500 for rent ; $3,500 for newspaper advertising ; any-
where from $1,500 to $2,000 for orchestra, and at least
$2,000 for house attaches, cleaners, ushers, electricity, stage
hands, not to mention billboard advertising. The total
expense could not be less than $11,000. At this rate the pic-
ture has cost the producers for this engagement a fortune.
It is my belief that if this money were spent in a national
advertising campaign, particularly in the Saturday Evening
Post and Liberty, the results would have been many times
more beneficial to you than the New York showing. The
trouble with this picture is the fact that there have been
at least five “Abie’s Irish Rose” made in some form or
other. As a result, the “edge” has been taken off on this
type of pictures. The picture is not bad. On the contrary,
it is very good. The fitting it with “voice” and photomusic
may help it considerably. But this has to be proved first.
I believe that a 35 point classification for this picture
as things now stand is fair.
“UNCLE TOM’S CABIN,” Universal: This picture
opened November 4, 1927, at the Central Theatre. The
first and second days the receipts amounted to $1,850.25.
The first day most of the house was occupied by the trade
and other invited guests. The receipts for the first eight
weeks were as follows :
1st week $11,147.75
2nd week 10,147.75
3rd week 12,722.50
4th week 11,378.50
5th week 10,419.75
6th week 9,611.50
7th week 8,059.00
8th week 15,188.50
The average for the first eight weeks was $11,188.47.
It is one of the most deeply appealing pictures that have
ever been produced. Under a different title than “Uncle
Tom’s Cabin,” it ought to have made a record, for the
reason that every one of those who have seen it has been
raving about it. Yet in my opinion it is not as good a big-
town picture as “Street Angel,” for the reason that “Uncle
Tom’s Cabin” has played for years in all kinds of places
in stock, and has been produced on the screen two or three
times, although no other version can approach this version.
But it should prove an excellent picture for small towns.
You are sure to please one hundred per cent, of those that
you will attract.
“THE MAN WHO LAUGHS,” Universal : This pic-
ture opened at the Central, this city, on April 27. These
are the receipts for the five weeks that it has so far played :
1st week $14,137.00
2nd week 14,003.00
3rd week 13,654.00
4th week 13,102.00
5th week 12,264.00
The average for these five weeks is $13,432.00. As I
said in the review, it is a wonderfully produced picture.
Mr. Veidt does better work in it than Lon Chaney has
ever “dreamed” of doing. He is a real artist. I also said
that, although it is a wonderfully made picture, it is grue-
some. But after all it is the public that passes judgment
on a picture. And the receipts in the first five weeks show
that the public goes to see it. It is manifest that Victor
Hugo’s name is an attraction. “The Man Who Laughs,”
however, in my opinion is a better picture for the big
cities than it is for the small towns. “Street Angel” is
good also for the small towns ; it should have a better appeal
for the masses. For this reason I believe that, although
“The Man Who Laughs” is outdrawing “The Street
Angel,” still 90 points is a fair classification. In other
words, if you should pay $100 for “The Street Angel,” $90
should, in my opinion, be a fair price for “The Man Who
Laughs,” except in the big cities, where a bigger price than
“Street Angel” might be paid. After all, my greatest care
is for the small exhibitor; for the big exhibitor can pro-
tect himself by seeing the picture for himself and deciding
what is a fair price for him to pay, whereas the small-town
exhibitor hasn’t that advantage, and must necessarily de-
pend on outside information.
( This article will be concluded next week.)
ABOUT TALKING PICTURES
Last week I announced that another article will be printed
this week on talking pictures. I wish to announce, how-
ever, that this article will be delayed considerably. There
is no need for you to hurry to buy an instrument. Wait.
Give me a chance to study the various instruments offered
for sale, to learn the advantages and disadvantages of each,
the price, cost of operation, the cost of the subjects, and
everything needed to present to you with facts that will
enable you to determine what to do. The study of these
instruments requires technical knowledge, and my early
technical training should prove of value to you. But you
needn’t worry for the next six months. Wait !
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s
Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JUNE 16, 1928
No. 24
A Reanalysis of the 1927-28 Substitutions
Because of urgent appeals made by exhibitor-sub-
scribers for a more complete analysis of the 1927-28 sub-
stitutions, I am compelled to postpone until next week the
printing of the last part of last week’s article, which
dealt with the 1928-29 two-dollar “hits” and “flops,” so
as to make room for the substitutions.
Before starting the substitutions, however, let me make
certain remarks about the arguments the exchanges have
been making in an effort to make you believe either that
what this paper declares substitutions are not substitutions
or that a certain provision printed in the prospectuses put
out last year, just before they started selling the pictures,
protects them.
In reference to the former, let me say that every fact
that I submit to you in proof that a picture they are of-
fering you is a substitute has been taken from the litera-
ture put out by the producers themselves ; in reference to
the latter, let me say that the wording of that provision
does not give them the right either to change the story
or to substitute a lesser star for a well known star. That
provision, in fact, does not refer to the leading players
but only to the supporting players.
Let me reprint it for the benefit of such exchangemen
as have forgotten it ; and let me interpret it, for the
benefit of such exchangemen as either do not understand
what it means, or have been given a wrong interpreta-
tion of it by their Home Office and told to act in accor-
dance with such interpretation :
"Due to causes or conditions which we deem sufficient,
we reserve the right, without notice, to change the cast,
or the director, or the title of any photoplays described in
this announcement.”
The wording in the literature of the different producers
varied a little, but the meaning in all cases was the same.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, for instance, printed it as fol-
lows :
“Titles, cast and directors subject to change without
notice.” Universal had it as follows :
"Due to the complexities of the picture production,
changes dictated by best production policy, and by causes
and conditions which we deem sufficient, Universal re-
serves the right, without notice, to change cast, director
or the title of any of the photoplays described in this an- ,
nouncement.”
The general clause was framed at the Hays office, and
was inserted in their literature by the different distribu-
tors slightly altered, manifestly in an inspired effort to
lead you to believe that there was no concerted action on
their part as members of the Hays organization.
Notice that the producers reserved the right to change
“cast, director or titles,” but it does not say that they can
change the leading players. If they had reserved such a
right, they would then be able to sell you a Clara Bow
picture and deliver one with Miss “Puffy” in the leading
role : or a Charles Farrell and deliver a “Dicky Dicks.”
The fact that they cannot “pull” such a stunt is the best
evidence that they cannot deliver a picture with a differ-
ent star from the one described in the literature at the
time you bought it.
Notice also that nowhere does that reservation give
them the right to change the story ; they have the right
to change the title, well enough, but the story? Never!
So when an exchangeman tells you in writing that they
have the right to change the story, or the leading player,
send his letter to this office for me to print so that the
world may know how that particular company does
business.
Don’t accept substitutes ! You don’t have to ! If the
exchange has been decent to you, you may accept them.
But you are not obligated to do so. If when you, relying
on the facts given in these pages, refuse to accept the
pictures and the exchange drags you before the arbitra-
tion board, request either the secretary of the exhibitor
organization or of the Film Board to subpoena the dis-
tributor’s records to be used as evidence at the trial. Re-
member that a board of arbitration has the right by law
to subpoena records ; and he who fails to present the rec-
ords demanded is in contempt of court. Demand, then,
that the distributor’s records be subpoenaed. In the event
that they are not brought to the trial, enter a protest and
demand the postponement of the case until they bring
them or until you bring your own. You may then write
to this office for photostatic copies of such records (they
will cost you 50 cents for each copy, which is the actual
cost ; the work for securing these copies and the postage
required for the mailing are furnished free by this office.)
The records that you should have subpoenaed should be :
The Annual Announcement Book, or Campaign Book, as
some distributors call them; a full set of Work Sheets
bearing on the top left hand side corner the day they
were printed ; and a press-sheet for each of the pictures
which have been declared substitutes by this paper and
which you desire to be relieved of.
Columbia Substitutions
“THE BLOOD SHIP” (August 10) : Not a substi-
tution.
“ALIAS THE LONE WOLF” (August 22) : Not a
substitution.
“SALLY IN OUR ALLEY” (September 3) : No
facts given in the book to enable one to determine whether
it is or it is not a substitution.
“BY WHOSE HAND” (September 15) : The Cam-
paign Book says that this was to have been founded on a
story by Channing Pollock; the finished product is by a
different author (not given in the press-sheet). It is a
story substitution.
"THE COLLEGE HERO" (October 3) : The Book
says that this was to be a Willard Mack story; the fin-
ished product has been founded on a story by Henry
Simonds. A clear story substitution.
"THE TIGRESS” (October 21) : The Columbia
Book states that this was to be a story by Alfred Henry
Lewis, and that Priscilla Dean was to appear in it; the
finished product has been founded on a story by Harold
Schumate, and Dorothy Revier and Jack Holt appear in
it. A clear story and star substitution.
"STAGE KISSES” (November 2) : The Book says
that this is a George Bronson Howard story; the finished
product has been founded on a story by Dorothy Howell.
A clear story substitution.
“THE OPENING NIGHT” (November 14) : The
Book says that this was to be a story by Owen Davis ;
the finished product is by Albert Payson Terluine. A
clear story substitution.
“THE WARNING” (November 26) : The Book says
that this was to be a story by Edgar Rice Burroughs ;
the finished product is by Lillian Ducey and H. Milner
Litchin. The Book says that the story is a “thrilling
romance” ; the finished product is a British Secret Service
melodrama unfolding in China. A clear story substitu-
tion.
“FASHION MADNESS” (December 8) : No facts
are given to help one determine whether it is or it is not
a substitution.
“THE SIREN” (December 20) : The Book does not
give the author, but it gives Priscilla Dean as the star;
the finished product has Dorothy Revier as the star. A
( Continued on last page)
94
HARRISON’S REPORTS
June 16 1923
“Chicken a La King” — with a special cast
(Fox, June 17; 6,417 ft.; 75 to 91 min.)
Not bad! It is a light comedy of the gold-digger type
(sexy), in which Ford Sterling, a married man of
miserly nature, gets embroigled with two gold-diggers,
who “fleece” him out of considerable money. There are
mild laughs all the way through. These are caused, at
times by the situations, at times by the subtitles, and at
times by Mr. Ford Sterling’s acting, but mostly by Mr.
Sterling’s acting. Arthur Stone, as Mr. Sterling’s wife’s
brother, who establishes himself in his brother-in-law’s
home and lives on the fat of the land, causes consider-
able comedy. Most of the comedy occurs in the scenes
where Ford Sterling is in the apartment of the gold-dig-
gers and his wife appears ; she had entered into a friendly-
conspiracy with the gold-diggers so that they might exact
money from the hero to buy her, the poor wife, the
things he had denied her right along. The efforts of the
hero to make himself appear as a model husband are
comical.
The plot has been founded on the stage play “Mr.
Romeo,” by Harry Wagstaff Gribble. It has been di-
rected by Henry Lehrman very well. Nancy Carroll,
George Meeker, Carol Holloway, Frances Lee and others
appear in the cast.
Note: This is being delivered for “Atlantic City.”
No author was given in the Work Sheet; but inasmuch
as the Work Sheet stated that “Atlantic City” was to be
“a romantic story of broken hearts of world’s play-
ground” and “Chicken a La King” is a farce-comedy
with a bedroom-farce twist in it, it surely is a story sub-
stitution.
“Fools for Luck” — -with W. C. Fields and
Chester Conklin
(Paramount, May 5; 5,852 ft.; 68 to 83 min.)
While nobody will hurt his sides laughing at this com-
edy, yet it is not a bad entertainment. There are several
mildly amusing situations and not a little pathos. - Mr.
Fields (villain) is a slick fake stock promoter, who wins
the good graces of everyone by his suave manners. His
specialty is abandoned oil wells. Mr. Conklin is the hen-
pecked restaurant proprietor, a champion pool player, and
also the richest man in town (a small country place).
The scenes in the restaurant and poolroom, where the
villain induces Mr. Conklin to teach him to play the game
and to get his dinner check against the game, which he
wins by trickery, will amuse devotees of pool. Other
amusing situations are those in Mr. Conklin’s bedroom;
those showing the villain urged by Mr. Conklin’s wife to
remain overnight as guest so that he might meet her hus-
band ; the scenes of the conversation between him and his
supposed wife, the discovery and subsequent fight. Amus-
ing are also the scenes in the ballroom where Mr. Conklin
goes in a suit many times too large for him. The suit had
been hastily basted and, when it comes apart, it causes
much embarrassment to his wife, a social climber and a
scold. There is much pathos when Mr. Conklin is in-
formed by another fake promoter that the oil well was
an abandoned one. He pays his informant $1,000 to per-
suade the villain to pay back the money to his victims
(all the townspeople) by having him told that the oil
well had gushed and so made his stock so much more
valuable. Not a little comedy is caused by Arthur Haus-
man, an associate of the villain, who becomes drunk at
the ball and tries to tell who the villain really is.
The picture was directed by Charles F. Reisner from
a story by Harry Fried, which was adapted by Sam
Mintz and J. Walter Ruben. Mary Alden, as the nagging
wife, who had “fallen” for the promoter, is good. Sally
Blaine makes a charming heroine and Jack Luden a good
hero.
“A Certain Young Man” — with
Ramon Novarro
(Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, May 19; 5,482 ft.; 63 to 78 m.)
This picture has grown whiskers. It is so old that I
have lost track of the time when it was produced. But
it must be at least two and one-half years. You can
judge for yourself from the fact that Willard Louis is in
the cast. The rumor has it that it was so poor that
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer executives were ashamed to re-
lease it. But the picture is not so bad, after all; only
that the make-up of Ramon Novarro is "terrible,” and
he is miscast. Novarro is no Sheik, and he is trying to
be one in this picture. The theme is about a British
nobleman, a Lord, who was a “terror” with the women.
He had so many on the string that he could hardly keep
track of them. Their presence would often bore him.
Among these women one was married, and her husband
would chase after her. He would enter the Lord’s home
and create a scene because he had information to the
effect that his other half was within; but the Lord was
always able to convince him that she was not there, al-
though she was. Another married woman happened to
turn out to be the very wife of his butler. This Lord-
hero meets the heroine and falls in love with her earn-
estly. One of his married women friends, however, would
not leave him alone ; she appeared in his apartment at a
seashore resort just at a time when he did not want her
to appear. The heroine sees her and her castles crumble.
But he is eventually able to convince the heroine that he
has become a changed man. They become reconciled.
The plot has been founded on the story “Bellamy the
Magnificent,” by Roy Horniman. After completing this
picture, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer were made an offer by
Paramount for the sale of the book. They accepted the
offer, and Paramount made “A Gentleman of Paris,”
with Adolphe Menjou, with it. The picture is suitable
only for the cosmopojitan centres. You might bring down
on you the wrath of your townfolk if you are in a small
town. It is too sexy. The direction is excellent; Hobart
Henley directed it. With a more suitable “Sheik,” Mr.
Henley would certainly have made a fine picture. The
production end is high class.
In England and the British Dominions this picture may
be taken as a slur against the British aristocracy.
“Lonesome” — with Glenn Tryon and
Barbara Kent
(Universal-Jewel, rel. in Oct.; 6,193 ft.; 12 to 88 min.)
This is an unusual picture. The plot is very simple,
but the mood of the story is so vivid that a deep impres-
sion is left on one’s mind, an impression that lasts long
after one has seen the picture. It is the story of a young
boy who felt lonesome because he had no friends and no
sweetheart ; and of a girl who likewise felt lonesome be-
cause she had no friends to invite her out and no sweet-
heart. During a holiday each goes to Coney Island to
“take in the sights” and to go in swimming. Acci-
dentally the boy sees the girl and natural attraction in-
duces him to approach her in order to make her acquain-
tance. At first the girl is shy, but as she, too, had been
lonesome, she accepts his offer to go in the surf. Before
the day is over each falls deeply in love with the other.
By a coincidence, they become separated. Each was al-
most out of his mind trying to find the other, particu-
larly the boy. They would wedge into the milling
crowds, each looking around for the other, until de-
spondently they gave up the effort as futile. Each returns
home. The boy, broken-hearted, puts on his phonograph
the record that played “I’ll Always Love You,” to the
tune of which they danced during the day at Coney Island.
The girl, who lived in the next room, a fact which was
unknown to the boy, becomes distracted by the music,
which brought back the sad memories of the loss of the
boy she had met and fallen desperately in love with, goes
to the room where the sound came from, resolved to de-
mand of the occupant to stop the “noise.” Tears rolled
down the cheeks of both when chance brought them to-
gether again.
It is hard to describe the effect the picture has on
one’s emotions, particularly in the closing scenes, where
boy and girl meet again. By this time the spectator takes
such an interest in the two, that he hopes and prays in
his mind that they meet again. The scenes in Coney
Island where the two became separated make one as sad
as the scenes of the reunion make him joyful.
The plot has been founded on a story by Mann Page.
It was directed with great skill by Paul Fejos, the direc-
tor who produced “The Last Moment.” It is manifest
that Mr. Fejos belongs to a new school ; he has brought
a new style of direction into the business.
According to my information, “The Yellow Lily,” with
Billy Dove, is drawing well.
95
HARRISON’S REPORTS
June 16, 1928
“Walking Back” — with Richard Walling
and Sue Caroi
( Pathe , May 21 ; a, 035 ft.; 58 to 12 min.)
It has otten been a wonder to me why the Pathe or-
ganization is wasting so fine a director as Rupert Julian
on program stuff, wnen he can handle big stuff as mas-
terly as any other director ; in fact has handled such stuff
m tne past. "Walking Back” is "a section of a special,”
produced by Mr. Julian with program material. The
opening scenes give thrills that have not been given for
a long time, 'ltiese thrills are caused by a "duel” with
automobiles. 1 wo young men, the hero and a rival for
tne girl he loves, fight it out by bumping each other with
their machines. 1 tns is entirely new in pictures. And
manifestly dangerous. There are other thrills. These
occur toward the end, when the young hero, son of a
banker, disregarding the pistol that was leveled at the
back of his head by the bank robbers, who had just
blown up the safe of his father’s bank and taken a bag
full of bank notes out of it, drives the machine right into
police headquarters, bringing about their arrest.
The theme is that of young folk who jazz, and drink,
and cut up, not realizing the consequences, until some-
thing happens in their lives that makes them learn and
turns them into good men and women.
Richard Walling is sympathetic as the banker’s young
son. Sue Carol is good as the young jazzy woman. She
has a future. Robert Edeson is good as the banker. The
story is by George kibbe Turner.
IN THE INTEREST OF FAIR PLAY
Jimmy Grainger, General Sales Manager of Fox Film
Corporation, took exception to the statement that I made
in last week’s HARRISON’S REPORTS to the effect
that the figures he gave on "Sunrise” were “padded.” He
thought that 1 have cast a reflection on his veracity.
In making that assertion, I meant no personal reflection
on J irnrny ; and lest there is some one else that may think
that 1 meant it the way Jimmy Grainger has interpreted
it, 1 take this means of setting him straight.
This is what prompted me to make that assertion :
It has been the custom in this industry for the pro-
ducers and distributors to exaggerate the drawing powers
of pictures. So when I received reliable information that
the actual receipts of "Sunrise” were lower by about $3,001)
than the figures Jimmy gave me, I took it for granted that
Jimmy simply followed the custom in this industry, of
exaggerating. But I did not mean to question his per-
sonal veracity.
Why shouldn’t I have taken it that way? Didn’t the
Fox organization make an exaggeration when it stated
in its trade paper insert that “Mother Knows Best” and
“The Red Dance” are Broadway hits when they have not
even been shown on Broadway?
Here is another case: Jimmy Grainger is telling you
through his branch managers that “A Girl in Every
Port” is the same picture as “Balaoo,” when we know
that "Balaoo” is “The Wizard,” because the author of
“The Wizard” is given as Gaston Leroux, whereas the
author of “A Girl in Every Port” is given as J. Mc-
Guinnes. Now, this is a misstatement; Jimmy himself
must admit it. But, in telling you that this is a business
untruth. I do not mean to cast any reflection on the
veracity of Jimmy Grainger.
It is not necessary for me to call some one names in
order to impress you with the accuracy of the informa-
tion I give you on these pages. When, for example, I
tell you that “The Chaser” is not “The Butter and Egg
Man,” it is not necessary for me to curse some one in
First National in order to make you take my statement
seriously. The facts in themselves are so impressive
that no other aid is needed. Nor is it necessary for me
to make personal remarks about Jimmy Grainger in or-
der to impress you with the fact that "Love Hungry” is
not "The Comedian” ; for the facts speak for themselves.
Jimmy Grainger is working for the Fox Film Cor-
poration, and must necessarily do all he can to show re-
sults at the Fox box office. On the other hand, you are
paying me to render you a certain service, and I must do
all I can to render it to you, no matter whose feelings I
may hurt in so doing. I like Jimmy Grainger personally.
In fact I admire him. I admire any one that has the stuff
in him to make the success that he has made. But my
personal liking for him is not going to make me refrain
from giving you information that may save you all hun-
dreds of thousands of dollars. The difference of opinion
between Jimmy Grainger and me about the box-office
receipts of “Sunrise” is something like $3,000 weekly:
He says that the average in the 28 weeks has been
$/,854; my information is to the effect that it is between
$4,500 and $5,000. There is just one way to settle the
matter: Let Jimmy Grainger show me the daily box-
office statements, signed by the treasurer of the Times
Square 4 heatre and countersigned by the Fox represen-
tative, as well as the bank book showing the daily de-
posits. then if I find that Jimmy is right and I wrong,
he. may rest assured that I shall print the figures con-
spicuously.
( Concluded from back page)
"LO\ E HUNGRY” (April 8) : The original title of
this one is supposed to be “The Comedian.” But "The
Comedian was to be a picture that would be founded on
the stage play by Sacha Guitry, to be directed by Victor
Schertzinger, and to have Janet Gaynor in the leading
part; whereas "Love Hungry,” which is a mediocre pic-
ture of the program grade, has been founded on a story
by Randall H. Faye, was directed by Victor Heerman,
and has Lois Moran in the leading part. It is a clear
story, star, and director substitution.
’ 1 HE PLAT GIRL" (April 22): This picture’s
original title is supposed to be “Honeymoon Dreams.”
“Honeymoon Dreams” was to be directed by Raoul
Walsh; "the Play Girl” has been directed by Arthur
Rosson. While you lose in the director values you gain
in the star values, because in the original no star was
promised, whereas in the finished product Madge Bel-
lamy has been delivered. It is up to you, however, to
determine whether you want to cancel it or not by taking
it to the board of arbitration.
”1 HE ESCAPE” (April 29) : According to the Fox
\\ ork Sheet of June 3, 1927, "The Escape” was to have
in the leading parts the formidable cast consisting of
Janet Gaynor, Victor McLagleu, and Charles Farrell,
and was to be directed by Raoul Walsh. It was sold to
you as a "Superspecial,” being included in the list of ten
superspecials. The finished product is an underworld
melodrama of the program grade, has William Russell
and Virginia Valli in the leading parts, and was directed
by Richard Rosson. It takes a lot of nerve on the part
of a producer to charge big money for a superspecial with
big names and to deliver a picture of program grade with
no names. You are not obligated to accept it.
"HONOR BOUND" (May 6) : This is supposed to
be the new title of “The Soul of Passion.” But “The
Soul of Passion” was described in the Fox Annual An-
nouncement as a picture to be founded on Prosper Meri-
mee’s “Carmen,” to have Dolores Del Rio and Victor
McLaglen in the leading parts, and to be directed by
Raoul Walsh; whereas “Honor Bound” has been founded
on a story by Jack Bethea, has been directed by Alfred
Green, and has George O’Brien in the leading part. A
star, story and director substitution. “The Soul of Pas-
sion,” too, belongs to the ten superspecial group, for
which big money was paid. In its place the Fox organi-
zation is delivering a picture of lower grade. You are
not obligated to accept it. ("The Loves of Carmen” is
really •'The Soul of Passion.”)
“HANGMAN’S HOUSE” (May 13) : Charles Far-
rel was promised with the others but not delivered. Star
substitution.
"A THIEF IN THE DARK” (May 20) : This is
supposed to be the new title of "The Unknown Beauty.”
But “The Unknown Beauty” indicates that the picture
was to be a society drama. It is inconceivable, there-
fore, how any producer-distributor could deliver in its
place a crook melodrama. Besides, the June 3, 1927,
Work Sheet promised Olive Borden and does not deliver
her in the finished product. To any fair-minded arbitra-
tion board it should be clear that it is a story substitu-
tion, and certainly is a star substitution.
“THE NEWS PARADE” (May 27) : This is sup-
posed to be the new title of “French Ankles.” It cer-
tainly takes a great deal of courage for any one to de-
liver a story of the troubles and tribulations of a Fox
News cameraman, as “The News Parade” is, for a leg
picture with Madge Bellamy in the leading part. It is a
story and star substitution and you are not obligated to
accept it.
“DON’T MARRY” (June 3) : This is supposed to
be the new title of “The a La Carte Girl,” but no facts
were given in the Work Sheet to help one determine
whether it is a substitution or not. “The a La Cart
Girl” was, in my opinion, only a safety-valve title, to be
used on some junk.
The other pictures will be analyzed as they are re-
viewed.
96
HARRISON’S REPORTS
clear star substitution, and you don’t have to accept it.
"THAT CERTAIN THING” (.January 1) : No facts
are given to tell if it is a substitution.
"THE WIFE’S RELATIONS” (January 13) : No
facts are given.
“LADY RAFFLES” (January 25) : The Book says
that this was to be a story by Alfred Henry Lewis, and
was to have Priscilla Dean as the star ; the finished prod-
uct has been founded on a story by Jack Jungmeyer and
Fred Stanley, and has Estelle Taylor in the leading part.
A clear star and story substitution.
“SO THIS IS LOVE” (February 6) : The Book says
that this was to be the story of a gold-digger by Ger-
trude Atherton; the finished product is a pugilistic pic-
ture by Norman Springer. A clear story substitution.
“A WOMAN’S WAY” (February 18) : This was to
be a story by Thompson Buchanan; the finished product
is by Izola Forrester. A clear story substitution.
“THE SPORTING AGE” (March 2) : An insert in
the trade papers gave this as a story by Charles K. Ten-
nant ; the finished product is by Armand Kalitz. It is a
clear story substitution.
“THE MATINEE IDOL” (March 14) : The original
title of this one is supposed to have been “Come Back to
Aaron.” No facts are given in the Book.
“THE DESERT BRIDE” (March 26) : This is the
new title of the picture sold as “The Adventuress.” The
Book says that “The Adventuress” is a Frances Marion
story ; the finished product “The Desert Bride” has been
founded on a story by Ewart Adamson. It is a clear
story substitution.
“BROADWAY DADDIES” (April 7) : The Book
says that this was to be a story by Grace Atkinson ; the
finished product is by Victoria Moore. A clear story
substitution.
“AFTER THE STORM” (April 19) : No facts are
given.
“GOLF WIDOWS” (May 1): Trade paper inserts
stated that this was to be a story by Henry Clayton
Cooper ; the finished product is by W. Scott Darling. A
clear story substitution.
“MODERN MOTHERS” (May 13) : The Book says
that this was to be the story “Perils of Divorce,” by
Rachel Crothers ; the finished product has been founded
on a story by Peter Milne. A clear story substitution.
“NAME THE WOMAN” (May 25) : This was sold
as "Bridge.” No facts are given in the book to help one
determine whether it is a substitution or not.
The remaining Columbia pictures will be analyzed
when they are released.
Fox Substitutions
“PAID TO LOVE” (August 14) : This is not a sub-
stitution as far as the 1927-28 program is concerned, but
it is the picture that was sold as “Gaby” or “A Royal
Romance” in the 1926-27 program. At that time Fox at-
tempted to deliver “Stage Madness” in its place, asserting
that it was the same picture as “Gaby” or “A Royal
Romance,” which was contrary to facts. Those who
bought this picture as “Gaby” or “A Royal Romance”
and lost it to their competitors are entitled to redress.
“CHAIN LIGHTNING” (August 14) : No facts.
“SINGED” (August 21): Not a substitution.
“TWO GIRLS WANTED” (September 11): Not a
substitution.
“THE JOY" GIRL” (September 18) : Not a substitu-
tion.
“THE GAY RETREAT” (September 25) : Its orig-
inal title “A. W. O. L.”; not a substitution.
“PUBLICITY MADNESS” (October 2) : Not a
substitution.
“EAST SIDE, WEST SIDE” (October 9) : Not a
substitution.
“HIGPI SCHOOL HERO” (October 16): Sally
Phipps and Richard Walling were promised, but the pic-
ture has been delivered with Nick Stuart. The changes
in cast, however, are not important enough to warrant
any exhibitor to refuse to accept it.
“PAJAMAS” (October 23) : Olive Borden and
George O’Brien were promised; Olive Borden and Law-
rence Gray have been delivered. Cause for complaint
with those of you with whom George O’Brien is a
drawing card.
“VERY CONFIDENTIAL” (November 6) : No facts
are given.
“LADIES MUST DRESS” (November 20) : The
Fox “Salesman’s Work Sheet,” “New Form S-4-5M-50
June 16 1928
to a pad 6-3-27-A,” promised this picture with James
Tingling and Mary Duncan; the picture is being deliv-
ered with Virginia Valli and Lawrence Gray. I don’t
think the star substitutions are of importance to entitle
you to a “kick.”
“WOLF FANGS” (November 27) : No facts given
to help one determine if a substitution; only that it was
to be a dog story.
“THE WIZARD” (December 11) : Not a substitu-
tion. The original title was “Balaoo.”
“SILK LEGS” (December 18) : The Fox Annual
Announcement promised it with Albert Ray as the direc-
tor ; Arthur Rosson has directed it. Director substitu-
tion. There is not, in my opinion, enough justification
for you to “kick.”
“COME TO MY HOUSE” (December 25) : Not a
substitution.
“GATEWAY OF THE MOON” (January 1) : This
is being delivered in place of “Luna Park.” According
to the Fox Work Sheet of June 3, 1927, this was to be
“A vivid, colorful story of carnival life with Victor Mc-
Laglen, Greta Nissen, Charles Farrell,” and was to have
Mr. McLaglen in a role “which runs second only to that
remarkable characterization of Captain Flagg in ‘What
Price Glory.’ It certainly took great nerve on the part
of Fox Film Corporation, after such promises, to attempt
to deliver a "rotten” picture of jungle life, even though
it has Dolores Del Rio in the leading part. A clear story
and star substitution.
’’WOMAN WISE” (January 8) : No facts to help
one.
“SHARPSHOOTERS” (January 15) : This is sup-
posed to be merely a title change, from the original title
"The Girl Downstairs.” But according to the Work
Sheets of May 9 and of June 3, 1927, the story of “The
Girl Downstairs” was to be by May Edginton, whereas
“Sharpshooters” has been founded on a story by Randall
H. Faye. It is a clear story substitution.
“SOFT LIVING” (February 5) : Not a substitution.
“A GIRL IN EVERY PORT” (February 26) : This
is supposed to be the new title of “Balaoo.” “Balaoo,”
however, was to be, according to the Fox Annual An-
nouncement in the trade papers and in the Fox Work
Sheets, “An American Adaptation of Gaston Leroux’s
Tremendous Parisian Stage Success” (which is the
picture “Wizard”), whereas the story of “A Girl in
Every Port” has been written by J. B. McGuinnes. A
clear story substitution. How can two different pictures
be “Balaoo”?
“SQUARE CROOKS” (March 4): The original
title of this picture is supposed to be “Widow-in-Law.”
But according to the Fox Work Sheets, “Widow-in-
Law” was to be a comedy, was to be directed by Albert
Ray, and to have Edmund Law, Mary Duncan and Sally
Phipps in the leading parts, whereas “Square Crooks”
is a crook melodrama by James P. Judge, was directed
by Lew Seiler, and has Robert Armstrong, J. M. Brown,
and Dorothy Appleby in the leading parts. It is a clear
story, star and director substitution. The board of arbi-
tration of the New York City zone, in the case of Fox vs.
Brandt’s Theatre Enterprises, of Brooklyn, N. Y., de-
cided a few weeks ago, as Mr. William Brandt has in-
formed this paper (his letter was printed in HAR-
RISON’S REPORTS last week) that “Square Crooks”
is a substitution and that the defendant was not obligated
to accept it.
“DRESSED TO KILL” (March 18) : The original
title of this is supposed to be “Silk Hats.” “Silk Hats.”
however, was to have been directed by Raoul Walsh, and
to have Victor McLaglen, Madge Bellamy and Edmund
Lowe in the leading parts, whereas “Dressed to Kill” has
been directed by Irving Cummings, and has Mary Astor
and Edmund Lowe in the leading parts. A star and
director substitution.
“WHY SAILORS GO WRONG” (March 25) : The
Fox Work Sheets do not give any facts to help one de-
termine who was to write the story. “The Film Weekly,”
of Sydney, Australia, however, gives J. McGuinnes as the
author. The finished product has been founded on a
story by William Conselman. Manifestly it is a story
substitution. But I don’t think an American arbitration
board will accept evidence imported from Australia, even
though we know that such information in the “Film
Weekly” was furnished by the Fox organization and
therefore it is correct. I don’t think it is worth-while
“kicking” on this one.
( Concluded on inside page )
Eateved as secoad-oi&ss matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Y early Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
TJ. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published W eekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X SATURDAY, JUNE 23, 1928 No. 25
An Analysis of the 1927-28 Substitutions---No. 2
(Continued, from last week)
Last week I informed you that I would print the second
part of the article “Two-Dollar ‘Hits’ and ‘Flops’ ” this
week. But in order to clean up the substitution analy-
sis of every company’s product, I am again compelled to
postpone that article until I finish the substitutions.
Since the appearance of last week’s article, which
dealt with substitutions, I have received some letters from
exhibitors asking me to define their rights in the matter of
substitutions. Some of them asked me if, when I say that
"It is a clear story substitution,” they can refuse to accept
such picture without violating their contract.
My answer is this : The foundation of a picture is the
story or the author, whichever is given with the title at
the time of the sale of that particular picture ; or the theme,
if sufficient facts are given to determine the nature of it.
When that story, or the author, is changed, the foundation is
removed. In other words, the picture is no longer what you
bought. For this reason, you have a perfect right to refuse
it without breaching your contract. ( If the picture was part
of a star or director series with no stories, then the star or
the director sold is the foundation.)
The other question is this : When an exhibitor has given
to the exchange play-dates thinking that it is the picture he
bought and then he reads in Harrison’s Reports that such a
picture is a substitute, has such exhibitor the right to
cancel the dates and refuse the picture ?
My answer is that he has a perfect right to do so, for
this reason : When he was notified by the exchange that
play-dates for that picture were available, he, thinking that
that picture was contained in his contract, gave the ex-
change play-dates in good faith. Later he discovered that
the picture was not what he had contracted for, and decided
that he did not want it. Remember that, where a substi-
tution is concerned, there is no contract in existence. The
exchange, therefore, cannot force an exhibitor to accept
something he did not contract for.
Before starting on the remainder of the substitutions, let
me define how you should proceed in the matter of sub-
stitutions :
When you read in these pages that a particular picture
is a substitute, if the title is the same, you may undertake to
prove that it is a substitute ; but if the title has been changed,
then it will be up to the exchange to prove that it is not a
substitute. Accordingly, in case you are haled before the
board of arbitration for failing to give the exchange play-
dates, your procedure should be as follows :
(A) If the title of the substitute is the same as the title
contained in the contract :
The exchange writes you demanding play-dates. You
write back and say that it is a substitute, and therefore you
don’t want the picture. The exchange refers the matter to
the Film Board of Trade. The Secretary of the Board
sends you a notice that the exchange has entered a com-
plaint against you for failing to accept a particular picture,
demanding your answer. You answer that the picture is a
substitute and therefore you do not want it. The Secretary
writes hack and asks you to appear before the board of
arbitration on a certain date when your case will be heard.
You write back and ask the secretary to demand of the dis-
tributor to present at the hearing: (1) A copy of his
Annual Announcement, whether in the form of a trade paper
insert or a Campaign Book published by his Home Office.
(2) A complete set of the company’s Work Sheets. (3) A
press-sheet for that particular picture; and (4) anything
you think it is necessary for you to establish your claim. In
the meantime, write to this office and get a photastatic copy
of the Work Sheet.
Suppose when you appear before the board, you find that
the exchange has failed to present these documents, either
through the negligence of the' film board secretary or
through the unwillingness of the exchange to present such
records, then you should protest, demanding, first, the
postponement of the case ; secondly, the subpoenaing of
these records by the board of arbitration (the arbitration
board has a right, by law, to subpoena such records. When
the exchange manager refuses to present them, he is in con-
tempt of court. The arbitration board can, in such an event,
make an application to the Supreme Court to certify his
guilt and to prescribe the punishment.)
When the title of the substitute picture is the same as that
contained in the contract, I said “you may” undertake to
prove that it is a substitute ; but you are not obligated to do
so. Remember that, as an elementary point of law, the
burden of proof rests always with the plaintiff. In civil
cases, the courts always so charge as a matter of routine.
But I chose to suggest to you to attempt, in such cases, to
prove that it is a substitute only because I feel that in this
manner you afford to your interests a greater measure of
protection. If you so choose, you and your counsel may
fold your hands and let the exchangemen prove that the
picture is not a substitute. All you and your counsel have
to do is to ask questions.
In case the arbitration board refuses to act, then it should
be clear to you that such board is “packed,” and it will be
suicide for you to remain until the case is finally disposed
of. Leave, and take the following steps : First, write to
this office ; I may be able to get the Home Office of the
distributor to take action at this end, to prevent an in-
justice. Should the Home Office refuse to act, then it will
be up to you to enter a complaint, either with the district
attorney of your exchange city or with the attorney general
of your state, on the ground that through false advertising
they are trying to compel you to accept something you did
not originally buy. It may even be necessary for you to
take court action. According to CAHILL’S CONSOLI-
DATED LAWS OF NEW YORK, 1926, you are en-
titled to take such action on two grounds : first, because of
evident partiality of the arbitrators ; and, secondly, because
the arbitrators, in refusing to subpoena the records to post-
pone the hearing until such records are presented, are
guilty of misconduct.
(B) In case the title of the substitute picture has been
changed, then the burden of proof rests upon the exchange.
In other words, it is up to the exchange to prove to the
arbitrators that the picture it is delivering is the picture
you bought. And it cannot do that, because of the proof I
have printed in these columns for your benefit.
In case the board of arbitration should show partiality to
the exchange and, despite your arguments and your proof
that the picture is a substitute, renders a decision against
you, you still have the right to go to the district attorney, or
to the attorney general of your state, to enter a complaint on
the ground of false advertising. You may also notify this
office so that I may take whatever steps I can to protect
your interests. The exchanges have their Home Offices. I
want to be your Home Office, where you can tell your
troubles and be sure to get a hearing. This paper is
devoted to your interests heart and soul. Let me have
your complaint. Be sure that you are right in your facts,
for unless you are right you weaken me when you ask me
to defend a wrong case. But when you are right, this
paper will go all the way for you.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Substitutions
TIM McCOY SERIES: The pictures of this star, six
in number (Nos. 844, 845, 846, 847, 848, and 849) were sold
as a star series. They are being delivered, therefore, as they
were sold.
( Continued on Last Page)
98
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Man, Woman and Wife” — with Norman
Kerry, Marion Nixon, and Pauline Starke
( Universal-Jewel ; Dec. 30; 6,495 ft.; 75 to 92 min.)
A strong melodrama. While the story is not new, it has
been handled well. It deals with a wealthy hero, who,
while fighting in France is so seized with fear that he
deserts. He returns to the United States but not to his
young wife. Inability to make his presence known makes
him so despondent that he abandons himself to drink. He
is thrown out of a saloon by a bounder. The heroine, who
was his mistress before his inarriage, and whom he had
repusled after his marriage to a young woman, finds
him and takes him to her apartment. The villain, a power
in the underworld, had been keeping the heroine. Upon be-
ing informed that his "sweetheart had taken a stranger
into her apartment, he rushes there and tries to catch him
in. The two run away and hide ; they rent an apartment and
live as husband and wife. Months later the villain dis-
covers their hiding place. He calls on the heroine while the
hero, having read in the papers that his real wife was about
to marry another man, goes to the church to stop the wed-
ding. But he did not have the courage to do it. Upon his re-
turn, he is confronted by the villain. The villain makes ready
to shoot the hero. The hero kicks the pistol from his hand,
takes it himself, and shoots and kills him. He is arrested,
tried, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. The
hero’s friend arranges for his escape from prison. His
escape becomes known and the sirens are blasted, sending
every guard to his post. A machine gun is trained on the
spot'through which the hero was to make his getaway. The
past flashes before the hero, and he realizes what a failure
he had made of his life. He then deliberately puts himself
in the path of the bullets and is shot and killed, his aim
being to spare his real wife pain.
There are some inconsistencies here and there. For in-
stance, it is impossible for one to believe that the hero would
have been tried and convicted of a crime in the same city
where his wife lived and his identity not to become known
not only to his wife but to everybody. His photograph,
which would naturally have been printed in the papers,
would have given him away. But the action is so fast and
gripping, that I am sure the average picture-go will over-
look these defects.
The story has been written by Charles A. Logue. It has
been directed by Edward Laemmle. Kenneth Harlan,
Byron Douglas, Crauford Kent, Jack Raymond and others
are in the cast.
“No Other Woman” — with Dolores Del Rio
{Fox, June 10; 5,071 ft.; 58 to 72 min.)
Quite “sexy” ; it shows some of the women characters in
tights, very tight. Consequently, it is hardly suitable for
exhibitors that cater to children. From the point of view
of adults, it is hardly much of an entertainment ; for hardly
any of the characters does anything that would arouse one[s
sympathy. On the contrary, most of what is shown is
scheming by the villain to marry the wealthy heroine by
double-crossing the hero, who is an old schoolmate of his,
and who had trusted him. And the villain succeeds. The
action takes place in Biarritz, near the Spanish border, and
later shifts to other parts of Europe. The acting is me-
chanical, the characters appearing as not possessing the
commonest degree of intelligence. The heroine would
“swallow” anything that the villain would tell her, and
hadn’t sense enough to look into his motives. On the other
hand, the hero is “blah! blah!” Miss Del Rio’s part is
anything but sympathetic; whatever sympathy she might
get, she loses by marrying the villain. No one feels com-
passion for her when she discovers her mistake and when
later she marries the hero, who had made the villain agree
to a divorce. In one scene a woman is shown in the hero’s
room; she was a part of the villain’s plot to discredit the
hero. He persuades her to go away when a bellboy is sent
for. This boy is no more than fourteen. And yet he is
made to say to the hero : "You are safe with me, Monsieur !
Us men got to stick together ;” meaning, of course, that the
boy would not give the hero away for having caught him
with a woman in his room. Whoever is responsible for this
title has certainly shown lack of taste to a deplorable degree.
And you should take steps to have this title removed.
The plot has been founded on the story by Poland
Banks. It has been directed by Lou Tellegen.
June 23, 1928
NOTE: I have been informed by some exhibitors that
this picture is delivered for “My Wife’s Honor,” which in
turn is supposed to be the title of “The Blond Panther.”
If so, these are the facts : No story or author was given in
the Work Sheet, but Frank Borzage was given as the
director, as well as the following descriptive matter : “The
genius who turned out “7th Heaven” will make this one,
a powerful melodrama of primitive love in a modern
society.” The picture is not a melodrama but a straight
drama, and not Frank Borzage but Lou Tellegen has
directed it. It is manifested that “The Blond Panther” was
a “safety-valve” title, and consequently the picture, not be-
ing a melodrama, as advertised, is clearly a story substi-
tution ; and it is a director substitution. Whether, however,
the exchangemen arbitrators will show fair-mindedness
enough so to declare it, I cannot say. If the picture is not
suitable for your customers and you want it canceled, you
should try to have it canceled by bringing it before the board
of arbitration on the ground that it is “sexy.”
“The Blond Panther” was sold to you as a Super-Special
— one of the group of 10 Super- Specials.
“Happiness Ahead” — with Colleen Moore
( First National, June 24; 7,265 ft.; 84 to 103 min.)
Like Clara Bow’s “Ladies of the Mob,” “Happiness
Ahead” is a crook melodrama. The difference, however,
is the fact that in “Happiness Ahead” the action does not
show electric chairs or encounters with the police, but it
confines itself chiefly to showing that the hero had made
up his mind to reform because of his great love for the
innocent country girl he had married, for which resolve
he had been given away to the police by a discarded mistress,
because he would not give up his wife to go back to her;
it shows also the suffering the heroine went through when
she learned that her husband, instead of being to South
America, where he had made her believe he had gone, was
in jail. The picture shows further commendable action in
the closing scenes where the heroine, who loved the hero
desperately, refused to allow him to tell her that he was in
jail preferring that he let her think that he was in South
America, for the sake, not only of her love for him but
also of their coming child
It is a sentimental little piece, in which Miss Moore is
given an opportunity to wring some tears from tender-
hearted spectators. There is some comedy here and there,
too. Edmund Lowe, too, does good work ; he takes the part
of a high-class crook. Lilyan Tashman, Edythe Chapman,
Arthur Housman, and many others are in the cast. The
plot has been founded on a story by Edmund Gould ing; it
has been directed by William A. Seiter well.
“The Lion and the Mouse” — with a star cast
( Warner Bros.; synchronized, 6,352 ft.; regular, 5,912 ft. )
Without the Vitaphone, “The Lion and the Mouse” is
going to please every one that will see it; with the Vita-
phone, it ought to create a sensation. It is the best synchro-
ized picture that Warner Bros, have ever produced, for
the reason that the characters, who are made to talk in im-
portant parts of the picture, are almost all experienced
actors and know what to say and how to say it, to get the
best effect. The part where Alec. B. Francis, supposedly a
Supreme Court judge, is sent for by the powerful Wall
Street magnate, Lionel Barrymore, is a piece of art. The
part where the Wall Street magnate is confronted by the
heroine, who had broken open his desk and had stolen the
letter her father had written to him. the flinty-hearted mag-
nate, and by which her father could prove his innocence on
the charges of having accepted a bribe, which had been
trumped up by the Wall Street man, should create a sensa-
tion ; Miss McAvoy handles her part very well even though
she has never acted on the stage, and has not had the expe-
rience the old actors Messrs. Francis and Barrymore have
had. The encounter between father and son, where the son
is shown denouncing his father for his determination to ruin
the father of the girl he loved, too, should create a deep im-
pression. Mr. William Collier, Jr., handles the part of the
son with skill ; his voice, too, registers well. There are
other parts where the “voice” is used with good effect.
The plot has been taken from the well known stage play
by Charles Klein. It has been put into pictures by Lloyd
Bacon, from a scenario by Robert Lord.
June 23, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
99
“Heliship Bronson” — with Noah Beery,
Mrs. Wallace Reid, and Reed Howes
( Gotham-Regional , May 1; 6,432 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
The theme of this picture is not of the kind that can be
related in polite society, even though the entire picture has
been handled well. For instance, a father, because of the
hate he felt for his wife, who he thought had disgraced him,
urges his growing son to be a “terror” with the women and
not to trust any of them. He is captain of his own ship and
his son is his mate. One of the situations shows the young
hero and his father, who had just returned to San Fran-
cisco after fifteen years of sailing, mainly in Chinese waters,
in a saloon ; the father urges his son to make friends of
the women of the underworld. In the same saloon, the
father is shown implying to his son that, the woman he was
in the room with was a common woman ; he had taught the
boy to hate his mother and did not want to tell him that it
was his mother. Later, when the little heroine, whom the
young hero had saved from the hands of the saloon keeper,
a white slaver, meets the hero in his ship, the latter acts
towards her as if she ought to “capitulate” to him. Still later,
when the young hero’s mother is found in the ship, he takes
her to be his father’s “girl.” All these sights are not the
kind that can be told in the family circle, particularly
not to children. Yet the picture is not without merit ; it is
of the virile sort, and suitable for adults that do not dislike
this type of picture. The storm scenes do not produce the
effect intended, for the reason that storm scenes cannot be
created at the order of man. Where the storm is supposed
to be raging, the ship is shown as stationary, and only the
titles as well as the artificial rain try to make one believe
that there is a storm on.
The story has been written by Norton S. Parker ; it has
been put into a picture by Joseph Hennabery. Mr. Henna-
bery did the bits he could with the material he had. Mrs.
Wallace Reid cannot act ; and the sooner she realizes it
the better it will be for her as well as for the exhibitors.
Noah Beery is good, so is Reed Howes, as well as the little
girl that takes the part of the heroine.
“Ladies of the Mob” — with Clara Bow
( Paramount , June 30; 5,834 ft.; 67 to 83 min.)
It was a mistake to put Clara Bow in a picture of this
type. It is a crook melodrama, in which she, a member of
a gang crooks, tries desperately to make the hero, whom
she loves desperately, quit that sort of life and settle down
to a peaceful way of living, a thing she does not succeed
doing until towards the closing scenes, where she shoots
and wounds him to save him from committing another
crime and "burning" in the electric chair. The suggestion
is that, after the shooting, both are caught by the police and
are sent up the river to serve time, each promising to the
other that he would wait until the end of their sentence.
Despite the good acting on the part of Miss Bow and of the
thrilling action, it is a gloomy affair at its best, and one
that neither edifies nor pleases. On the contrary, it leaves
one in the frame of mind one finds himself after returning
from a funeral or after surviving from a great calamity.
It is true that the theme shows vividly how hard a woman
will fight to save the man she loves, but the development
of it is such that it does nobody any good ; it is better that
picture-producers keep away from such stories. There is
considerable “shooting,” particularly in the closing scenes,
where hero and heroine are corailed in an old shack, where
they had been living, and from which shack they succeed
escaping by a ruse until the heroine, realizing that the
hero would again go back to the “racket,” shoots and
wounds him with the hope that she, by drawing the atten-
tion of the police and having him as well as herself arrested,
would prevent him from committing another crime and
perhaps paying the death penalty for it.
The plot has been founded on the story by Ernest Booth ;
it has been directed by Mr. William Wellman well. Richard
Arlen takes the part of the crook-hero. Helen Lynch,
Mary Alden, Gerard, Bodil Rosing and others are in the
supporting cast.
NOTE: Inasmuch as the Clara Bow pictures were sold
as a star series one cannot tell whether it is a substitution
or not.
“Gow”
( Regional ; about 7,000 ft.; 81 to 100 min.)
“Gow” is a thrilling picturization of events among the
head hunters and cannibals of the South Seas Islands,
notably of the Fiji, Solomon and New Hebrides groups. It
was made by Captain Edward A. Salisbury, and photo-
graphed by the Messrs. Cooper and Schoedsack, who made
“Chang.” They accompanied Captain Salisbury on a long
voyage into the little known and seldom visited parts of the
South Seas ; and what they brought back is a fine instructive
film of life, habits, civilization and the general goings-on
of the dark, unclothed people of those regions.
The most interesting and thrilling thing the cameramen
have recorded is a battle between the great Chief Gow and
some enemies, who made off with his married daughter.
This battle is fought after Gow had rallied his several
minor chieftains and their fleets of great war canoes. Pad-
dling like mad-men, they went over the ocean to reach the
stone walls, which the marauders had erected for defense.
Gow landed on one side of the island, the minor chieftains
on the other, and when their joint attack was made their
spears began flying through the air and men began to fall.
This battle was recorded in the film because Salisbury’s
men, in speed boats, outdistanced the war canoes and were
on the scene when the scrapping began.
Of outstanding interest are also many shots of the native
dances, particularly those of the cannibals, who dance for
hours until they bring themselves into a state of frenzy
and begin slugging their friends over the head with pigs.
The skull-houses of the head hunters where they keep
their trophies are also shown, as are many other fascinating
details of their life.
“Gow” has been shown in several cities to the accompani-
ment of a lecture by Captain Salisbury in person. The busi-
ness is reported as having been good. It is the sort of a
picture upon which college and school tieups can be ob-
tained, and the exhibitor working hard on this one can do
well, for it is all it is represented to be. Captain Salisbury’s
lecture tells many things not in the titles, and even without
him, it holds up well for the tribal dances and the battle
scenes are enough to insure its success.
“Gow” is one of the best South Sea Island pictures
filmed to date. It is a real novelty, with an appeal to all
types of picture-goers
“How to Handle Women” — with
Glenn Tryon
{Universal- Jewel, Sept. 3; 5,592 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
Pretty good. It is a comedy, with a farcical twist in
it. Mr. Tryon this time is a country boy cartoonist,
who goes to New York to set the world afire with his
cartoons. Nobody will believe him when he insists that
he is a genius until he finds out that the Crown Prince
of Volgaria came to the United States to get a loan and
nobody would give him one, because the bankers thought
his country was too poor to risk lending money to ; he
then climbs through the window, reaches the Prince, and
tells him of the scheme he had in mind to help him raise
the money. The Prince’s attendants were about to evict
him but the Prince, having had an opportunity to hear
partly his plan and liked it, orders, his attendants not to
molest him. By agreement with the Prince, the hero im-
personates the Prince and carries on negotiations with the
bankers. He was able to convince the bankers that a
loan to Volgaria was safe in that the country produced
millions of peanuts annually; and peanuts were popular
in the United States. Just as the bankers signed the
papers and handed them to the “Prince” for his signature,
the villain, one of the Prince’s retinue, informs the bank-
ers that the “Prince” is a hoax. They chase to arrest
him. But the hero, aided by the heroine, a newspaper
woman with whom he had fallen in love, reaches the
Prince in time to get his signature on the papers and to
make them legal. Hero and heroine marry.
There is a great deal of light comedy all the way
through, and, in the scenes of the chase, thrills. The
interest is held pretty well. The plot has been founded
on the story by William Craft and Jack Foley; it has
been directed by Mr. Craft. Marian Nixon is the hero-
ine, Raymond Kean, Bull Montana, Cesare Cravina, Rob-
ert T. Haines and others are in the cast.
100
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“THE BIG PARADE”: No. 851 (Sept. 10). O. K.
“ANNIE LAURIE” No. 836 (Sept. 17). O. K.
“ROAD TO ROMANCE” No. 729 (Sept. 24) : Metro-
Goldwyn-Mayer have mixed up their Novarro and h red
Niblo releases so much that I doubt if they themselves know
what is what. This picture was sold in the 1926-27 group
as “Romance.” I don’t know whether they delivered to you
this picture or some other. And I don’t know whether it
has been delivered to you this year for something they sold
you in the 1927-28 group or not. You will have to find it out
yourself directly from them.
“BEN HUR” No. 850 (Oct. 2). O. K.
“BODY AND SOUL” No. 809 (Oct. 11) : Not a sub-
stitution but a poor picture.
“THE FAIR CO-ED” No. 736 (Oct. 15) : The original
title of this picture was “Mary of Vassar,” and was sold
on the 1926-27 group. If Metro-Goldwyn is furnishing you
with “Co-Ed” for some Marion Davies’ picture you have
bought in the 1927-28 group, it is a substitution and you may
refuse to accept it.
"SPRING FEVER” No. 815 (Oct. 22) : O. K.
“IN OLD KENTUCKY” No. 823 (Oct. 29) : O. K.
“THE GARDEN OF ALLAH” No. 837 (Nov. 5) :
O. K.
“BECKY” No. 818 (Nov. 12) : O. K.
“MAN, WOMAN AND SIN” No. 834 (Nov. 19) : O.K.
“THE THIRTEENTH HOUR” No. 801 (Nov. 26) :
O. K.
“LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT” No. 838 (Dec. 3) :
The original title of this one is supposed to have been “The
Hypnotist.” But "The Hypnotist,” although it was not
described in the Metro-Goldwyn trade paper insert, would
lead one to believe that it would be a picture that dealt with
hypnotism, whereas “London After Midnight” is a Scot-
land Yard picture and has nothing to do with hypnotism.
To any fair-minded arbitration board this should be a
substitution.
“TEA FOR THREE” No. 804 (Dec. 10) : No facts
given to help one.
“THE LOVELORN” No. 820 (Dec. 17) : O. K.
“BUTTONS” No. 808 (Dec. 24) : O. K.
“QUALITY STREET” No. 827 (Dec. 31) : O. K.
“LOVE” No. 853 (Jan. 2) : Originally this was sold as a
Greta Garbo No. 1, Release number 831. After making the
picture, giving it 853 as a release number, M-G-M with-
drew it. Those exhibitors whose contracts contain “Love”
are entitled to it and they will get it if they don't lie down.
“WEST POINT” No. 817 (Jan. 7) : O. K.
“THE DIVINE WOMAN” No. 832 (Jan. 14) : O. K.
“BABY MINE” No. 812 (Jan. 21) : “Red Pants” was
the original title of this one, but it is not the same story for
the reason that “Red Pants” was to be a story by Edward
Sedgwick and Lew Lipton, whereas “Baby Mine” has been
founded on the stage play by Margaret Mayo. A clear
story substitution.
"WICKEDNESS PREFERRED,” Cody and Pringle
No. 3 ; Rel. 805 (Jan. 28) : No facts given ; so not a substi-
tution.
“THE STUDENT PRINCE” No. 854 (Jan. 30) : O. K.
“THE BIG CITY” No. 839: The original title of this
one is supposed to have been “Hate,” but they are not the
same stories, for the reason that “Hate” was to have been
founded on “The Four Stragglers,” by Frank Packard,
whereas “The Big City” has been founded on a story by
Tod Browning. It is a clear story substitution.
“THE SMART SET” No. 816: The original title of
this one is supposed to have been “Smart Alec”; but it is
not the same story, for the reason that “Smart Alec” was to
have been a story by Florence Ryerson and F. Hugh Her-
bert, whereas “The Smart Set” is by Bryon Morgan. A
clear story substitution.
“THE CROWD” No. 841 : O. K.
“THE PATSY” No. 828 : This is supposed to be the new
title of “Dumb Dora”; but “Dumb Dora” was to have been
founded on the comic strip by Chic Young, whereas “The
Patsy” has been founded on the stage play by Barry Con-
nors. It is a clear story substitution.
“BRINGING UP FATHER” No. 819: O. K.
“UNDER THE BLACK EAGLE” No. 802: Bonaparte,
the dog, was promised as the star ; Flash is being starred.
A star substitution.
“CIRCUS ROOKIES” No. 813 : No facts given.
“ACROSS TO SINGAPORE” No. 830: This is sup-
posed to be the new title of “The Prince of Graustark,” No.
830 in the Work Sheet. But they are not the same story
for the reason that “The Prince of Graustark” was to have
been founded on George Barr McCutcheon’s famous novel,
of the same name, whereas “Across to Singapore,” which is
June 23, 1928
a mediocre picture, has been founded on a story by Ben
Ames Williams. It is a clear story substitution and you are
not obligated to accept it.
“LAUGH, CLOWN, LAUGH !” No. 840 : “Seven Seas”
is supposed to have been the original title of this one. But
“Seven Seas” was to have been founded on one of Gaston
Leroux’s stories, the locale of which was to be Devil’s Is-
land, whereas “Laugh, Clown, Laugh!” has been founded
on the stage play by Tom Cushing and David Belasco. A
clear story substitution.
“THE ACTRESS” No. 824: No author was given for
“The Bridal Night,” which is supposed to have been the
original title. Not a substitution.
"DIAMOND HANDCUFFS” No. 822: “Business
Wives” is supposed to be the original title of this picture ;
but it is not the same story, for the reason that ‘Business
Wives” was to have been founded on the Winifred Van
Duzen serial, which was syndicated in the Hearst news-
papers and “hundreds of others,” whereas “Diamond Hand-
cuffs” has been founded on an original story by Carey
Wilson. It is a clear story substitution.
“A CERTAIN YOUNG MAN” No. 647 : Ramon No-
varro No. 647, which was designated as Novarro No. 3, was
sold on the 1925-26 program, and was completed at that
time. Therefore it has no business on the 1927-28 group.
If Metro-Goldwyn is delivering this picture to you for a
Novarro you bought on the 1927-28 group, you are not obli-
gated to accept it. Nor are you obligated to accept it if
you have a Novarro picture coming from the 1925-26
group ; your contract for that picture has been outlawed,
for this reason: The Uniform Exhibition contract stipu-
lated that if any picture was made outside the life of the
contract, the distributor was obligated to deliver it no
matter when he produced it, and the exhibitor had to accept
it, no matter when tendered to him. But this picture was
not made “outside” the life of your contract; it was made
during its life. For this reason, you don’t have to accept it.
If they failed to deliver it to you at that time, the grief
should be theirs, not yours. (Willard Louis died on the
first week in August, 1926. So the picture was made within
the life of all 1925-26 contracts.)
“DETECTIVES” No. 814: No facts were given in the
Work Sheet for No. 814 to enable one to tell whether it is
a substitution or not.
“FORBIDDEN HOURS” No. 730: No. 730 was sold
in the 1926-27 group as Ramon Novarro No. 2. It has no
business on the 1927-28 group.
The other Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer pictures will be an-
alyzed when reviewed.
First National Substitutions
“THREE’S A CROWD” No. 428: First National sold
three Harry Langdon pictures in the 1927-28 season: No.l
— “The Butter and Egg Man,” (Release no. 426,) No.2 —
‘The Nineteenth Hole,” and No. 3, without any title, but
No. 428 as the release number. “Three’s A Crowd” is
Langdon No. 3. Not a substitution.
“RED RAIDERS” (465) : Six Ken Maynard pictures
were sold in the 1927-28 season. The Annual Announce-
ment gave the titles as follows: “The Caravan Trail,”
“Captain of the Strong,” “The Royal American,” ’’The
Upland Stage,” ‘The Canyon of Adventure, and “Gun
Gospel.” Inasmuch, however, as no authors were given,
they are not substitutes. But even if they were, you would
not be the loser for accepting them, for every one of the
Ken Maynard pictures that has been produced so far has
been good.
“SMILE, BROTHER, SMILE!” No. 450: “Road to
Romance” was the original title of No. 450. Not a sub-
stitution.
“THE LIFE OF RILEY,” No. 453: “East Side,
West Side” is the original title of this one. Not a sub-
stiution.
“THE DROP KICK.” No. 400: Not a substitution.
'“ROSE OF THE GOLDEN WEST,” No. 545: O. K.
“AMERICAN BEAUTY,” No. 433: O. K.
“THE CRYSTAL CUP,” No. 379: Not a substiution.
“NO PLACE TO GO,” No. 457: O. K.
“HOME MADE,” No. 462: O. K.
“MAN CRAZY,” No. 452: O. K.
“VALLEY OF THE GIANTS.” No. 441: O. K.
“THE LOVE MART,” No. 544: “Louisiana” is the
original title of this one. Not a substitution.
“FRENCH DRESSING,” No. 446: O.K.
“SAILOR’S WIVES,” No. 459: O. K.
“THE NOOSE,” No. 437: O. K.
(To Be Concluded Next Week )
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
( Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JUNE 30, 1928
No. 26
An Analysis of the 1927-28 Substitutions---No. 3
( Continued from last week)
First National Substitutions
Part of the First National substitutions were printed in
last week’s issue.
“THE WHIP WOMAN,” No. 445: “Golden Calf” is
supposed to be the original title. But “Golden Calf,”
or Kane No. 2, was announced as an Aaron Davis story,
which was published in the Liberty Magazine, whereas
“The Whip Woman” has been founded on a story by
Forrest Halsey and Leland Hayward. It is a substitu-
tion.
“THE CHASER,” No. 426: “The Butter and Egg
Man” is supposed to be the original title of this Langdon
No. 1 picture. But the story is not the same, for the
reason that "The Butter and Egg Man” was to have
been founded on the stage success by George S. Kauf-
man, whereas "The Chaser” has been written by Harry
Langdon himself. It is a substitution.
"FLYING ROMEOS,” No. 455: This is being deliv-
ered in place of “Down Went McGinty.” But “Down
Went McGinty” was to have been founded on the popu-
lar song of the same name, whereas “Flying Romeos”
has been written by John McDermott. But the picture
is so good that you will lose out if you do not accept it.
“MAD HOUR,” No. 447: O. K.
“CHINATOWN CHARLIE,” No. 461: This Johnny
Hines’ picture is being delivered for “A Pair of Sixes.”
But “A Pair of Sixes” was to be a “stage farce com-
edy by Edward H. Peple,” whereas “Chinatown Char-
lie” is by Owen Davis. It is a substitution, but it is a
good picture and therefore you cannot afford to reject it.
“VAMPING VENUS,” No. 456: Not a substitution.
“THE YELLOW LILY,” No. 435: This is being
delivered in place of “Once There Was a Princess.”
“Once There Was a Princess,” however, is the Satur-
day Evening Post story by Juliet Wilbur Tompkins,
whereas “The Yellow Lily” was written by Alexander
Korda. It is, therefore, a substitution. But according
to my information the picture is drawing so well that
you cannot afford to reject it. You cannot afford to
reject any picture that draws.
“THE HAWK’S NEST,” No. 442: Not a substitu-
tion.
“THREE RING MARRIAGE,” No. 460: The title
given to No. 460 originally was “Do It Again.” But as
no facts were given about “Do It Again” we cannot
determine whether it is or it is not a substitution. You
have to accept it.
“THE WHEEL OF CHANCE,” No. 438: The
original contract did not give a title for No. 438. Richard
Barthelmess No. 3. Later, First National announced
that “Roulette” would be the title. It has now changed
it to “The Wheel of Chance.” It is not a substitution.
“HAPPINESS AHEAD,” No. 429: This is the new
title of “Baby Face.” But inasmuch as no facts were
given with “Baby Face” we cannot tell whether it is a
substitution or not. You have to accept it.
The other pictures will be analyzed as they are
reviewed.
Warner Bros. Substitutions
It is difficult for one to tell really how many of the
pictures Warner Bros, are delivering are substitutes,
for the reason that last year they gave no author along
with the title, and very little descriptive matter to
enable one to know what kind of picture he was going
to get. Whether this is a good plan for you or not,
you are the judge. To be fair to Warner Bros., how-
ever, I may say this, that for program stuff, their 1927-
28 product has not turned out to be bad, and if you have
bought it at program prices it is possible that you have
not lost out; but if you have paid “Special” prices for
it, I fear that you have not made a good bargain.
The danger from this plan of picture-buying, how-
ever, lies in the fact the a company may make a good
picture and deprive you of it, and you will have no way
of forcing it to deliver it to you. We have an example
by this very company: Originally they sold you “A
Million Bid.” In the orgy of substitutions that pre-
vailed in the 1926-27 season, Warner Bros., as best as I
can make out, decided to deliver a different story with
the same title. And so they announced in the trade
papers, particularly in the Moving Picture World of
January 29, February 12, 19 and 26, March 5 and 19,
1927; also in several issues of Motion Picture News in
the early part of 1927. But after nearly finishing the
picture they found out that it was a good one and de-
cided to give you the original “A Million Bid.” And so
they again announced the production of “A Million
Bid,” as gathered from the issues of Moving Picture
World of April 2 and 9, and of May 2 and of other issues
of this publication.
It is preferable that you should known what you are
buying. If not, just buy them by the “bushel.”
The only material that I have to work with in my
efforts to find out how many Warner Bros, pictures are
substitutes is a Work Sheet, or “Exhibitors’ Herald,”
as this company calls it, which it put out last year. Com-
paring the promises they made in that Work Sheet with
the pictures they have delivered or are delivering to
you, I find the following substitutions:
“SAILOR IZZY MURPHY,” No. 195: This is sup-
posed to be the new title of “Finnegan’s Ball”: The title
indicates that this would be an Irish comedy; “Sailor
Izzy Murphy” is a Jewish-Irish comedy, and it is a
story of lunatics aboard a yacht. No connection what-
ever between the two possible pictures. Any fair-minded
board should, therefore, declare this a substitution, which
it really is.
"GINSBERG THE GREAT,” No. 196: This is sup-
posed to be the final title of “The Broadway Kid.” But
the Warner’s Work Sheet stated that “The Broadway
Kid” would be the “Story of the Great White Way,”
whereas “Ginsberg the Great” is about a small-town
boy that goes to the city, gets in with crooks, saves
some jewels from a wealthy theatrical producer, and, with
the aid of this producer, becomes a featured magician. It
is clearly a substitution and any fair-minded arbitration
board should so declare it.
“THE LITTLE SNOB,” No. 206: This is supposed
to be the new title of “Rebecca O’Brien.” But “Rebecca
O’Brien” was described in the Work Sheet as, “A
Jewish-Irish story of humor, pathos and action,” where-
as “The Little Snob” is the story of an American girl
of poor parents, whose father conducts a concession at
Coney Island ; he sends her to a boarding school and she
comes out a snob. It is a story substitution, and arbitration
boards, if not prepossessed in favor of the exchange, will
so declare it.
“THE CRIMSON CITY,” No. 213: This is sup-
posed to be the new title of “O’Reilly and the 400.” But
although no description of it was given in the Work
Sheet, the title indicates that “O’Reilly and the 400”
would be the story of an Irishman who became wealthy,
entered into society and did not know how to act, until
he got tired of pretense and once again came down to
earth, acting as a regular human being instead of an
( Continued on last page)
102 HARRISON’S REPORTS June 30, 1928
“Tenth Avenue” — with Victor Varconi,
Joseph Schildkraut and Phyllis Haver
( Patlie , August 5 ; 6,370 ft.; 74 to 90 min.)
There are many thrills in this crook melodrama, and the
spectator is held in suspense throughout ; at times in tense
suspense. The direction and acting are of the first order.
But the story is not of the over-pleasant sort. It has to do
with gangsters, living in a rooming house on Tenth Avenue,
New York City, one of whom murders a money lender and
robs him of his bank roll. It is true that he commits this
crime to hold the girl (heroine) he loved, which hold he
had felt slipping because of the great liking the heroine
had shown for another crook, more handsome and not as
vicious. But this is no excuse for the crime. The interest
the heroine had felt for the murderer was only maternal,
that protective interest women usually feel for weak per-
sons ; she did not want to see him go back to the “racket,”
and tried to hold him by half-promising to marry him. The
suspense is created by the efforts of the police authori-
ties to uncover the mystery and to find the criminal.
There is also a self-sacrifice, offered by the crook the
heroine really loved ; he had refused to tell the police that
the evidence found on him had been handed to him by the
murderer, who had promised to leave town and to forget
the heroine; he felt that the heroine should not marry a
murderer. In the development of the plot, the real mur-
derer is, of course, detected, and the innocent crook freed.
The action is so realistic that one feels as if being present
in a real life occurrence. Victor Varconi arouses the spec-
tator’s sympathetic interest by his clean looks and by his
manly self-sacrifice. Joseph Schildkraut takes a very un-
sympathetic part. Phyllis Haver, too, does good work and
arouses some sympathy. But the acting honors in this pic-
ture belong to that great old actor, Robert Edeson. As the
chief of the detectives, he is excellent. The easy way by
which he interrogates the crooks, his smiling yet deeply
clever manner of exacting the truth from them, could not
be exceeded even in real life. There is one situation where
Phyllis Haver, too, does mental third degree work that
should qualify her for a job on a detective force ; it is where
she exacts the truth from the murderer by looking into
his eyes and leading him on, until she makes him fidgety
and forces him to confess.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by John
McGowan ; it has been directed skillfully by William De-
Mille. Ethel Wales, Casson Ferguson, Louis Natheaux and
Ernie Adams are other players in the supporting cast.
“Three Ring Marriage” — with Lloyd
Hughes and Mary Astor
( First National, June 10; 5,827 ft.; 67 to 73 min.)
Not a bad romance. It unfolds out in the West, where
the hero, a crack shot, falls in love with the daughter
(heroine) of the ranchman he was working for. For this,
he is discharged by his employer. He joins the circus as a
famous shot. The heroine leaves home and goes to the cir-
cus, where she applies for a position as a rider, really to be
near the hero. The manager, a lady-killer, becomes so
struck with her beauty that he gives her a job. But what
he really had in mind was to “possess” her. Some mis-
understandings take place between hero and heroine on
account of the attention the villain had shown to the her-
oine, and because of a girl-rider’s seeming infatuation for
the hero, who did not reciprocate the feeling. Jealousy on
the part of the hero, too, brings about a break in their en-
gagement. One of the heroine’s girl friends, who knew
that hero and heroine loved each other, suggests to the
heroine to write a letter to the villain, which she (the girl
friend) would present to the hero with the statement that
she had found it on the villain’s desk, showing that the
heroine agreed to the villain’s marriage proposal. This, as
she suggested, would arouse the jealousy of the hero, who
would rush to the appointed hotel to stop the marriage. The
heroine accepts the plan. But it goes awry, as one of the
letters she had written and thrown away as unsuitable falls
into the hands of the villain. The villain, thinking the letter
genuine, goes to the place the letter had indicated. But a
midget, friend of the hero, knowing where the villain was
going, asks his midget wife to inform the hero, and then
hides in the villain’s valise. The heroine is surprised when
the villain walks into her room. But the midget friend was
there to see that no harm befell her until the hero’s -arrival ;
he had cut the leather with a knife and come out of the
valise. The hero arrives and gives the villain a good beat-
ing. Everything is patched up between hero and heroine.
Considerable comedy is caused by Harry Earles, the
midget, and Tiny Earles, who takes the part of his wife;
also by a monkey, who expresses at times surprise, at
times anger, and who at times laughs, just as the occasion
requires. The scenes where the monkey imitates a garrulous
person, too, are comical.
The plot has been founded on a story by Dixie Willson ;
it has been directed by Henry Hobart.
“A Ship Comes In” with Joseph Schildkraut
( Pathe-DeMillc , June 3 ; 6,902 ft.; 80 to 98 min.)
Like many of the George Cohan plays, “A Ship Comes
In.” plays upon the sympathies of the spectators by “wav-
ing the Amercian Flag.” It is a patriotic subject, and as
such it will naturally appeal to most American picture-
goers. But in some of the situations the appeal to the
emotions is not directed by patriotism alone ; also dramatic
value plays some part. The scenes in the court room, for
example, where the hero is convicted and sentenced to
life imprisonment for a dynamite explosion he had no knowl-
edge of, in which explosion a United States judge had been
injured and his secretary killed, are indeed pathetic. The
scenes of the hero’s liberation as a result of the death-bed
confession of the guilty man, too, are pathetic. There are
other situations where the heart interest is strong.
The story revolves around a Russian Hebrew, who
comes to America with his family and settles in New York
City. He becomes a citizen and is proud to be one. An
anarchist plants a bomb in the federal building and the re-
sulting explosion injures the judge who had made the hero
a citizen and kills the judge’s secretary. The hero is ar-
rested on suspicion and is convicted. But the guilty man’s
death bed confession frees him to return to his family.
Air. Joseph Schildkraut, as the hero, does very good
work. Louise Dresser is very good as the hero’s wife.
Robert Edeson does well as the judge.
The plot has been founded on an original story by Julien
Josephson; it has been directed well by Air. William K.
Howard.
Note : This picture was sold as “His Country.” It is not
a substitution.
“The Perfect Crime” — with Clive Brook
and Irene Rich
(F B O, Aug. 19; 6,337 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
This is a peculiar picture. Judged after one has seen it
all, one cannot help pronouncing it an excellent murder-
mystery melodrama. But one feels a variety of emotions
before he has seen the entire picture and realized what it
really is. After a reel or so, the hero, a famous detective,
a man who had made a reputation for having solved every
crime, in which his services were asked, is shown delib-
erately committing a murder, first, by giving his victim
poisonous tablets, and later, by cutting his throat (this is
only implied — nothing is shown) , his object being to remove
every clue so as to make it impossible for the authorities
to detect the real criminal, his desire being to commit a
“perfect crime.” Just before the closing scenes, when the
author has not yet shown the wind-up of the story, it is
shown that the hero had realized that it is useless for any
one to think that he can commit a crime and go undetected,
for even if one should commit such a crime something inside
him will give him away. This moral somewhat offsets the
bad taste one feels as a result of seeing a hero commit a
deliberate murder. The closing of the story, however,
shows that all this was planned by the hero only in his mind ;
he, like the author of a novel, after conceiving the
action, shakes his head as if to say, “It will not work that
way.” It is only then that all traces of “bad taste” are
removed ; one feels greatly surprised at the twist the story
takes. The picture has been produced so well that one is
held in tense suspense throughout. The court-room scenes,
showing (in the hero’s imagination) the trial, conviction
and sentence of an innocent young man are, of course,
heart-rending. The pleas of the condemned man’s wife to
the hero to undertake to prove the innocence of her husband,
too, are pathetic.
The plot has been founded on an original story, “The Big
Bow Alystery,” by the famous writer Israel Zangwill. It
has been directed well by Bert Glennon. Clive Brook does
excellent work as the famous detective. Ethel Wales, as
the wife of the murdered man, does good work, too. Car-
roll Nye is good as the condemned young husband. Edmund
Breese does well as the detective captain. Tully Marshall
takes the part of the murdered man.
June 30, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
103
“rlic of the Show” — with Joe Brown and
Gertrude Olmsted
(F B O, Sept. 23; 6,337 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
There are some laughs in this picture, but there are also
some tears — mostly tears. It is a deeply moving picture,
and a clean one. The scenes that show the death of the
good-hearted actor, who loved the heroine, move one deeply.
There are heart-interest situations all the way through.
It is the story of a young girl, daughter of a wealthy
father, who, just a few minutes before the wedding cere-
mony marrying her and her sweetheart was to be per-
formed, runs away, leaving a note behind, asking her
father’s forgiveness. She calls on a theatrical producer,
friend of her father’s, and asks him to give her a part in the
cast of one of the shows. The friend agrees to give her a
chance provided her father would approve his action. The
heroine did not want him to tell her father where she was
and she runs out of the building. The hero, an old actor,
who had been sent for to be given a part, runs after her.
He takes her to his boarding house, where his good land-
lady gives her a room. When he returns for the job, he
finds it filled. Hero and heroine establish a friendship.
The landlady, too, who at first w-as hard on the heroine,
learned to like her when she realized what a thoroughbred
she was. In time the hero is given a part in a show by
another theatrical producer. He succeeds in inducing this
producer to give a part also to the heroine. On the eve of
the performance the hero overhears the star performer
promising his mistress’ to give the heroine “the works.”
The hero drags him in the dressing room, binds him, and
after making up himself he appears in the star’s part. He
lets the heroine know who he is. They make a hit. But at
the end of the act, the hero, w:ho had a weak heart, collapses.
He dies in the arms of the heroine. The heroine goes back
to her sweetheart, who, after he had discovered her, called
on her and induced her to give him the reasons for her dis-
appearance ; she had disappeared because she had thought,
as she said to him, that he had proved unfaithful to her.
But he gave her a satisfactory explanation for the acts
of his which she had misinterpreted.
The plot has been founded on an original story (“No-
tices”) by Viola Brothers Shore. It has been directed by
Ralph Ince with great skill. Mr. Brown is a fine actor, but
his looks are rather against him. However, he is good for
such parts as this one. Gertrude Olmsted has never ap-
peared to a better advantage ; she proves to be a real artist.
It is too bad that Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer have not recog-
nized her ability to give her the prominence her ability en-
titles her to. Gertrude Astor, as the landlady, is very good.
In fact every one does well, thanks to the masterly direction
of Mr. Ince.
“The Cop” — with William Boyd
( Pathe , August 19; 7,054 ft.; 82 to 100 min.)
There is a hold-up scene in this picture which, for realism,
has not been seen in pictures for years. I doubt if a true-to-
life hold-up scene could give one greater thrills. It is so
cleverly conceived and so well executed that one gasps for
breath until it is all over. There is, of course, a master mind
among the crooks, who plans it ; and his men carry it out
without a hitch. First, one car, at the appointed time,
drives in front of the armored car that carried thousands
of dollars, and stops it. Then a heavy truck, driven by
another confederate, drives at high speed, bumps against the
armored car and wrecks it, tearing it apart. The crooks
then carry the money away. Confederates posted in shops
and rooming houses with machine guns complete the pic-
ture. There are other thrilling situations in other parts
of the picture ; but the situation j ust described is the most
thrilling. The action holds one’s interest from the very
beginning. And one is made to feel friendly toward the
hero by proper characterization. In the beginning he is
shown as a draw-bridge tender. At one time he secretes
a crook with a bullet wound in his arm ; he had been chased
by the police immediately after a hold-up. But the hero’s
kind-heartedness is rewarded by the crook’s stealing his
coat and $25, while the hero was out to buy grub to feed
the crook with. The hero becomes tired of his work and
joins the police force. It was during his beat that the
armored car had been held up and the money stolen, and
his friend, also a cop, killed. He then vows to catch the
murderers, whose leader happened to be the very same
man that had stolen his money and his overcoat. By follow-
ing the heroine, member of the gang, he is able to locate
the hiding place of the master mind. But when he gets into
the house, he finds the master mind gone. However, he
telephones headquarters to cover the river and to leave the
bridge to him. He then suggests to the heroine, for whom
he had felt an interest, because of dawning love, that it
would be dangerous for her to go to the bridge that night.
He goes to the bridge, but finds the heroine there. He
realizes that she had gone there not to warn the crooks but
to tell him (the hero) that his life was in danger. In a
pistol duel with the crook, the hero comes out the victor ;
he had aimed at and shot the master crook in the head, being
the only vulnerable spot, his body being protected by a
steel jacket. The wounded crook drowns in the river. The
heroine promises the hero to give up the “racket.” (It is
implied that they married.)
The plot has been founded on the story by Elliott Claw-
son ; it has been directed with great skill by Donald Crisp,
from a screen play by Tay Garnett. Mr. Boyd does good
work as the hero, Robert Armstrong as the master criminal,
and Jacqueline Logan as the heroine. Alan Hale is good,
too, as the chief of the homicide squad.
Although a crook play, it leaves no bad impression.
“Wheel of Chance” — with
Richard Barthelmess
( First National, June 17 ; 6,874 ft.; 80 to 98 min.)
The unfortunate part about engaging a prominent author
to write a story for a star is often the fact that when such
author writes a “lemon,” the producer is compelled, be-
cause of the big money he has paid him for the story, to put
it into pictures. It seems as if that is just what has hap-
pened in this instance ; for it is inconceivable that the pro-
ducers were unaware that “Roulette,” which is the original
title of this Fanny Hurst story, would not make a good pic-
ture. To begin with, nothing that the characters do arouses
the spectator's sympathy. Following this, Richard Bar-
thelemess, as the hero, does things that his followers in this
country will not like. He has made a reputation by imper-
sonating real American boy parts, clean and wholesome.
It is such parts that have gained him fame. For them, then,
to see him in a somewhat villainous role, infatuated with
a woman and lying to his mother in order to lead her into
believing that he still was “mother’s boy,” it will undoubt-
edly prove a severe jolt. The whole story is sordid. In the
beginning, the hero’s family is shown in Russia. The Rus-
sians massacre the Jews while the hero was still a little
boy and his twin brother is hit on the head with a sabre and
left by his parents for dead. A drunken woman lifts the
coat off the boy's body and when she finds him alive takes
him away. She comes to America. The hero’s parents, too,
come to America. The hero grows to manhood and be-
comes a lawyer. He becomes infatuated with a woman and
lies to his mother in order to keep her ignorant of the fact.
Soon he discovers another man in her room and breaks
with her. The supposedly dead brother grows to man-
hood, too, but in the slums. His foster mother dies of
drunkenness, and the twin brother meets with his brother’s
(hero’s) discarded sweetheart; they establish a friendship.
His love for her makes him work hard to provide a nice
home for her. But she had not changed color ; secretly
she made men friends, who provided her with the things her
boy lover could not buy. The boy lover discovers evidence
of her infidelity and grabs her by the throat, not really to
choke her but to frighten her. But while he was pushing
her against the wall, a nail is driven into her back and she
dies. He is arrested. The hero, who worked as an assistant
to the district atorney, takes up the prosecution. His mother
is struck by the defendant’s resemblance to her living son
and prevails upon her son to be lenient with him, the ac-
cused. The hero makes so weak a prosecution that the
accused is acquitted.
The closing scenes show tire mother imploring her son
not to let the acquitted boy get away from them. It is im-
plied that his identity eventually would become known to
the mother.
The picture was directed by Alfred Santell. There is
nothing the matter with it. Nor with the acting. The story
is not there, that is all.
It is not a picture for the family; particularly not for
children.
ATTENTION!
If you have been notified by a distributor that the title
of a particular picture has been changed, notify this office
at once so that an investigation may be made to determine
whether it is a substitution or not. 1 have no way of know-
ing when a title is changed unless you let me know.
104
HARRISON’S REPORTS
automaton. In place of such a logically possible story,
Warner Bros, are delivering "The Crimson City,” a
story unfolding in Shanghai, China, and revolving
around the love of a Chinese girl for a white hero. It is
clearly a substitution.
These are all the substitutions that I can dig out from
this company’s program.
Universal Substitutions
“THE LONE EAGLE:” “War Eagles” was the
original title of this one. Not a substitution.
“THE THIRTEENTH JUROR”: This picture
was sold as "Honor and the Woman.” The author for
both is Henry Irving Dodge; therefore, it is not a sub-
stitution.
"STOP THAT MAN”: The original title of this one
was “The Girl Show” (Release No. AS707). No author
was given in the Campaign Book to help one determine
whether it is a substitution or not.
"HOT HEELS,” with Glenn Tryon: In the cam-
paign Book it was stated that this picture would be
founded on Harry O'Hoyt’s "Patents Pending.” In the
Work Sheet, Gerald Beaumont was given as the author.
The finished product has been founded on a story by
Jack Foley and Vin Moore. It is, therefore, a story sub-
stitution. But inasmuch as "Hot Heels” has turned out
to be a good picture no one is the loser by accepting it.
“A HERO FOR A NIGHT”: This is being deliv-
ered in place of "How to Make Love.” No author for
“How to Make Love” was given in the announcement;
therefore you will have to accept "A Hero for a Night,”
which at one time was called “Flying Nut.” The pic-
ture is a knockout, however, and j-ou should accept it
even if we could prove that it is a substitution.
“THE COUNT OF TEN”: This is being delivered
in place of “He Knew Women.” It is a different pic-
ture entirely, for “He Knew Women” was to have been
founded on the Morris Gest musical comedy “The Peas-
ant Girl,” whereas “The Count of Ten,” which formerly
was called “Kid Gloves,” has been written by Charles
Ray. But the picture is so good that no one is the loser
by accepting it.
“MY WONDERFUL ONE”: The new title of this
picture will be “Jazz Mad.” It has not yet been released;
it will be released next Fall. It will be deliverd to those
who hold a contract for it, just the same.
“ETERNAL SILENCE”: “Grip of the Yukon” will
be the new title of this picture. It has not yet been
released, but it will be released next fall and, according
to Universal, will be delivered to every one of you that
has a contract.
The Reginald Denny and the Hoot Gibson pictures
were sold as star series. No stories or authors were
given with them, and, therefore, none of them is a sub-
stitute.
The following are not substitutions: “Back to God's
Country,” “Silk Stockings,” “Cheating Cheaters,” “The
Chinese Parrot,” “The Small Bachelor,” “Wild Beauty,”
“The Irresistible Lover,” “A Man’s Past,” “Finders
Keepers,” “Alias the Deacon,” “The Fourflusher,”
"Midnight Rose,” “Surrender,” “Love Me and the
World is Mine,” “Thanks for the Buggy Ride,” “Thir-
teen Washington Square,” “We Americans,” and “Buck
Privates.”
The other pictures of the 1927-28 program will be
analyzed as they are reviewed.
Pathe (Pathe-DeMille) Substitutions
The only substitutions that I have so far been able to
discover in this company’s product are the pictures that
were so declared in the issue of May 19. They are the
following:
“MIDNIGHT MADNESS,” No. 324: This picture
was promised with Jetta Goudal and is being delivered
with Jacqueline Logan. This information was printed
on page 427, June 11, 1927, of Moving Picture World,
and in the June 10 issue of Motion Picture News, page
2275, as well as in many regional publications. Pathe
cannot force you to accept this picture because of the
substitution of the star.
“THE LEOPARD LADY,” No. 304: This picture,
too, was promised with Jetta Goudal as the star and is
being delivered with Jacqueline Logan. You will find
the promises they made printed in the same pages as are
printed the promises about “Midnight Madness.” “The
Leopard Lady” is also a story substitution, in that the
trade paper anouncements said that the story was to be
June 30, 1928
by Clara Beranger, whereas the finished product has
been founded on a story by Edward Childs Carpenter.
“HIS COUNTRY” is ready for delivery now; it has
been released in the early part of this month, under the
title, “A Ship Comes In.” Not a substitution.
“ALMOST HUMAN,” No. 300: This is merely a
change of title, the original being “Beautiful But Dumb.”
“THE DRESS PARADE,” No. 331: This, too, is a
mere change in title, the original title having been
“West Pointer.”
“CRAIG’S WIFE” and “Power” have been com-
pleted, but they will be delivered to those who hold con-
tracts for them, even though Pathe has included them
in the 1928-29 group. Delivery will be made next Fall.
“RIP VAN WINKLE”: This picture will not be
made.
Paramount Substitutions
With the exception of 10 pictures, this company sold
its product as star pictures; therefore, no picture sold
in a star group can be declared a substitution. This
analysis will, therefore, be confined to the ten pictures
this company sold by titles, the facts of which were
given in the trade paper inserts.
“WIFE SAVERS,” No. 2705: The original title
of this picture was “The Big Sneeze,” which was
changed to “Now We’re in Dutch,” before it was finally
changed to “Wife Savers,” It is not a substitution.
There are no substitutions among the other pictures
that were sold by title.
The only picture that could be considered a substitu-
tion is “David Crocket.” But immediately after this pic-
ture was announced last year, Paramount sent a letter
to the exhibitors asking them if they would consent to
having “Kid Carson” made in its place. There were
about 200 accounts sold by that time, and, as I have been
informed by the Paramount office, in almost every in-
stance the exhibitor agreed to the change. So it is not
a substitution.
Tiffany Substitutions
This company sold mere titles in the 1927-28 season
and they are now delivering what they want. During the
1926-27 season, their Campaign Book gave at least some
descriptive matter with the titles, by aid of which many
exhibitors were advised by this office the possible sub-
stitutions. The Campaign Book of the 1927-28 season,
however, did not give anything to enable one to de-
termine whether any of the pictures are substitutes or
not. But they are correcting this defect in the 1928-29
season; they are giving author and players in the
majority of their pictures.
F. B. O. Substitutions
A hasty comparison of this company’s finished pic-
tures with what they promised in the trade-paper inserts
and in their Work Sheets last year discloses the fact
that they have made no substitutions. I am going to
make a closer study of them soon and if I find any sub-
stitutions I shall let you know immediately.
DOES BOB KNOW THIS?
My friend Bob Lynch, chief of the Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer office in Philadelphia, goes into ecstacies in an ad in
“The Exhibitor” about the reissue “The White Sister” in
an effort to induce the exhibitors of his zone to book it and
to pay, no doubt, big rentals for it.
I wonder if Bob’s Home Office has informed him that on
Friday evening, the last day of the engagement of this pic-
ture at the Capitol Theatre, a New York City Metro-
Goldwyn-Mayer house, giving presentations a’nd other mu-
sical acts as well as a Jazz Orchestra, there were over
twelve rows of empty seats at 9:30, just before the first
show was let out, and hardly anybody went in during the
second show. If it hasn’t, I am taking the liberty of inform-
ing him of the fact myself.
Any time Bob wants the “low-down” on things let him
apply to this office. I won’t charge him anything for the
information.
LOOK OVER YOUR FILES
Look over your files and if you find any copies missing let
me know and I shall be glad to send you duplicates free of
charge. Don’t wait until you need the missing copies to
write for them ; write now 1
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
Bartered as second-class matter January 4, 1984, at (tee post o&ee at New Tod;, Ntew York, under the act of Ma*eh 3, 1379.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published W eekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
( Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JULY 7, 1928
No. 27
1928-29 Two Dollar “Hits” and “Flops’^-No. 2
{Continued from Week of June 9)
In working out a table of points for the different 1928-29
two-dollar pictures in an effort to help you determine what
each of such pictures is possibly worth to you, I used as a
basis the rentals you paid for “The Big Parade” or for
“What Price Glory.” Since the week of June 9, when the
first half of this article was printed, I have had talks with
many exhibitors of this zone and have had correspondence
on the subject with exhibitors from different parts of the
country ; and as a result of the information that I have re-
ceived as to the present business conditions and as to what
the prospects hold for the 1928-29 season, I have come to
the conclusion that the rentals paid for these two pictures
are too high for you to use as a basis as to what you should
pay for the 1928-29 two-dollar pictures. The rentals paid
for “Seventh Heaven” should be a fairer basis.
Accordingly, if you paid for “Seventh Heaven,” say,
$500, then $250 maximum should, in my opinion, be a good
price for you to pay for “Street Angel” ; if you paid $100,
then $50 maximum should be the price. Half of what you
paid for “Seventh Heaven,” then, should be the 100 points
of “Street Angel.”
For convenience, let us reproduce the table, which ap-
peared in the issue of June 9:
STREET ANGEL 100 P
FOUR SONS 70 P
SUNRISE 35 P
MOTHER MACHREE 45 P
ABIE'S IRISH ROSE 35 P
UNCLE TOM’S CABIN 70 P
THE MAN WHO LAUGHS 90 P
TEMPEST 125 P
TWO LOVERS (Small Towns 35P) 50 P
RAMONA 70 P
GAUCHO 50 P
DRUMS OF LOVE ' 25 P
WINGS 150 P
TENDERLOIN 25 P
GLORIOUS BETSY 45 P
TRAIL OF ’98 100 P
FAZIL 85 P
THE LION AND THE MOUSE (Without
Vitaphone) 40 P
KING OF KINGS ??
The pictures on the table from “Street Angel” to “The
Man YY ho Laughs” were analyzed in the issue of June 9,
where the reasons that prompted me to give their points or
percentages were printed.
* * *
“TEMPEST,” with John Barrymore; United Artists:
This picture opened well at the Embassy, this city, and
continued showing strength despite the warm weather. It
played to capacity business the first weeks and nearly
capacity up to this time. Mr. Barrymore’s fame, coupled
with the excellence of the production, makes this picture a
good bet.
“TYVO LOVERS,” with Ronald Colman and Vilma
Banky ; United Artists (Sam Goldwyn) : This picture
made a poor showing at the Embassy, this city, where it
played a few months ago. Although the Embassy has less
than ()00 seats, it did not fill them. The matinees, in par-
ticular, were a sorry sight. The picture is not bad; but it
is a costume play, and appeals only to the high-brows. It
is not for the masses. In the first table I gave this picture
50 points. Although a 50 point classification is fair for the
big cities, I fear that is too high for the smaller places ; 35
points should, in my opinion, be fairer.
“RAMONA,” with Dolores Del Rio; United Artists:
This picture showed good strength in the first few weeks.
The first four weeks it averaged $37,000. The second four
weeks it declined, no doubt because of the warm weather.
($40,000 a week for a good picture at $2 prices is not extra-
ordinary for the Rivoli Theatre where “Ramona” has
been playing, for this theatre has 2,100 seats.) The pic-
ture was withdrawn last week. It is a good bet if a fair
price is paid for it, even though it is a heavy entertainment.
70 points for the big cities is not too high a classification,
although small cities may reduce this classification consid-
erably on account of the depression that now prevails.)
“GAUCHO,” with Douglas Fairbanks : I fear that even
50 points is too high for this picture. At the Harris Thea-
tre, this city, it made a very poor showing. It opened big,
drawing $19,000 for the week. But it kept on declining,
taking in only $4,500 the closing week, which was the ninth
week of the engagement, it is apparent that the fame of
Mr. Fairbanks drew them the first weeks, but could not
hold them because of the poor quality of the picture as an
entertainment. As said in the review last year, the picture
is excellently produced, but the diseased character they
use throughout the picture makes it repulsive. They have
cut down the scenes where this character appears consid-
erably, but they could not eliminate him entirely because
his presence is demanded by the story. I fear that for small
towns even 50 points is too much.
“DRUMS OF LOVE,” produced by D. YV. Griffith;
released by United Artists : The box office failure that
“Drums of Love” made at the Harris Theatre, this city,
where it played last year, can be rivaled only by “Abie's
Irish Rose” ; only that "Abie’s Irish Rose” is a good en-
tertainment, and it will take better in smaller cities, whereas
“Drums of Love” is not, and is less suitable in the smaller
towns than it is in the big centres. The engagement was
to be of six weeks’ duration, and the theatre was so rented.
But it was withdrawn the fourth week, United Artists pay-
ing the rent of the theatre for the full six weeks. The first
week, it took in $8,000 ; the second, $6,000 ; the third,
$4,500 ; the fourth, $3,500. If it had been kept on the board
for as long a run as other two-dollar pictures were held, I
fear that "Drums of Love” would not have taken in even
the price for the electricity. The name of Mr. Griffith drew
fair crowds first ; but it could not hold them, because
“Drums of Love" is not a good entertainment even for the
highbrows, let alone for the masses. The 25 points have been
given as a tribute to Mr. Griffith, and not because the pic-
ture, in my opinion, deserves it from the box office point of
view. If the name of Air. Griffith means anything to your
box office, you may pay twenty-five per cent, of what you
are going to pay for “Street Angel,” which price should,
as said, be one-half of what you paid for “Seventh Heaven” ;
if not, use your own judgment.
YY INGS, ’ Paramount : The following are the receipts
of this picture in the first eight weeks :
1st week (ending August 20) $16,430 75
wee,k 16.855.33
f,d vvee,k 16,658.24
dt 1 vveek 17,088.24
week 16,319.88
£* week 16,311.67
““ week 16,285.94
8th week: .... 16,093.22
1 lie receipts have kept up to capacity up to within the
last lew weeks, just before the warm weather set in. But
they nave not fallen down to such an extent as to dis-
qualify it from the $2 picture class. The capacity business
for this house is $15,941.00. The higher receipts may be ac-
counted tor, first, by the tax, which has been added to the re-
ceipts, and secondly by the standing room tickets that were
sold. "\\ mgs” is a genuine two-dollar picture, and may be
( Continued on Last Page )
106
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Magnificent Flirt” — with
Florence Vidor
{Paramount, June 2; 6,440 ft.; 74 to 92 min.)
A good picture for the high-brows, but it is unlikely
that the rank and file will find any enjoyment in it. it
is light comedy, with the characters in silk hats and
beautiful evening gowns. Miss Vidor, as the heroine,
takes the part of a women who, although past nineteen,
still carries on flirtations with men, even though they
are of the innocent grade. A French count likes her,
but only as a companion; he does not think her good
enough for a relative. His nephew loves her daughter
and, in order to put an end to the love affair he offers to
prove to him that the mother of the girl is not a proper
person for a mother-in-law. As per arrangement, the
nephew is hidden behind a velvet curtain while the
uncle was dining with the heroine. But the heroine
cleverly turns the tables on him, with the result that
there are two marriages, the one uniting the nephew
with the heroine’s daughter, and the other, the count
with the heroine.
The production end is magnficent. Mr. d’Abbaddie
d’Arrast directed the picture with great skill. His
comedy touches are intelligent. He seems to belong
to the school of Ernst Lubitsch, the man that directed
“The Marriage Circle,” with Adolphe Menjou. Miss
Vidor does good work. So does Albert Conti, whose
role is somewhat similar to the roles that have been
given to Mr. Menjou. Loretta Young is charming as
the daughter. Ned Sparks contributes considerable
comedy as the bored American millionaire, spending his
money in France to have a good time. Matty Kemp,
Marietta Millner and others are in the supporting cast.
The story was written by the director himself.
“Modern Mothers” — with Helene Chad-
wick, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., and
Barbara Kent
{Columbia, May 13; 5,540 ft.; 64 to 79 min.)
Just fair. The parts of the heroic characters are not
sympathetic. As a result, the spectator’s interest is
not aroused very strongly. It deals with a mother, who
makes fame in Paris as an actress, but, who, when
she returns to America, refuses to make her identity
known to her daughter, because she felt that she would
be a hindrance to her career. The daughter is in love
with a young “nobody,” who aspires to become a play-
wright, but her relatives want her to marry the young
son of a wealthy family. The daughter refuses to do
that. Daughter and mother establish a friendship, the
mother telling the daughter to call on her for help any-
time she needed it. The daughter sends her sweet-
heart to her to help him produce one of his plays. The
mother in time falls in love with the young man. The
daughter visits her mother and finds her and her sweet-
heart in a passionate embrace. She is schocked. After
the young hero is gone, the daughter comes out from
behind the curtain and upbraids her mother. The
mother, who had not yet disclosed her identity to her
daughter, for the first time learns that her daughter was
in love with the young man. She determines to sacrifice
her own love. When the young man calls again, she
tells him that she does not love him. He is shocked,
goes back to his sweetheart, and begs her forgiveness.
He is forgiven.
The story and scenario are by Peter Milne. Phil
Rosen has directed it. Ethel Grey Terry, Alan Roscoe,
Gene Stone, George Irvin and others are in the cast.
Note: This is a substitution. See analysis in the issue
of June 9.
“Madamoiselle from Armentieres”
{Metro-Gold. -{British) ; June 2; 5,441 ft.; 63 to 77 min.)
A fair program picture; it is still another war picture
with considerable love interest and some thrilling scenes
of the war fought between the British and German lines.
Estelle Brody (heroine), as Mademoiselle, the French
barmaid that had fallen in love with the British soldier
(John Stuart, hero,) is pleasing enough. She arouses
sympathy because she accepted the duty imposed upon
her by the French Officer to find out if a supposed
farmer was not really a German Spy and is discovered
by her sweetheart entertaining the Officer in her rooms
where the spy is hidden. She is not able to give an ex-
planation and her sweetheart mistrusts her. The scenes
where she is shown following her sweetheart’s troop re-
Ju!y_7,J928
mind one of the scene in “The Big Parade,” where the
heroine had tried to hold on to her lover. The scenes
where she is shown slipping onto a big truck and enter-
ing the German lines are thrilling, as are those in the
trenches where the English troops are almost wiped
out to give the French troops a chance to stengthen
their weak defenses. Most suspensive are the scenes
in the German quarters, where the heroine and the hero
(one of the few survivors) are brought before the Com-
mander, she being accused of being a spy. They are al-
most suffocated when the place is bombarded but are
rescued in time. Explanations clear up the mistrust
the hero had for the heroine and they marry.
Alf Goddard as the hero’s buddy contributes the
comedy. The picture is based on a story by Victor
Saville and it was directed by Maurice Elvey.
“The Foreign Legion” — with Norman
Kerry, Lewis Stone and June Marlowe
{U niv. -Jew el, Sept. 23; 7,828 ft.; 91 to 111 min.)
Evidently Universal tried to make another “Beau
Geste.” But it has not succeeded, even though it has
made a pretty good picture out of it. As the title indi-
cates, “The Foreign Legion” is a picture that revolves
around the French Foreign Legion, which is stationed
in Africa, and into which are inducted every national-
ity’s persons that want to drop out of sight either for a
while or forever. The main situation in it is the revel-
ation to the commander of the regiment that the soldier
whom he had just condemned to death for rebellion is
his own son, whom he had not seen since childhood.
There are several emotional scenes in that part of the
film. Mr. Kerry awakens considerable sympathy as the
English officer, who lets himself be thought of as a thief
rather than tell the court martial that the thief was me
husband of the woman he had loved, and who, thus dis-
graced, had joined the Foreign Legion to be forgotten.
He awakens more sympathy in the part of the film that
shows him, as a Legionaire, assuming blame that was
not his. Mr. Stone, too, awakens sympathy as the com-
mander of the regiment by his humaneness. Mary Nolan
does well in an unsympathetic part; she assumes the
role af an unfaithful woman.
The plot has been founded on I. A. R. Wylie’s novel,
“The Red Mirage.” It has been directed by Edward
Sloman well.
“The Cossacks” — with John Gilbert
{Metro-Gold.-Mayer, June 23 ; 8,600 ft.; 100 to 122 min.)
Whether your customers will like this picture or not will
depend on whether they like strong melodramas or not. It
is a strong melodrama. How strong it is you may judge
from the fact that in one situation the Turks, with whom
the Cossacks are shown to have always been at war,
blind the hero’s father with a red hot iron and nearly do
the same thing to the hero. To tender-hearted people
this should prove sickening. And yet, if one is to judge
from "The Sea Beast,” the Warner Bros, picture with
John Barrymore, which was produced three years ago,
one cannot help coming to the conclusion that there are
more people with strong stomachs than there are with
weak stomachs; the situation in “The Sea Beast,” in
which the hero’s leg was shown cauterized with a red
hot iron, was if anything stronger than the situation
referred to in “The Cossacks.” The picture is full of
action. The story is not very strong, but Mr. Gilbert
helps it considerably. There is a love affair, too, be-
tween the hero, son of the leader of the Cossacks, and a
girl of the tribe. Mr. Gilbert is shown performing some
remarkable horsemanship; he does it like a genuine
Cossack. Ernest Torronce is very good as the hero’s
father, leader of the tribe. Mary Alden, David Fuller,
and others are in the supporting cast.
The plot has been founded on the novel of the same
name, by Leo Tolstoy. It has been directed with skill
by George Hill. Mr. Hill has preserved the atmosphere
of the novel well.
Note: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer started out to make
“The Cossacks” a two-dollar picture. They imported
genuine Cossacks at a great outlay of money. This they
did for publicity. That they have not succeeded in
making it such a picture may be judged by the fact that
they have shown it at the Capitol for the first time, at
their regular admission prices, instead of at a legitimate
theatre, where they have been in the habit of showing
all their pictures that they thought were either genuine
two-dollar pictures or “cousins” to them.
July 7, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
107
“The Michigan Kid” — with Conrad Nagel
and Renee Adoree
( Univ.-Jcwel , Oct. 21 ; 6,030 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
There are several features in this picture that make it
atractive as a booking. First, the name of the author,
Mr. Rex Beach; secondly, a fight between the hero and
the villian, which almost approaches that of “The
Spoilers”; thirdly, the forest fire, which endangers the
lives of hero and heroine; fourthly, the riding of the
rapids through the flaming forest, a feat of extremely
dangerous nature. At the Roxy Theatre, where this
picture was shown last Sunday for the week, the aud-
iences groaned and exclaimed when the hero, the her-
oine and the villain, were riding the rapids through flam-
ing timbers. At one point, the noise of the exclamations
became a roar; it was at the point where the little canoe
with its occupants was seen leaping down the falls. The
thrills one get's from the picture are, in fact, almost as
piercing as are those in “The Trail of ‘98.” The only
shortcoming is Mr. Conrad Nagel, who takes the part
of the hero. Mr. Nagel is more of a parlor hero than a
hero of frozen Alaska. However hard he tries to appear
a "tough guy,” he is hardly successful. But the story is
so trong that it carries him along, despite his misfitness
in the part. An actor like Harry Carey in that part
would have strengthened the picture still more. Miss
Adoree does not do bad work. At times she is charm-
ing. Lloyd Whitlock makes a good villain. Fred Es-
melton, Adolph Millar, Maurice Murphy, Virginia Grey,
Dick Palm and others are in the cast. Irvin Willat has
directed it well.
The story concerns a young boy, whose feelings are
so slighted by the father of his playmate, a little girl,
that he decides to go away and make himself a fortune.
He goes to Alaska. In the years that followed he be-
came a successful owner of a gambling hall, and was
known in Alaska as the Michigan Kid. The super-
intendent of some mines gambles and loses not only
his own money but also the payroll of his company.
He appeals to the hero for help. The hero learns from
him that he was to marry the very same girl he loved
when a boy. The superintendent (villian) takes the
money the hero gave him and gambles it again. But
again he loses it. In desperation he shoots one of the
dealers. The wound is only slight. The sheriff arrests
him. The hero uses his influence and has the villain
freed. He orders him to go to the mines. He (the hero)
meets the heroine when the boat lands but he does not
disclose his identity to her. He asks her to follow him
to the mines, where her finance is supposed to be wait-
ing for her. On the way, a storm overtakes them and
they are forced to seek asylum in the mining company's
midway house. The villain, feeling restless when they
failed to arrive, goes out in the storm and finds them
in the midway house. During the night the villain hits
the sleeping hero on the head with a club, binds him,
and puts him in a closet. As a fire had broken out in
the forest, he wakes up the heroine and asks her to
follow him. He tells her that the hero had already gone.
While in the cabin she becomes aware of the fact that
the hero is locked in the closet. She opens the closet
and frees him, just as the villain comes back into the
house. There is a terrible fight between them, in which
the hero comes out the victor. Fie drags the villain in
the boat, and all three ride the rapids to safety through
the flaming forest.
“Stormy Waters” — with Eve Southern and
Malcolm McGregor
( Tiffany , June 1; 5,735 ft.; 66 to 82 min. )
If your customers can find enjoyment in the doings of
a common woman, a shameless creature, a woman who
would not hestitate to leave one man to take up another,
and who finds enjoyment in making men beat each other
up or knife each other for her love, then they would
enjoy “Stormy Waters.” Otherwise they may be dis-
appointed. The story is decidely “sexy”; and it makes
no “bones" about it, even though the sex situations have
been handled with kid gloves. In one situation the
young hero is shown entering the supposed-heroine’s
room and after embracing her, the flame of a candle light
is shown in a close-up shooting up and then dying out.
The implication is too plain even for children. The
situations that show her on the boat, presumably the
wife of the young hero, flirting with the sailors and
acting in any but a lady-like manner, also are strongly
suggestive. The action unfolds either on board a ship
or in ports. Miss Southern portrays the part of the
common woman very well. Malcolm McGregor is good,
too. Roy Stewart, as the hero’s brother, does well.
Shirley Palmer is the girl the young hero was engaged
to.
The plot has been suggested by Jack London’s story,
“The Yellow Handkerchief.” It has been directed by
Edgar Lewis well.
The story is about a young man, engaged to a girl,
who becomes infatuated with a common woman. She
makes him believe that they had been married the night
before. The hero had been so intoxicated that he did
not remember anything. And he took her word for it.
He takes her on board his brother’s ship. When they
return home and his sweetheart learns that he gave her
up for another woman, she is heart-broken. The sup-
posed wife is tired of the hero and makes ready to run
away with a pugilist. The hero’s brother finds her
packing up and forces her to go to the ship with him.
On board the ship she flirts with other tnen. Finally she
tries the hero’s brother. He calls her vile. She so
resents it, however, that he makes the hero believe that
his brother had made advances to her but that she had
repulsed him. There is a fight between the brothers,
but soon the hero finds out the real nature of the woman
that had posd as his wife. He begs forgiveness of his
brother and of the girl he loved.
“The Big Killing” — with Wallace Beery and
Raymond Hatton
( Paramount ; May 19; 5,930 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
A good hot weather entertainment. It is mostly slap-
stick work. Nevertheless, it causes laughs. This time
Messrs. Beery and Hatton, patent medicine men, find
themselves in a feud country, where one clan had hired
them to kill the members of the opposite clan. The
comedy is caused chiefly by the two hero’s misunder-
standing of words, taking them to mean one thing when
those who uttered them meant them for another thing.
For instance, when the head of the clan that had hired
them to do the killing told them that their job would be
to kill the Beagles, the two heroes thought that “bea-
gles” meant dogs or something simlar to dogs. There are
thrills, too, caused by shooting. Most of the thrills are
caused in the scenes where the two heroes trick the
members of the clan that had hired them into the base-
ment of the old shack, while outside men of the other
clan started shooting in an effort to kill the two heroes
and those that had hired them. There is a love affair, too,
between the young son of the leader of the one clan and
the daughter of the leader of the other. In the develop-
ment of the plot, it is shown that an end was put to the
feud by the marriage of the boy and the girl, which
marriage is brought about by the aid of the two heroes.
Grover Jones wrote the story. F. Richard Jones
directed it. Gardner James is the boy; Mary Brian, the
girl. Anders Randolph, Paul McAllister, James Mason
and others are in the supporting cast.
“The Red Dance” — with Dolores Del Rio
and Charles Farrell
( Fox , 1928-29 Release; 9,250 ft.; 107 to 132 min. )
The production of it is first class, well enough, but
the story is not such as to arouse the spectator’s interest
strongly. There is nothing extraordinary about it. It
is a Russian story and shows a Russian Grand Duke in
love with a girl of the working classes. The only differ-
ence in the charactertization of the heroine in this pic-
ture from the characterization of heroines in other
Russian pictures is the fact that in this picture she is
educated, being presented as a teacher. Outside of that,
it is the regular formula Russian drama. It is not easily
believed by the spectator of average intelligence that
a proud Russian Grand Duke would marry a girl that
had sprung up from the working classes. A mild thrill
is caused here and there by the scenes of the Russian
revolution. The scenes that show the hero’s life in dan-
ger hold the spectator in mild suspense. Mr. Farrell
does well in a part that does not offer him great oppor-
tunities; but his magnetic personality helps a great deal.
Miss Del Rio’s part, too, is one that lacks much color.
The plot has been founded on a story by Harvey L.
Gates and Eleanor Brown; it has been directed well by
Raoul Walsh, from a scenario by James Greelman. Ivan
Linow, Boris Charsky, Dorothy Revier, Andre Segu-
rola, and Dimitri Alexis are in the supporting cast.
108
July 7, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
classed along with the other genuine two-dollar pictures,
which are: “The Birth of a Nation,” ‘‘Way Down East,”
"The Covered Wagon,” "The Ten Commandments,” “Ben
Hur,” “The Big Parade,” and "What Price Glory.” If
it were not for the poor business conditions prevailing, it
would have been entitled fully to the prices paid for "The
Big Parade” or "What Price Glory” ; under the circum-
stances, 150 points in accordance with the first classifica-
tion, which was based on the figures of “The Big Parade”
or "What Price Glory,” or 200 points on the later classifi-
cation, which is based on the prices paid for ‘‘Seventh
Heaven,” is fair. In other words, you should be able to pay
as much for "Wings” as you paid for “Seventh Heaven.”
"TENDERLOIN,” with Dolores Costello and Conrad
Nagel; Warner Brothers: The points given to this pic-
ture are 25. Such a classification is fair for those that
have no Yitaphone installed. Those who have Vitaphone
can afford to pay a much higher price. How much higher,
I cannot tell. At the Warner Theatre, this city, it fell
"flat," despite the Vitaphone. But my information is that
throughout the country this picture has eclipsed "The Jazz
Singer.” I have had an exhibitor friend of mine tell me
that “Tenderloin” drew more for him than did “The Jazz
Singer.” Exhibitors that have no Vitaphone, however,
should be very careful in buying pictures that have made a
success with the Vitaphone. “The Jazz Singer” fell flat
without the Vitaphone, and “Tenderloin” will, in my opin-
ion, fare worse, for the reason that “Tenderloin” is, with-
out the “voice,” a mediocre program attraction, whereas
"The Jazz Singer” is at least a good picture even with-
out the Vitaphone. The Vitaphone is a new thing, and its
real influence dates only from "The Jazz Singer”; there-
fore it is difficult for one to tell at this time how much its
influence should be rated. Exhibitors that have a Vita-
phone should be better judges.
"GLORIOUS BETSY,” with Dolores Costello and
Conrad Nagel; Warner Bros.: As said in the review,
"Glorious Betsy” is a very good picture; only that it is a
costume play. At the Warner Theatre, this city, it made a
better success than "Tenderloin” ; but not so that anybody
has noticed it. It is difficult, however, to tell how it is go-
ing to perform in the interior. For those that have no Vita-
phone, a 45 point classification should be more than fair ;
but those that have Vitaphone have to use their own judg-
ment as to what it is worth to them.
1 RAIL OF 98, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer superspecial:
I fear that the 100 point classification made of this picture
is a little too high. Not that the picture is bad, but that
there are many things that work against it. For instance,
pictures with Alaska as the locale have been done to death ;
dozens of them have been made from James Oliver Cur-
wood stories. Of course, none of the Curwood story pic-
tures can even approach “The Trail of ’98” in magnitude;
yet the public has been surfeited with this kind of pictures.
I understand that Metro-Goldwyn have abandoned the idea
of roadshowing it. It is my belief that big town theatres
can play this picture to a profit if they should charge their
regular prices of admission ; it has been advertised so
strongly that I am sure it will draw. Those of exhibitors
that are situated West of the Rocky Mountains, in particu-
lar, should fare better than those situated East, because the
story is closer at home to the people of the West. Small
town exhibitors must use their judgment as to what prices
they should pay for it. In my opinion, such exhibitors can
safely pay a price based on 50 points in comparison with the
100 points of “Street Angel.”
"FAZIL,” with Charles Farrell ; Fox: I made the pre-
diction in the issue of the 9th that “Fazil,” which was at
that time in its opening week at the Gaiety, would make a
success. W ell, it did in the opening weeks. I understand
that it drew as good as “Street Angel,” despite the smaller
seating capacity of the Gaiety as compared with that of the
Globe ; but lately it has fallen off considerably. It was
noticed that the majority of those that went to see it were
old women mid young flappers. The picture is consider-
ably “sexy.” For this reason, the classification of 85 per
cent, is very fair for the big cities. Small town exhibitors
however, may not be able to afford a price on that basis.
Some of^ them may not even be able to show it unless Fox
“prunes” it considerably. In such an event, the “life”
will be taken out of it. My suggestion to those who con-
template buying it is either to see it themselves or to wait to
see how it took in other cities outside New York City.
THE LION AND THE MOUSE,” Vitaphoned War-
ner Bros, subject : This picture is good either with or
without the Vitaphone. But without the Vitaphone it is
worth only about 30 per cent, of what it is with the Vita-
phone. In the opening week, it drew good crowds. But it
has declined since, until now its business is only fair. It is
my opinion that without the Vitaphone, it should be given
forty points. In other words, if you should pay $100 for
"Street Angel” you should pay only $40 for "The Lion and
the Mouse.” Those who have Vitaphone have tp use their
own judgment.
"KING OF KINGS”: It is hard for one to judge a
religious subject from the box-office point of view. This
picture did not draw well in this city ; I think that its aver-
age for the entire engagement, which was pretty long, was
around $5,000. At this figure it lost considerable money.
But I have been informed reliably that it has drawn well
on the road. It is my belief that this picture is better for
the small towns than it is for the big centres. Exhibitors
with a custom consisting chiefly of religious people should
do well to book it. It will help them by creating a good
will among the religious people, and may go a long way to-
wards lifting some of the prejudice that exists among such
people against motion pictures.
Reducing the points to dollars, you should pay for these
pictures as follows :
SEVENTH HEAVEN $200
STREET ANGEL 100
FOUR SONS 70
SUNRISE 35
MOTHER MACHREE 45
ABIE’S IRISH ROSE 35
UNCLE TOM’S CABIN 70
THE MAN WHO LAUGHS 90
TEMPEST 125
TWO LOVERS (small towns, $35) 50
RAMONA (small towns, $60) 70
GAUCHO (small towns, $35) 50
DRUMS OF LOVE (hardly a small town picture) . . 25
WINGS 200
TENDERLOIN (without Vitaphone) 25
GLORIOUS BETSY (without Vitaphone) 35
TRAIL OF ’98 (small towns) 50
FAZIL (not a very good small town picture) 50
LION AND THE MOUSE 40
I have tried to give you as accurate an account of how
these pictures have performed at the box office in this city
as possible, my desire being to help you without being un-
just to the producer. It has been the habit of producers in
the past to take flash-light photographs of the crowds on
the opening nights waiting to get into the theatre, then re-
produce them in the trade papers, thus leading you into
believing that such crowds attended all the performances
during the entire engagement. If they do not use these
methods, today, they at least fill the heads of their field
representatives with wild stories as to how much these
pictures drew ; and the field representatives, naturally tak-
ing their word for it, go to you and ask three or four times
what these pictures are worth. And often they get it. What
I have presented to you are facts, which you may take or
reject, just as you see fit. If you want to put your neck
to a producer’s noose, it is none of my business ; when I gave
you the figures and tried to be as accurate as it is humanly
possible, 1 did my duty. The rest is up to you.
Of course, your conditions may vary; therefore, you
have to adjust the information I have given you to your
conditions. If you are “coining” money now, there is no
harm in your paying a little more than these figures tell
you that you should pay; my chief object is to protect those
that are either breaking even or losing money ; that is,
those that cannot afford to base their film rentals for these
pictures on the fantastic figures the producer-distributor
representatives present instead of the actual figures. Don’t
forget that a house may look crowded and yet not have
taken in half of the business-capacity money; when the
picture does not draw they have a way of “papering” a house
that defies detection. That is why I have relied on inside
information. Other information is deceptive, just as is the
tables of comparative receipts that the film salesmen or the
distributor executives show you. This is not the time for
any one of you to make mistakes. Don’t rush ! Remember
that one of the sales “tricks” is for the salesman to “rush”
you before you get a chance to think. That is how you
often regret afterwards the price you promised to pay
even five minutes before. If they should use such tactics,
or if the film salesman should happen to be an orator and
uses on you arguments that you cannot offset, just stick by
my figures as the maximum you are willing to pay. Tell
him that since you went by the information that I gave you
m the past and did not regret it, you will be satisfied again
to go by the information that I am giving vou now ; tell him
you are sure you will not regret it.
IN fWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JULY 7, 1928
No. 27
(Semi-annual Index — First Half of 1928)
Abie’s Irish Rose — Paramount 74
Across the Atlantic — Warner Bros 71
Across to Singapore — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 71
Adorable Cheat, The — Chesterfield-Reg 67
Adventure Mad — Paramount 87
After the Storm — Columbia 75
Alex the Great — F. B. 0 43
A Modern du Barry — U. F. A 50
Baby Mine — -Metro-Goldwyn 7
Bare Knees — Gotham-Lumas-Regional 14
Beau Sabreur — Paramount 15
Beyond London Lights — F. B. O 30
Beware of Married Men — Warner Bros 14
Big City, The — Metro-Goldwyn 51
Big Noise, The — First National 58
Blue Danube, The — Pathe-deMille 59
Branded Sombrero, The — Fox 6
Bringing Up Father- — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 46
Broadway Daddies — Columbia 62
Buck Privates — Universal-Jewel 23
Burning Daylight — First National 38
Buttons — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 34
Canyon of Adventure — First National 58
Certain Young Man, A — Metro-Goldwyn 94
Chaser, The — First National 35
Chicago After Midnight — F. B. 0 27
Chicken a la King — Fox . 94
Chinatown Charlies — First National 50
Chinese Parrot, The — Universal-Jewel 2
Circus Rookies — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 79
Circus, The — United Artists 7
Clothes Make the Woman — Tiffany-Stahl 82
Come to My House — Fox 11
Cohens and the Kellys, The — Universal-Jewel 27
Coney Island — F. B. 0 2
Cop, The— Pathe 103
Count of Ten, The — Universal 43
Crimson City, The — Warner Bros 66
Crooks Can’t Win — F. B. 0 66
Crowd, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 30
Czar Ivan the Terrible — Amkino 51
Daredevil’s Reward, A — Fox 10
Dawn — Selwyn-Regional 91
Desert Bride, The — Columbia 62
Devil’s Skipper, The — Tiffany-Stahl 58
Divine Woman, The — Metro-Goldwyn 10
Don’t Marry — Fox 87
Doomsday — Paramount 35
Dove, The — United Artists 2
Drag Net, The — Paramount 86
Dressed to Kill — Fox, 6,566 ft 42
Drums of Love — Griffith-United Artists 18
Easy Come, Easy Go — Paramount 75
End of St. Petersburg, The — Regional 90
Enemy, The — Metro-Goldwyn 3
Escape, The — Fox 70
Fangs of the Wild— F. B. 0 11
Fazil— Fox 86
Feel My Pulse — Paramount 38
Finders Keepers — Universal 34
Finnegan’s Ball — First Division 7
Flying Romeos — First National ; 51
Fools for Luck — Paramount 94
Fortune Hunter, The — Warner Bros 7
Four Sons — Fox, 9,412 ft 39
Freckles — F. B. O 14
Freedom of the Press — Universal- Jewel 90
Fifty-Fifty Girl — Paramount . . . . 79
Garden of Eden, The — United Artists 51
Gateway of the Moon, The — Fox 22
Gentlemen Prefer Blondes — Paramount 10
Girl in Every Port, A — Fox 31
Glorious Betsy — Warner Bros 74
Good Morning, Judge — Universal -Jewel 55
Gow— Regional 99
Gypsy of the North — Rayart 78
Ham and Eggs at the Front — Warner Bros
Hangman’s House — Fox
Happiness Ahead — First National
Harold Teen — First National
Has Anybody Here Seen Kelly? — Universal -Jewel
Haunted Ship, The — Tiffany
Hawk’s Nest, The — First National
Heart of a Follies Girl, The — First National
Hellship Bronson — Gotham-Regional
Her Summer Hero — F. B. O
Her Wild Oat — First National
His Tiger Lady — Paramount
Hit of the Show — F B O
Hold ’Em Yale — Pathe-deMille
Home, James — Universal-Jewel
Honor Bound — Fox
Hot Heels — Universal
Horseman of the Plains — Fox
House of Scandals — Tiffany-Stahl
How to Handle Women — Universal-Jewel
Husbands for Rent — Warner Bros
34
.82
.98
..90
..15
...83
,.46
...99
.. 6
..26
...91
.103
..78
...90
..70
..70
..71
..78
...99
.. 2
Ladies of the Mob — Paramount 99
Ladies' Night at a Turkish Bath — First National 42
Lady Be Good — First National 86
Lady Raffles — Columbia-Reg 22
Last Command, The— Paramount 19
Latest From Paris, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 35
Laugh, Clown, Laugh — Metro-Goldwyn 87
Legion of the Condemned, The — Paramount 26
Leopard Lady, The — Pathe-DeMille 35
Let ’Er Go, Gallagher — Pathe-deMille 11
Lion and the Mouse, The — Warner Bros 98
Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — First National 55
Little Yellow House, The— F. B. 0 66
Lonesome — Universal-Jewel 94
Love and Learn — -Paramount 7
Love Hungry — Fox 66
Love Mart, The — First National .. 2
Love Me and the World Is Mine — Universal 30
Mad Hour, The — First National 46
Man in the Rough — F B O 87
Man, Woman and Wife- — Universal- Jewel 98
Man Who Laughs, The — Universal 70
Marry the Girl — Sterling 39
Matinee Idol — Columbia 54
Midnight Adventure, A — Rayart 90
Midnight Madness — Pathe-deMille 63
Mother Machree — Fox 15
Nameless Men — Tiffany-Stahl 47
Newrs Parade, The — Fox 86
Night Flyer, The — Pathe deMille 47
Night of Mystery, A — Paramount 62
Noose, The — First National 35
No Other Woman — Fox 98
On Your Toes — Universal-Jewel 10
Partners in Crime — Paramount 59
Patsy, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 67
Peaks of Destiny — UFA-Paramount 34
Perfect Crime, The — F B O 102
Perfect Gentleman, A — Pathe 6
Phantom of the Range — F. B. 0 22
Pinto Kid, The— F. B. 0 14
Pioneer Scout, The — Paramount 22
Play Girl, The — Fox 67
Port of Missing Girls, The — Brenda- Regional 47
Race for Life, A — Warner Bros 18
Ramona — United Artists 83
Red Hair — Paramount 54
Road to Ruin, The — Regional 59
Rose Marie — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 31
Rush Hour, The — Pathe-deMille 19
July 7, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
First Half of 1928
Sadie Thompson— United Artists 35
Sailors’ Wives — First National 11
Satan and the Woman — Excellent-Regional 26
Scarlet Dove, The — Tiffany-Stahl 82
Secret Hour, The — Paramount 42
Sharpshooters — Fox 18
Shepherd of the Hills — First National 6
Ship Comes In, A — Pathe-DeMille .. . 102
Showdown, The — Paramount 34
Silk Legs — Fox 3
Simba — Motion Picture Capitol Corp 63
Siren, The — Columbia 26
Skinner's Big Idea — F. B. 0 43
Skyscraper — Pathe-deMille 58
Smart Set, The — Metro-Goldwyn 38
South Sea Love — F. B. 0 27
So This Is Love — Columbia 47
Soft Living — Fox 38
Something Always Happens — Paramount 51
Speedy — Paramount 58
Spoilers of the West — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 46
Sporting Age, The — Columbia 55
Sporting Goods — Paramount 30
Square Crooks — Fox, 5,397 ft 38
Stand and Deliver — Pathe-deMille 54
Steamboat Bill, Jr. — United Artists 82
Stop That Man — Universal -Jewel 50
Street Angel — Fox 63
Streets of Shanghai — Tiffany 34
Street of Sin, The — Paramount 91
Sunset Legion, The — Paramount 71
Surrender — Universal 39
Tempest — United Artists 83
Tenderloin — Warner Bros : 62
Tenth Avenue — Pathe 102
Terror Mountain — F. B. 0 78
Thanks for the Buggy Ride — Universal-Jewel 14
That Certain Thing — Columbia-Reg 22
That’s My Daddy — Universal 31
Their Hour — Tiffany-Stahl 59
13 Washington Square — Universal-Jewel 18
Thief in the Dark — Fox 79
Three Ring Marriage — First National 102
Three Sinners — Paramount 67
Tillie’s Punctured Romance — Paramount 62
Tragedy of Youth, The — Tiffany-Stahl 43
Trail of ’98, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 11,000 ft.... 54
Two Flaming Youths — Paramount 3
Two Lovers — United Artists 75
Under the Black Eagle — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 74
Under the Tonto Rim — Paramount 50
Upland Rider, The — First National 87
Vamping Venus — First National 75
Wagon Show, The — First National 70
Walking Back — Pathe 95
Warning, The — Columbia-Regional 6
We Americans — Universal 54
West Point — Metro-Goldwyn 3
Wheel of Chance— First National 103
Whip Woman, The — First National 35
Why Sailors Go Wrong — Fox 50
Wickedness Preferred — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 31
Wife Savers — Paramount 10
Wife’s Relations, The — Columbia 27
Wild West Romance — Fox 90
Wild West Show, The — Universal 71
Woman Wise — Fox 23
Woman’s Way, A — Columbia 47
Women Who Dare — Excellent-Regional 79
Yellow Lily — First National 79
FIRST NATIONAL PICTURE
EXHIBITION VALUES
546 Shepherd of the Hills — Jan. 1 Special
542 Helen of Troy — Jan. 8 Special
446 French Dressing — Jan. 15 900,OOOB
459 Sailors’ Wives — Jan. 22 800, 000 B
437 The Noose — Jan. 29 1,300.000B
445 The Whip Woman — Feb. 5 900.000B
426 The Chaser— Feb. 12 1,000, 000B
464 The Wagon Show— Feb. 19 700.000B
455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 1,100,(MX)B
447 Mad Hour— March 4 900.000B
440 Burning Daylight — March 11 950,OOOB
434 Heart of a Follies Girl— March 18 1,100,OOOB
448 The Big Noise — March 25 900,OOOB
451 Ladies’ Night — April 1 1,000,000b
436 Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — April 8 1,300,000b
461 Chinatown Charlie — April 15 800,000B
468 Canyon of Adventure — April 22 700,0OOB
444 Harold Teen— April 29 900,OOOB
449 Lady Be Good— May 6 900,OOOB
456 Vamping Venus — May 13 l,100,00OB
435 The Yellow Lily— May 20 1.100.000B
442 The Hawk’s Nest— May 27 950,OOOB
467 The Upland Rider— June 3 700,000B
460 Three Ring Marriage — June 10 800.000B
438 Wheel of Chance — June 17 (Roulette) l,30O,00OB
429 Happiness Ahead — June 24 l,30O,OO0B
466 Code of the Scarlet — July 1 700.000B
539 Good-Bye Kiss — July 8 Special
454 The Head Man— July 15 1,100,000B
458 Heart to Heart— July 22 800,000B
427 Here Comes the Band — July 29 1,000,000B
463 The Wright Idea— Aug. 5 8O0,OOOB
543 The Barker — Aug. 12 Special
439 Out of the Ruins — Aug. 19 l,30O,0O0B
430 Oh Kay— Aug. 26 1.300.000B
FEATURE PICTURE RELEASE
SCHEDULE
Columbia Features
Ransom — L. Wilson-Ed. Burns June 7
The Way of the Strong June 19
Beware of Blondes — M. Moore-D. Revier July 1
Say It with Sables — F. Bushman-H. Chadwick July 13
Virgin Lips — O. Borden-J. Boles (Reset) July 25
Excellent Features
Into No Man’s Land
(formerly You’re in the Army Now) June 15
Making the Varsity — Rex Lease-G. Hulette July 10
The Speed Classic — Rex Lease-M. Harris July 25
Power of the Press Withdrawn
Manhattan Knights Aug. —
F B O Features
( Please correct your records as to the release date of
No. 8209, “Little Mickey Croogan” ; it is Dec. 27, 1927,
instead of January 30, 1928.)
82016 Crooks Can’t Win — Lewis-Hill (Reset) May 11
8217 Alex the Great — ‘Skeets” Gallagher-P. Avery
May 13
8236 Man in the Rough — Bob Steele May 20
82014 The Little Yellow House (Reset) May 28
8296 Dog Justice — Ranger and N. Martin (Reset).June 10
8214 Loves of Ricardo — Beban-S. Lee June 17
8224 Texas Tornado— Tom Tyler-N. Lane June 24
8246 The Fightin’ Redhead — Buzz Barton July 1
8237 The Trail of Courage — Bob Steele July 8
8219 Sally of the Scandals — B. Love-A. Forrest. .July 15
8247 The Bantam Cowboy — Buzz Barton Aug. 12
9221 Terror Mountain — Tom Tyler Aug. 19
9211 The Perfect Crime — C. Brook-I. Rich Aug. 19
9201 Danger Street — W. Baxter-M. Sleeper Aug. 26
9232 Lightning Speed — Bob Steele Aug. 26
Fox Features
Don’t Marry — L. Moran-N. Hamilton June 3
No Other Woman — D. Del Rio-D. Alvardo June 10
Wild West Romance — Rex Bell June 10
Chicken a la King — Carroll-Sterling-Meeker June 17
Fleetwing — B. Norton-D. Janis (Reset) June 24
Painted Post — Tom Mix (Reset) July 1
The Farmer’s Daughter — M. Beebe-W. Burke (Reset)
July 8
Road House — M. Alba-M. Burke (Reset) July 22
None But the Brave — Morton-Phipps (Reset) .. .Aug. 5
Street Angel — Gaynor-Farrell Aug. 19
The River Pirate — McLaglen-Moran Aug. 26
Four Sons — Hall-Mann-Collyer Sept. 3
Fazil — Farrell-Nissen Sept. 10
Gotham Features
United States Smith — Gribbon-Lee (Reset) June 1
The Man Higher Up — Bushman-Olmsted (Reset). July 1
The River Woman — L. Barrymore-J. Logan July 30
The Head of the Family July
First Half of 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Features
—*806 Mile, from Armentieres— E. Brody-J. Stuart. .June 2
S44- Detectives — K. Dane-G. K. Arthur June 9
—7-30 Forbidden Hours — R. Novaro-R. Adoree June 16
— 842 The Cossacks— J. Gilbert-R. Adoree June 23
&W Telling the World— Wm. Haines- A. Page June 30
m White Shadows— M. Blue-R. Torres.... withdrawn
§+» The Adventurer— Tim McCoy-D. Sebastian. .July 14
No Release July 21
No Release
tr- 835 Four Walls — Gilbert-Crawford Aug. 4
— 833 War in the Dark— Greta Garbo Aug. 11
— 829 Her Cardboard Lover — Davies-Goudal Aug. 2d
Paramount Features
2762 The Drag Net — Bancroft-Brent May 26
2782 The Street of Sin— E. Jannings-Fay Wray.. May 26
2738 The Magnificent Flirt — F. Vidor June 2
2734 His Tiger Lady — Menjou-Brent June 9
2743 Half a Bride — Ralston-Cooper June 16
2755 The Vanishing Pioneer — Holt-Blaine June 23
2709 Ladies of the Mob — Bow-Arlen June 30
2723 The Racket — Meighan-Prevost June 30
2729 Hot News— B. Daniels-N. Hamilton July 14
2775 Kit Carson — Fred Thomson July 21
2853 The Wedding March — Von Stroheim-Wray. Aug. 4
2801 Warming Up— R. Dix-J. Arthur Aug. 11
2819 Loves of An Actress— P. Negri-N. Asther..Aug. 11
2874 Forgotten Faces (formerly "White Sin”) .. .Aug. 18
2804 The First Kiss — Cooper-Wray Aug. 18
2829 The Sawdust Paradise — E. Ralston-Bosworth.Aug. 25
2835 Just Married— J. Hall-R. Taylor Aug. 25
2862 Beggers of Life — W. Beery-L. Brooks. Sept. 1
2839 The Model From Montmartre — Petrovitch. . Sept. 8
2870 The Water Hole— Holt-Carroll Sept. 15
___________ July 7,^928
Sterling Features
Burning Up Broadway — H. Costello-R. Frazer.. Jan. 30
Marry the Girl — B. Bedford-Bob Ellis Mar. 1
A Million for Love — M. Carr-J. Dunn-R. Howe. . .Apr. 15
Undressed June 1
It Might Happen to any Girl July 15
Tiffany Features
Clothes Make the Woman — Southern-Pidgeon. . .May 1
Ladies of the Nightclub — B. Leonard-R. Cortez. . May 15
Stormy Waters — E. Southern-M. McGregor June 1
Green Grass Widows — W. Hagen June 10
Prowlers of the Sea — Cortez-Myers (Reset) June 20
Lingerie — A. White — M. McGregor (Reset) July 1
The Grain of Dust- — Cortez-Windsor (Reset) July 10
The Albany Night Boat — Olive Borden July 20
Beautiful But Dumb — Patsy Ruth Miller Aug. 1
Domestic Relations — Claire Windsor Aug. 15
United Artists
Tempest — John Barrymore-C. Horn Aug. 11
Two Lovers — R. Colnian-V. Banky August
Hells Angels — B. Lyon-G. Nissen not set
Revenge — D. Del Rio-L. Mason not set
The Woman Disputed — N. Talmadge-G. Roland not set
The Battle of the Sexes — J. Hersholt-P. Haver not set
The Awakening — V. Banky- W. Byron not set
A Tale of Two Cities Withdrawn
The Rescue — Ronald Colman-Lili Damita Not set
The Love Song (formerly "La Paiva”) — Boyd... Not set
Warner Bros. Features
211 Pay As You Enter — Fazenda-Cook (Reset) . .May 12
201 F'ive and Ten Cent Annie — Fazenda (Reset). May 26
Pathe-DeMille
309 Skyscraper — Wm. Boyd Apr. 9
311 Walking Back — Sue Carol (Reset) May 7
333 Hold 'Em Yale — Rod LaRoque (Reset) May 14
317 A Ship Comes In (formerly His Country — April 23)
June 3
Pathe Westerns
1226 The Law’s Lash — Klondike (dog) May 20
1227 Fangs of Fate — Klondike (dog) June 24
9631 Saddle Mates — Wally Wales Aug. 5
9671 The Black Ace — Don Coleman Sept. 2
9621 Burning Bridges — Harry Carey Sept. 30
Pathe Features
(1928-29 Season)
9522 Tenth Avenue — Varconi-Schildkraut-Haver.Aug. 5
9520 The Cop — William Boyd Aug. 19
9521 The Red Mark Aug. 26
9544 Man-Made Women — L. Joy-H. B. Warner. .Sept. 9
9512 Love Over Night — Rod La Rocque Sept. 16
9519 Craig's Wife — I. Rich Sept. 23
Ray art Features
The Branded Man — Chas. Delaney-June Marlowe. May —
A Midnight Adventure — C. Landis-E. Murphy May —
The Lightnin’ Shot — B. Roosevelt May —
The Devil’s Tower — B. Roosevelt June —
Mystery Valley — B. Roosevelt July —
The Divine Sinner — V. Reynolds-E. Hilliard July —
Man From Headquarters — E. Roberts-C. Keefe. Aug. —
Sweet Sixteen — Helen Foster-Gertrude Olmsted. Aug. —
Universal Features
A5711 Buck Privates — L. DePutti-M. McGregor. June 3
A 356 A Made to Order Hero — Ted Wells June 3
A5720 The Count of Ten — C. Ray-J. Ralston June 17
A5718 The Flvin’ Cowboy — Hoot Gibson July 1
A 357 Quick Triggers — F. Humes July 15
Greased Lightning — Ted Wells July 29
A5722 Riding for Fame — Hoot Gibson Aug. 19
A5730 Uncle Tom’s Cabin — J. Lowe-V. Grey.. ..Sept. 2
A5732 Home, James — L. LaPlante Sept. 2
A5734 Anybody Here Seen Kelly — T. Moore. ... Sept. 9
A5735 The Night Bird — Denny Sept. 16
A5733 Foreign Legion — L. Stone-N. Kerry Sept. 23
Extended Runs
177 Don Juan — John Barrymore (1927) Feb. 19
178 The Better ’Ole — Syd Chaplin Mar. 12
180 The Missing Link — Syd Chaplin Aug. 7
179 When a Man Loves — Barrymore-Costello Aug. 21
184 Old San Francisco — D. Costello Sept. 4
188 The First Auto — Oldfield-Miller Sept. 18
181 The Fortune Hunter — Syd Chaplin Nov.' 17
182 The Jazz Singer — A1 Jolson (1928) Feb. 4
185 Glorius Betsy — D. Costello Not set
186 Tenderloin — McAvoy-Barrymore Not set
183 The Lion and the Mouse — L. Barrymore Not set
RELEASE SCHEDULE FOR
COMEDIES
Educational One Reel
Never Too Late — W. Lupino-Cameo May 6
Felix the Cat in Arabiantics May 13
Three Tough Onions — M. Collins-Cameo May 20
Felix the Cat in In- and Out-Laws May 27
Crown Me — -W. Lupino June 3
Felix the Cat in Outdoor Indore June 10
Sailor Boy — M. Collins-Cameo June 17
Felix tire Cat in Futuritzy June 24
Educational Two Reels
Rah Rah Rah — Dorothy Devore June 3
Who's Lying — Davis-Collins-Mermaid June 10
A Homemade Man — Lloyd Hamilton June 17
Hectic Days — Lupino Lane June 17
The Gloom Chaser — Big Boy- Juvenile June 24
Hop Off— Bowers July 1
Ladies Preferred — Drew-Mermaid July 8
Blondes Beware — Arthur-Tuxedo July 15
Listen, Children — Hamilton July 22
Leaping Luck — Davis-Collins-Mermaid July 29
Roaming Romeos — Lupino Lane July 29
F B O — One Reel
Newslaff May 14
Newslaff May 28
Newslaff June 11
Newslaff 81622 June 25
Newslaff 81623 July 9
Newslaff 81624 July 23
Newslaff 81625 Aug. 6
Newslaff 81626 Aug. 20
F B O— Two Reels
Mickey in Love — Mickey McGuire i..June 4
Heavy Infants — Standard June 11
Come Meal — Karnival June 11
Almost a Gentleman — Karnival June 25
Mickey’s Triumph — Mickey McGuire July 2
Standing Pat— Standard . July 9
Mickey’s Babies — Mickey McGuire Aug. 7
Joyful Days — Standard Aug. 14
Fox — One Reel
Sea Breezes May 13
Lords of the Back Fence May 27
Thar She Blows June 10
The Dude Ranch June 24
Land of the Storks July 8
Oregon — The Trail’s End July 22
The Lofty Andes Aug. 5
Fox — Two Reels
A Knight of Daze — Van Bibber June 10
A Cow’s Husband — Animal June 24
Daisies Won’t Tell — Imperial July 8
His Favorite Wife — Van Bibber July 22
The Elephant’s Elbows — Animal Aug. 5
Her Mother’s Back — Imperial Aug. 19
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
Sanctuary — Oddity May 5
Golden Fleeces — Oddity May 19
Tokens of Manhood — Oddity June 2
Palace of Honey — Oddity June 16
Sleeping Death — Oddity June 30
A Happy Omen — Oddity July 14
Nature’s Wizardry — Oddity July 28
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Fair and Muddy — Gang May 5
Crazy House — Gang June 2
Cleopatra — Events July 7
Paramount — One Reel
The Patent Medicine Kid — Krazy Kat June 2
Koko’s Field Daze — Inkwell Imps June 9
Stage Coached — Krazy Kat June 16
Koko Goes Over — Inkwell Imps June 23
The Rain Dropper — Krazy Kat June 30
Koko’s Catch — Inkwell Imps July 7
The Companionate Marriage — Krazy Kat. *» * .July 14
Koko’s War Dogs — Inkwell Imps ..July 21
Paramount — Two Reels
Hold ’Er Cowboy — Vernon June 2
Say Uncle — Christie-Duffy June 9
Slippery Heels — Adams June 16
Alice in Movieland — Par. Novelty June 23
Scrambled Weddings — Herton June 30
Slick Slickers — Christie July 7
Sea Food — Dooley , July 14
Face Value — Par. Novelty July 21
No Title — Stars and Authors Aug. 4
Stop Kidding — Vernon Aug. 11
Dizzy Diver — Dooley Aug. 18
Hot Scotch — MacDuff Aug. 25
Skating Home — Chorus Girl Sept. 1
No Title — Stars and Authors Sept. 8
Vacation Waves — Horton Sept. 15
The Sock Exchange — Vernon Sept. 22
Oriental Hugs — Dooley Sept. 29
Pathe — Two Reels
The Girl From Nowhere — Sennett Aug. 5
His Unlucky Night — Sennett Aug. 12
Smith’s Restaurant — Smith Family Aug. 19
The Chicken — Sennett Aug. 26
Universal — One Reel
The Trickster — Hall-Harold Highbrow June 4
Poor Papa- — Oswald Cartoon June 11
The Speed Shiek — Lake Drugstore June 18
Fox Chase— Oswald Cartoon June 25
Her Haunted Heritage — Hall-Highbrow July 2
Tall Timber — Oswald Cartoon .' July 9
Universal — Two Reels
George’s School Daze — Stern Bros May 30
Whose Wife — Stern Bros June 6
A Full House — Stern Bros June 13
George Meets George — Stern Bros June 20
Buster Minds the Baby — Stern Bros June 27
Newlyweds False Alarm — Jr. Jewels July 2
Reel Life — Stern Bros July 4
High-Up — Oswald Cartoon Aug. 6
King of Shebas — Lake Drugstore Aug. 13
Hot-Dog — Oswald Cartoon Aug. 20
Hurry-Up Marriage — Hall-Harold Highbrow. . .Aug. 27
NEW YORK RELEASE DATES OF THE DIFFERENT NEWS WEEKLIES
International
52 Even Number Saturday, June 30
53 Odd Number Wednesday, July 4
54 Even Number Saturday, July 7
55 Odd Number Wednesday, July 11
56 Even Number Saturday, July 14
57 Odd Number Wednesday, July 18
58 Even Number Saturday, July 21-
59 Odd Number Wednesday, July 25
60 Even Number Saturday, July 28
61 Odd Numebr Wednesday, Aug. 1
62 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 4
63 Odd Number Wednesday, Aug. 8
64 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 11
Fox
80 Even Number Saturday, June 30
81 Odd Number Wednesday, July 4
82 Even Number Saturday, July 7
83 Odd Number Wednesday, July 11
84 Even Number Saturday, July 14
85 Odd Number Wednesday, July 18
86 Even Number Saturday, July 21
87 Odd Number Wednesday, July 25
88 Even Number Saturday, July 28
89 Odd Number Wednesday, Aug. 1
90 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 4
91 Odd Number Wednesday, Aug. 8
92 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 11
Pathe
55 Odd Number Saturday, June 30
56 Even Number ....Wednesday, July 4
57 Odd Number Saturday, July 7
58 Even Number Wednesday, July 11
59 Odd Number Saturday, July 14
60 Even Number Wednesday, July 18
61 Odd Number Saturday, July 21
62 Even Number Wednesday, July 25
63 Odd Number Saturday, July 28
64 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Aug. 1
65 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 4
66 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Aug. 8
67 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 11
Kinograms
5409 Odd Number .... Saturday, June 30
5410 Even Number ..Wednesday, July 4
5411 Odd Number Saturday, July 7
5412 Even Number ..Wednesday, July 11
5413 Odd Number Saturday, July 14
5414 Even Number ..Wednesday, July 18
5415 Odd Number Saturday, July 21
5416 Even Number . .Wednesday, July 25
5417 Odd Number Saturday, July 28
5418 Even Number. .Wednesday, Aug. 1
5419 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 4
5420 Even Number. .Wednesday, Aug. 8
5421 Odd Number Saturday.Aug.il
Paramount
97 Odd Number Saturday, June 30
98 Even Number .. .Wednesday, July 4
99 Odd Number Saturday, July 7
100 Even Number ...Wednesday, July 11
101 Odd Number Saturday, July 14
102 Even Number ...Wednesday, July 18
103 Odd Number Saturday, July 21
104 Even Number . . .Wednesday, July 25
1 Odd Number Saturday, July 28
2 Even Number .. Wednesday, Aug. 1
3 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 4
4 Even Number . .Wednesday, Aug. 8
5 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 11
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
92 Even Number Saturday, June 30
93 Odd Number .. .Wednesday, July 4
94 Even Number Saturday, July 7
95 Odd Number . . .Wednesday, July 11
96 Even Number Saturday, July 14 — •
97 Odd Number .. .Wednesday, July 18
98 Even Number Saturday, July 21
99 Odd Number .. .Wednesday, July 25
100 Even Number Saturday, July 28
101 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 1
102 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 4
103 Odd Number .. .Wednesday, Aug. 8
104 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 11
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exoiusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1,1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
S ATU RD AY, JU LY 14, 1928
No. 28
MOTION AND SOUND
Under the heading, “TALKING FILMS TR\
MEN’S SOULS,” the Sunday, July 8, issue of the
New York Times prints the following dispatch from
Los Angeles:
“It is the movies . . . just now that are all in a lather
over the ‘talking film’ situation. In a recent trip through
the manufacturing areas of Hollywood and elsewhere
I found many corrugated brows. The manufacturers
don’t know just now how far to go. The}' realize that
the next year or two will see rapid developments in the
‘talkies,’ and naturally they hesitate to install expensive
equipment which may have to be scrapped before the
newness has worn off . . .
“The corrugations in the brows of the scenario writers
come from the fact that a new type of story must be
devised — something that will bridge the gap between
action and talk. The present sound films are interest-
ing because of their novelty, but as pictures they are
Hops, and the abrupt change of tempo when the words
stop and the action resumes is a terrific strain on the
credulity of the customers ...
“Most of all, the performers’ brows are lined with
worry make-up, because they see their fat contracts
slipping away into the hands of actors who can make
language behave. The zero hour of the ‘beautiful but
dumb’ is about to strike. Hollywood is filled with pretty
little girls who have learned to do exactly what the
director tells them to do at the precise moment they
are required to do it, and a lot of them never have found
out what it is all about beyond that. Now they are to
get parts which must be learned letter perfect and then
they are to be shoved into mid-stream where the voice
of the director must never penetrate and where, if they
rock the boat, overboard they go. And that is where
most of them are going.
“The beginning of a new era is recognized by all, but
no one yet knows what it portends. In the meantime, the
whole industry is nervous and inclined to jump when-
ever any one says ‘boo!’”
* * *
In reading every worth-while article on talking pic-
tures; in straining my ear to catch any whisper that
might give me the clue as to what is to be the future of
the motion picture under this new invention, I have yet
to read an article that puts the matter so clearly as does
this Times article by Chapin Hall. If he had included
the exhibitors, this analysis of the situation would have
been complete. Every exhibitor should study and digest
it, for Mr. Hall gives the elements that should enable
him to determine what is to be his policy for the coming
picture season.
Mr. Hall says that the picture producers hesitate to
install expensive equipment lest they be compelled to
scrap it when the newness is worn off. In other words,
to take care of the present demands for pictures syn-
chronized with music and with “voice,” the producers
are going to adopt provisional methods. So the quality
of the product will naturally turn out to be in direct
ratio to the quality of the equipment used for its manu-
facture.
Another important fact Mr. Hall reveals is that the
scenario writers will be compelled to devise new stories
so as to “bridge the gap between action and talk.” My
observation so far has been that, where the characters
are made to talk, the story value is sacrificed to the
dialogue value. The best proof of this is “Lights of
New York,” which has started its New York engage-
ment at the Strand, this city. The story is one of those
wild melodramas that were produced on the stage in the
days of the 10-20-30. Without the “voice,” it is a pretty
good crook melodrama, suitable for other than first-run
down-town theatres, and deserving, perhaps, no higher
than program prices. With the Vitaphone, it will natur-
ally draw while the present “craze” lasts, just as have
drawn other mediocre pictures so fitted. It is the first
film that has the characters talk all the way through.
How wild a melodrama it is, and how unsuitable for
high class audiences it would have been without the
"voice” may be judged by the fact that on the stage,
this drama would have perhaps been laughed off it b}
intelligent people. In the key-cities, it would have
“starved to death.” But the novelty of having the
screen shadows talk naturally changes the complexion
of the thing.
Another important fact Air. Hall reveals is that the
parts must no longer be entrusted to the “beautiful but
dumb,” but to actors who either have had stage experi-
ence or have natural inclination for the new work. How
many stage actors are available? And of those that are
available, how many are screen box office attractions?
It is true that, among the actors of the silent drama,
there are many who are highly intelligent. But it was
not intelligence that made the screen stars popular; it
was youth and beauty, first. Acting ability has, with an
exception here and there, as in the case of Emil Jan-
nings, for example, been of secondary consideration.
The great demands of the picture theatres, then, must
be supplied with pictures that are acted by actors of no
box-office value. This, every exhibitor, whether he has
installed the new device or not, must take into con-
sideration this year, and no doubt the next.
* * *
Not only the producers and the actors, but also the
exhibitors are “up in the air” about the talking pictures.
They don't know what to do. No one is in a position to
give them the information they want to enable them to
judge accurately the value of this new device in propor-
tion to the original cost of the installation, the cost of
maintenance, as well as the cost of the new type of film,
and to help them determine whether they should install
it at once or wait for further developments, and if they
should decide to install it what type of instrument to
install.
Pictures in which the characters talk all the way
through will naturally come into competition with the
legitimate drama. But at best they will be but an imita-
tion of the real thing. It does not take much imagination,
therefore, to predict that the shadow-speaking drama
will never be able to compete with the flesh-and-blood
drama. If so, one cannot help coming to the con-
clusion that the new device ought to confine itself to
singing subjects and to comedy acts, as well as to musi-
cal accompaniment of films. It is on these branches of
entertainment that it should be developed.
Even then, this mechanical music is but a poor imita-
tion of the real thing. Next time you see and hear a
screen orchestra play, pay close attention to the bass
drum, cymbals and bass violin; you will not hear them.
They do not record. The reason for it is the fact that,
the bass sounds being of low frequency, haven’t the
power to overcome the resistance the metallic dia-
phragm of the microphone offers so that they might
register. This resistance, in physics, is called inertia.
It is true that the sound is amplified, but the amplifica-
tion takes place after the vibrations of the voice have
set the diaphragh into motion, not before; therefore,
the resultant tone quality is nothing but a reproduction
of what the diaphragh first “felt.” This lack of power
affects the quality of the sound. The sound is, in a
( Continued on last page)
110
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Jazz Mad” — with Jean Hersholt
(Universal-Jewel, Sept. 30; 6,032 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
Everything about this picture is good except the title.
While it is not a misnomer, yet it leads one to believe that
the action would show young men and women drinking,
smoking and dancing to the tunes of a jazz orchestra, when
the facts are entirely different. The action really shows a
famous German musician, leader of a band in Germany,
coming to America expecting to be recognized because of
his talent. But he could not find a position and was starving,
until a friend of his, by his perseverance and determination,
compelled the leader of a philharmonic orchestra to read
the piece the hero had written and to undertake to produce
it ; the hero had found that the people in this country were
jazz mad and would not listen to classical music such as he
had written.
There is pathos all the way through. One cannot help
feeling compassion for the hero, who, although he was a
talented musician, could not gain recognition. The scenes
that show him in the cabaret attempting to lead a jazz
orchestra, and made fun of by the customers, who threw
confetti bombs at him, hurting his feelings, arouse the spec-
tator’s sympathy for him. There is a love affair, too, be-
tween Marion Nixon, who takes the part of the hero's
daughter, and George Lewis, who takes the part of the
son of a wealthy family. The mother wanted to recognize
the hero, because she had always aspired to entertain celeb-
rities, but the father, a more prosaic fellow, held him in
contempt, because he thought that all European so-called
celebrities were fakers. Mr. Hersholt does excellent work.
George Lewis and Marian Nixon are a good pair of youth-
ful lovers. Clarissa Selwynne is the mother of the young
lover, and Charles Clary the father.
The plot has been founded on a story by Sven Gade. It
has been directed by F. Harmon Weight.
“Lights of New York” — with Helen Costello,
Cullen Landis, Gladys Brockwell and others
( W amer-V itaphoned , Fall Release; 5,267 ft.)
The only thing that j ustifies the playing of this picture in
first-run Key-City theatres is the fact that the characters
are made to talk all the way through as if they were acting
on the stage in the flesh. It is the first picture so fitted, and,
if one is to judge by the fact that on last Sunday, the hottest
day in this city this year, the Strand was packed to the
doors when the other theatres, with the exception of the
Paramount, where ‘‘The Racket’’ is playing, were actually
“starving” for want of customers, they will prove fas-
cinating to the picture-goers for the time being. The story
itself is one of the most wildly melodramatic that has been
seen in pictures for some time. In one scene, the villain is
shown shot and the barber, partner of the hero, in order to
hide the murder from the detective, who had called on them,
puts the body on the chair and starts shaving him, talking
to him while the detective is in the barber shop. This he
did to allay suspicion. It is about the best part of the film,
or the worst for intelligent people. The dialogue is carried
on well all the way through. The players appear as if they
know their lines, and speak them effectively. Cullen Landis
is surprisingly good in dialogue. Helene Costello is good,
too. In fact every player does well.
The plot has been founded on the story by Hugh Herbert
and Murray Roth. It deals with two country boys (the
hero and his pal), who are induced by two crooks to go to
New York to take over their supposed barber shop. They
go. But the barber shop turns out to be also a bootlegging
joint. The hero becomes acquainted with the heroine, a
chorus girl, dancing in a cabaret conducted by the vil-
lain, a bootlegger. The villain murders a cop. The police
authorities are bent upon finding the murderer. Through
his tools the villain learns that a shipment of Century
whisky, which the murdered cop was trying to intercept
was sought of by the police as a clue. The villain, who had
it in his secret safe, sends for the unsuspecting hero and
asks him as a favor to store it in his barber shop for a few
days, his purpose being to double-cross him. When the
detectives call on him he makes an appointment with them
at a certain hour in the hero’s barber shop, promising to
give them the clue they wanted. The heroine overhears the
conversation between the villain and the detective and ap-
prises the hero of it over the telephone. The hero dumps
the whisky into the river. When the villain calls on the
hero a few minutes before the detectives were to arrive, the
hero tells him that he knows of his efforts to double-cross
him, and threatens to tell the police who the cop’s murderer
is. The villain pulls outs his pistol to kill the hero, but
July 14, 1928
some one from behind the curtain shoots him before he had
a chance to shoot the hero. The hero and his partner put
the dead body on the chair, and his partner starts shaving
him as the detectives enter. The hero leaves by the back
door and goes to the heroine with the object of leaving town
with her before he is caught by the detectives. One of the
detectives exacts a part confssion from the hero’s partner
and rushes to the heroine’s apartment to arrest the hero.
He reaches there in time. But just as he was about to hand-
cuff them, a woman enters and tells the detectives that it
was she who had killed the villain. She said that she had
been his mistress and been abandoned by him.
“Golf Widows” — with Vera Reynolds and
Harrison Ford
( Columbia , May 1 ; 5,592 jt.; 65 to 80 min.)
Just a fair program picture, if it is that. There is a lone
laugh here and there, even though the picture is supposed
to be a comedy-drama. A great deal of the action unfolds in
Tia Juana, Mexico, just across the border from the United
States. The idea of the story is the efforts of two wives to
teach their husbands a lesson ; the husbands had been de-
voting most of their time to golfing at the expense of the
time their wives were entitled to. The husbands seek their
wives all over, and eventually reach Tia Juana. The wives
had become acquainted with the hero and another person, a
young wealthy man. All four had been having the time of
their lives at the race track, when the two husbands arrive.
Accidentally the two husbands meet the hero and ask par-
ticulars about their wives, giving a description of them.
The hero pretends that he had not seen them and tries to
avoid the irate husbands, until the hero’s sweetheart appears
on the scene. Then the hero has to avoid not only the hus-
bands but also his own sweetheart. In the end everything is
cleared up. The husbands promise their wives never again
to neglect them for golf.
The story is by W. Scott Darling; it was directed by Erie
C. Kenton. John Patrick, Sally Rand, Kathleen Key,
Vernon Dent, and Will Stanton are in the supporting cast.
Note: This is a substitution. Read facts in the June 16
issue of Harrison’s Reports.
“Diamond Handcuffs” — with a Special Cast
(Metro-Goldwyn, May 5 ; 6,057 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
This is not a feature in the real sense of the word, but
three episodes with a central idea, combined into one "show.”
The central idea is the misfortune brought upon the pos-
sessors of a certain large diamond, originally stolen from a
South Africa diamond mine by a Kaffir (negro), who was
afterwards shot and killed for his act ; he had stolen it to
satisfy the cravings for diamonds of a woman he loved.
This incident is told in the first of the three episodes.
The second episode has the diamond in the show window
of a Fifth Avenue jewelry store, intriguing many women.
The heroine of this story begs her husband to buy it for
her ; but he tells her he hasn’t the money. A friend of hers
buys it for her. The husband eventually discovers it and
turns his wife out of the house.
The third episode again has the diamond on display in the
show window of a big city jewelry store, but the action
shifts to the underworld, where a young woman, mistress
of a powerful underworld character, asks her "man” to buy
the diamond for her. But her “man” is not in the habit of
spending so much money for a woman’s whim, and he re-
fuses. A young man who has a cigar store in a cabaret is
secretly in love with her. Because she has tuberculosis, he
draws from the bank every dollar he has, hands it to a doc-
tor friend of his, and has him send for the heroine to give
it to her so that she might go West for her health. She
takes the money but instead of going West she buys the
diamond from a pair of crooks who had held up the jewelry
store and stolen it.
This story winds up with the death of the heroine's “man”
at the shooting fray that had ensued when the police raided
the “joint” with the purpose of rounding up the crooks. The
hero then takes the heroine and goes West, where they are
married and live in the country happily.
The picture is not for the best family circles, and cer-
tainly not for children. It was written by Carey Wilson and
Henry C. Vance, and directed by John P. McCarthy. Each
episode is acted by a different set of players: Eleanor
Boardman, Conrad Nagel. Lawrence Gray, Sam Hardy,
Lena Malena, Gwen Lee, John Roche and George Cooper
are some of them. The last episode is the best ; it is some-
what thrilling.
Note : This is a substitution. See facts in issue of June 23.
July 14, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
111
“The Racket” — with Thomas Meighan
(Paramount, June 30; 7,646 ft.; 88 to 109 min.)
“The Racket’’ proves that Mr. Meighan has not lost any
of his old acting ability, and that, given a good story, he can
draw as big a number of people at the box office as he has
always done. Last Sunday afternoon there were lines three
deep formed in front of the Paramount Theatre box office
reaching around the block, on a day that was the hottest of
the year, and when other theatres, excepting the Strand,
where “Lights of New York” is playing, were starving to
death.
“The Racket” is from the play of Bartlett Cormack; it
has followed the play faithfully. Mr. Meighan, as the
police captain, is as good as the character in the play. There
is suspense throughout, tense at times. The acting of all the
players is first class. Louis Wolheim, as the bootleg king, is
very good. Marie Prevost is good, too, as the cabaret enter-
tainer, who forces a confession from the bootleg king
about the murder of a cop. John Darrow, as the young
cub reporter, furnishes most of the comedy. “Skeets”
Gallagher, Lee Moran, as the reporters ; Sam De Grasse,
as the district attorney in the power of the bootleg king ;
George Stone, as the bootleg king’s "kid” brother ; Burr
McIntosh and others do good work as the supporting
players.
The story is that of a Captain of police who is hampered
in his exercise of duty. Every time he is on the trail of
some murderer, powerful influences are used to save the
guilty person from the clutches of the law. At last this in-
fluence is used against him and he is transferred to a
precinct in the outskirts of the town, where it was thought
he would be impotent to do any harm to the bootleg king or
to any member of his gang. But a good man could not be
kept down ; he eventually catches the bootleg king, who had
murdered another bootleg king, in a net. While attempting
to escape, the bootleg king is shot to death by the assistant
district attorney.
“Fleetwing” — with a Special Cast
(Pox, June 24; 4,939 ft.; 57 to 70 min.)
If your customers like Arabian desert pictures, they
should get pretty good enjoyment out of "Fleetwing,”
which belongs to the program grade. There isn’t much
human interest in it, but there is action; the characters
ride fine horses and with the desert as the background
men and horses present an artistic picture. The suspense,
too, is fairly strong. The Arabian steed, which in the pic-
ture is nick-named Fleetwing, is spirited and gives one
pleasure to look at him.
The story deals with the hero, son of an Arab chieftain,
who at the risk of his life saves a young woman (heroine)
from the hands of his tribe’s deadly enemies. On the way,
they fall in love with each other. The hero takes the hero-
ine to his father and asks him to permit them to marry.
But one of his father’s lieutenants (villain), who was jeal-
ous of the hero, demands that the spoils be divided in ac-
cordance with the desert law, which allowed half to the
victor and half to the highest bidder among the other mem-
bers of the tribe. The father gives the hero the horse and
allows the others to bid on the heroine. The villain gets
the girl and they are married. But the hero revolts. He
steals the bride and runs into the desert, intending to take
her to her father. By breaking the law of the desert, the
hero puts his life in danger. His father heads some of his
warriors and goes in search of the hero. The hero does an
exploit that saves the lives of his father and of his war-
riors. Hero and villain have a combat. The hero comes
out victorious. As the villain is slain, the hero and the
heroine marry.
Barry Norton is the son of the Sheik; Dorothy Jannings
the girl. Lambert Hillyer has directed the picture from a
story by himself and by Elizabeth Picket.
A good filler when there is nothing better in sight.
“Name the Woman” — with Anita Stewart,
Huntly Gordon and Gaston Glass
(Columbia, May 25 ; 5,544 ft.; 64 to 79 min.)
Not much to it. It is a murder-mystery melodrama, in
which the interest is aroused only fairly, and in which there
isn’t much heart appeal or suspense. The author attempted
to create suspense by having the district attorney’s wife
with the hero in the room where a man had been murdered,
and afterward the hero refusing to testify who the masked
woman was, preferring to be convicted. But neither the
hero nor the heroine is shown doing anything to win the
spectator’s sympathetic interests, the foundation of sus-
pense when a sympathetic character’s life is in danger.
Nor does the district attorney do anything that wins the
spectator’s sympathy any better than either the hero or the
heroine. He, too, is colorless. There is a great deal of kiss-
ing done in the picture.
The story is by Erie C. Kenton. It has been directed by
Mr. Kenton himself.
“Sally of the Scandals” — with Bessie Love
(F. B. O., July 15 ; 6,059 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
A good program picture. It is the story of a girl that is
willing to sacrifice herself by marrying a crook, her object
being to secure enough money to have an operation per-
formed on her little crippled sister. But fate intervenes and
saves her from the hands of this crook ; the police had ar-
rested him and his gang after a hold-up job. The heroine
marries a wealthy young man, who had accidentally met
her and learned to love her, the heroine reciprocating that
sentiment. There is a great deal of heart interest all the way
through, and the spectator is held in pretty tense suspense
in particular moments. Miss Love does good work, as al-
ways ; as the sacrificing sister, a chorus girl of good char-
acter, she awakens the spectator’s warm sympathy. Allan
Forrest takes the part of the wealthy young man; Jerry
Miley, that of the leader of the gang of crooks. Jack Ray-
mond, Jimmy Phillips, Irene Lambert, Margaret Quimby
and others are in the supporting cast. The story is by Enid
Hubbard ; it was directed by Lynn Shores. The production
end is very good.
YOUR RIGHTS IN SUBSTITUTIONS
In the issues of June 16 and 23, I printed my opinion
as to what are your rights in questions of substitutions,
and how to proceed to protect such rights.
In a desire to find out whether that opinion was abso-
lutely correct or not, I requested Mr. Aaron Sapiro to
go over those articles and to pass his opinion on them.
Mr. Sapiro, besides being an expert in organizing indus-
tries co-operatively, is also a great lawyer. The fol-
lowing is the letter I have received in reply:
“Dear Mr. Harrison:
“I have just read your articles in HARRISON’S RE-
PORTS of June 16 and 23, analyzing the matter of
substitutions.
“In my opinion, you are absolutely correct in your
statement that the reservation, ‘Titles, cast and direc-
tors subject to change without notice’ will not permit
the producer to change any featured member of the
cast or any featured director or any featured author
of the story or the story itself in a substantial way.
“Nor would the reservation that a picture may be
made ‘outside’ the life of the contract ever apply to a
picture made within the life of the contract.
“These reservations should be strictly construed in
favor of the exhibitor, because they are terms at vari-
ance with a written obligation; and I can conceive of
no self-respecting court which would interpret these
reservations against the exhibitors to any greater extent
than you have definitely admitted in your clear analysis
of the provisions.
“I believe that your statement of the law is accurate
and precise; and that your legal statement is wholly
justified by both trade practice and general commercial
equity.
“It is traditional that lawyers should withhold com-
plete approval and find some weak spot somewhere; but
I simply have to go back on the profession and admit
that your statement stands without a flaw, as far as my
examination discloses.
“With personal greetings,
(Signed) “Aaron Sapiro.”
* * *
Many exhibitors still ask me what to do when
the exchanges try to force them to take substitute '
pictures. One of them told me that the exchanges know
that to fight a case before the arbitration board is ex-
pensive for them not only in money but also in time and
they, that is, the exchanges, are taking advantage of it
by pressing the exhibitors with threats to summon them
before the board.
There is, in my opinion, only one remedy in such
cases: send the exchangeman’s letter to the post office
authorities and enter a complaint against him on the
grounds that he is using the mails to defraud. You may
also complain to the BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU
of your town on the grounds that the exchange is using
sharp selling methods.
112
HARRISON’S REPORTS
July 14, 1928
way, “strained.” Until this defect is overcome, “talking
pictures” will be what they are today. (In the Vita-
phone, more sounds of the lower frequency are left unre-
corded, because of the additional energy required to make
the stylus dig into the record.) A further defect is the use
of horns. These make the voice sound hollow, and
therefore unnatural. All these defects now are not no-
ticed except by those among the picture-goers that are
highly trained musically. But as time goes on the ears
of others will become sensitive and will detect them. It
is then that the complaints will begin. When pictures
first came into being, anything moving fascinated those
that saw them. But as time went on their tastes be-
came more and more cultivated, until now the general
public knows a good picture from a bad picture just as
well as the highly trained critic. It is bound to be so
with the talking pictures; though now any subject
wherein motion and sound are combined pleases them, as
time goes on they will become more descriminating.
And the day will soon come when they will know that
this new device is but a cheap imitation of the real
thing, and they will not want to hear it unless, of course,
decided improvements take place in the meantime.
But the public today demands it. And the exhibitor
must satisfy their demand.
Both systems, that is, the disc system as well as the
film system, have their advantages and their defects.
But the defects of these systems will affect worse those
of the exhibitors that are far away from the center of
distribution than they will those that are in the ex-
change cities or within riding distance.
The film system will be liable to “gaps” in the talk
of the characters as well as in the singing of operatic
pieces due to breaks in the film, which breaks you could
not repair at once. Breaks in the film will, of course,
occur also in the disc system, but in such an event the
conversation or singing will not be interrupted. One
has to take into consideration also the “static” that will
be caused when oil will get on the sound track. (I
don’t know yet whether the static created by the friction
of the film and sprockets, as well as the other mechanical
parts, will have an effect on the sound.)
On the other hand, the disc system may cause great
inconvenience to the users by the mixing of the records
in shipment, an error that cannot help happening now
and then, when one has to depend on the human factor.
This system will, in my opinion, also require greater
knowledge on the part of the operator. But its greatest
defect is the hissing sound, caused by the friction of
the stylus on the disc record. This hissing is more pro-
nounced than the hissing in the home phonographs, be-
cause it is magnified many times just as is magnified the
sound. This becomes more pronounced in conversa-
tion. In the conversation between Lionel Barrymore
and Alec B. Francis, in “The Lion and the Mouse,” it
is so pronounced that it is annoying.
But the public demands this form of entertainment at
present, and, even though the film system is, in my opin-
ion, better than the disc system, Warner Bros, are al-
ready serving the exhibitors, whereas the others are still
getting ready, or are still experimenting. To manu-
facture and deliver the instruments requires time. I
doubt if other concerns will be able to deliver any of
their instruments in mass quantities before the first part
of 1929. In the meantime, those who think that they
can build up their business with this new device must
make an immediate installation of some kind.
The ones that could benefit the most out of this new
device are the small exhibitors. These will be able to
give their customers big orchestras, played by expert
musicians, in place of the tin pan piano or piano and
violin, played by poor musicians, that they are giving
them now. But the cost of installation is so prohibitive
that they will not be able to use it, unless they install
some of the other devices, such as Powers’ Cinephone,
for example, that sell for less than $2,500. But in such a
case, one must make sure that one will be able to use the
film of any producer on the same instrument. Otherwise
one will have to install every instrument on the market.
To those that are desirous of making an immediate
installation of a “talking” device, I may say this: If you
think that you can earn the price of the instrument in
the next twelve months, go ahead and install one of
the instruments that are ready for delivery and from a
company that can supply you with service, singing and
talking subjects, as well as synchronized features. If
you don’t think you can earn it, then wait for develop-
ments. If you want to keep up-to-date, in a year’s time
you might be required to scrap the instrument you will
have installed now. And it will be too expensive a
process for you unless you earn its cost by that time.
To determine whether you can earn its cost in a year’s
time, you must figure out whether the increased at-
tendance will enable you to pay for the amortization of
the original investment, for the maintenance of it, for
the increased cost of the film (features as well as acts)
and for the increased cost of operation. Remember that
you have to pay real money to an operator of such a
device. And if you are in a union town, you may have
to hire more than one operator. You might be able to
cover the cost easily if you could dispense with your
orchestra. But at present you cannot dispense with it,
unless you show a program for a full week, for not all
pictures are synchronized.
Here is one other factor that you must take into
consideration. Perhaps up to this time you have re-
frained from playing pictures on percentage and “over-
age.” When you install such an instrument, you will be
put into a position where you must submit to such
terms. In Cleveland, for example, the exhibitors have
so far stuck by the resolution their organization passed
a few years ago and have refrained from playing pic-
tures on a percentage basis. Let them install such an
instrument and you will see how quickly they will
capitulate.
In this editorial I have tried to present to you my
views as I have formed them as a result of the talks I
have had with exhibitors as well as with producers and
distributors, and by reasoning. But I cannot take the
position of being positive as to what the future holds
for this business as a result of this invention. No one
has taken a positive stand; for no one can. My sole
object was to present you with such facts as will help
you to set your own course. The only suggestion that
I should like to make to you is not to be hasty. If you
should install such an instrument first, your competitor
is bound to install a similar instrument if he should see
that you are getting all the business. And when he
installs it, conditions will not be much better than they
are now. So use your head !
A WISE COURSE!
I have been informed by E. E. Sprague, of Goodland,
Kansas, that Warner Bros, are sending circulars to
small-town exhibitors informing them of the great suc-
cess “The Jazz Singer” and “Tenderloin” have made
at the box office, but they do not indicate plainly that
its success is owed to the Vitaphone. Mr. Sprague also
makes the following observation:
“In my opinion, the independent exhibitor is in the
toughest spot of all in his buying in this season. With
all the producers frantic to synchronize their pictures,
how can the exhibitor tell whether the box office appeal
is in the ‘sound’ or in the straight black and white silent
drama? ‘The Jazz Singer’ is an example. This picture
is very mediocre without the Vitaphone. But Warner
Bros, are trying to ‘gyp’ the exhibitor by what may be
taken as misrepresentation in advertising. I have not
bought any new product for the coming season and do
not intend to do so until I find out what they have to
sell, but nearly every salesman tries to hide the fact
that over half of these pictures are being made with
sound effects.”
It seems to me that this season is going to be a
repetition of the 1919-20 season, when the selective
booking system was to form the foundation of selling
pictures. Despite the intentions of the producers, every-
thing remained the same as before in 1919 except the
prices. These advanced anywhere from one hundred to
one thousand per cent. It looks as if the prices are to ad-
vance this year likewise, even for exhibitors that have
not installed a “talking” device. For this reason the
attitude Mr. Sprague has adopted should be adopted by
every exhibitor that wants to survive. Don't make a
move unless you know what the effect is going to be.
Let the other fellow hold the bag!
A CORRECTION
In the article “1928-29 Two-Dollar ‘Hits’ and ‘Flops’,”
printed last week, I put “Ramona” in the two-dollar
class. This was an error, for “Ramona” played at the
Rivoli Theatre, this city, at the regular prices of admis-
sion charged by that theatre, 99c being the top price.
If two-dollar top prices were charged for it, perhaps
it would not have made the success it is making now.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors^
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JULY 21 , 1928
No. 29
The Attitude of Fox on Substitutions
This office has been informed by exhibitors that the
Fox Film Corporation refuses to acknowledge that
“The News Parade,” which it is delivering for “French
Ankles,” is a substitution.
Originally the picture was sold merely as “French
Ankles.” No author or director was given with it. But
there was the following description of it: "Madge ’ll
goal them again with this. If you think ‘Ankles Pre-
ferred’ was a wow — wait for this one.” Now, this
description clearly indicates, as I stated in the analysis
of the Fox substitutions, printed in the issue of June 9,
that “French Ankles” would, as every exhibitor no
doubt understood, be a "leg” picture. The Fox Work
Sheet supports that assumption. But what is “The
News Parade?” A story of the troubles and tribula-
tions of a Fox camera man; the difficulties he has in
getting news material for the Fox News. It certainly
takes nerve to tell an exhibitor that “The News Parade”
is a better “wow” than “Ankles Preferred.”
Fox contends that the reservation as to director, cast
and title, printed in the Work Sheets last year, gave
them the right to change the title of this picture. Let
me make certain things clear about this reservation
clause: The right of the producer to change a title is
conceded. Also the supporting cast. But when no story
or author is given with the title, then the matter differs
entirely. In such an event, if the title is indicative of
the nature of the theme, it is the “substance” the ex-
hibitor buys; the landmark whereby the buyer can
recognize his goods. So when the producer changes
that title he changes the substance, and therefore he
changes the story. Consequently, the exhibitor is not
obligated to accept it. In this case, an additional reason
for the exhibitor to reject “The News Parade” is the
fact that it is not being deliverd with the star it was sold
with. Ask any Fox manager if he thinks you would buy
a picture with Madge Bellamy, pay a Madge Bellamy
price, and then accept one with Sally Phipps! It is
disgraceful that the Fox organization would even at-
tempt to make such a claim. It is showing bad faith to
the worst degree.
But then this is not the first time that the Fox organ-
ization has assumed such an attitude. Look over their
Work Sheets of any one season and you will find in-
stances of this kind too numerous to state in detail here.
Fox would stick his hand in a bag, grab a title, put it
on the Work Sheet, make some general statements
about it, statements that cannot be pinned down to any
promise, and then, when the time came for him to
deliver the picture, he would produce anything he
pleased. I wonder how often the Fox executives
laughed at your expense!
Why don't you do something? Why don’t you com-
plain to the post office authorities, asking them to put
an end to this game? Your indifference emboldens the
producers ; it makes them callous.
Fox Additional Substitutions
“THE FARMER’S DAUGHTER”: Fox informs
the contract holders that the original title of this pic-
ture was “Holiday Lane.” If so, then it is a story, star
and director substitution and therefore you are not
obligated to accept it for the reason that “Holiday
Lane” was to be a picture that would be, according to
the Work Sheet, “Hitting the High Spots on the Gay
White Way — Jazz, Spice, Joy and Life along the
‘Wickedest’ street in the world,” with Earle Foxe,
Nancy Nash, and J. Farrell McDonald in the cast, and
to be directed by J. G. Blystone; whereas “The Farm-
er’s Daughter” is a comedy-drama with a rural back-
ground, in which the chief character is a slick con-
fidence man ; it was directed by Arthur Rosson, and is acted
by Marjorie Beebe, Warren Burke, and Arthur Stone.
“ROADHOUSE”: The original title of this one is sup-
posed to have been “None But the Brave.” But it seems as
if it is another case where you put your money on one
shell and found the bean under another. “None But
the Brave” was sold with Madge Bellamy and Edmund
Lowe, and was to have been founded on the stage suc-
cess by Brandon Fleming and Bernard Merrivale, to
be dircted by J. G. Blystone. But “Roadhouse” is from
an original story by Philip Hurn, it has been directed by
Richard Rosson, and has Maria Alba, Warren Burke,
and Lionel Barrymore in the cast. It is, according to
the Fox press-sheet, a melodrama of flaming youth, an
expose of “snares in the waj^ of dancing feet.” A clear
substitution all around.
But the peculiar part about “None But the Brave” is
the fact that the Fox organization has already made this
picture, or it has just about finished it, and has sched-
uled it for release August 5. But even then you are not
obligated to accept it for the reason that although they
sold it to you with Madge Bellamy, they are delivering
it with Dorothy Knapp. The important part about it,
however, is the fact that the plot has not been founded
on the stage play by Brandon Fleming and Bernard
Merrivale, but on an original story by James Gruen
and bred Stanley. In either case you are not obligated
to accept it.
* * *
Several exhibitors have informed this office that the
Fox exchanges refuse to reply to letters that ask definite
questions about substitute pictures. In some cases the
exchanges refuse to take action even after they threat-
ened the exhibitors with arbitration board proceedings
when such exhibitors refuse to give play-dates on
pictures under dispute. Look out for that! It is my
opinion that the exchanges don’t want to take a definite
stand now for the reason that if a case were decided
against them in one zone, all the contracts of that zone
would be affected thereby. They want to “browbeat”
as many exhibitors as they can without the risk of arbi-
tration proceedings and then, when they come to a
point where the remaining exhibitors cannot be fright-
ened into playing them, to resort to the arbitration board
with the hope that something might happen to throw a
decision their way.
If the arbitration board of your zone is fair and you
feel that you have a chance to get justice, take Fox
before the board yourself, immediatly. If the board is
controlled by the Hays’ organization, as is the case in
most zones, then take the following steps : Enter a
complaint with the post office authorities, with the
Department of Justice, with the Federal Trade Com-
mission, with the attorney general of your state, with
the district attorney of your city, and with the Better
Business Bureau of your city or territory. I am sure
that in this manner you will be able to get justice. You
should take the same steps not only in the case of Fox
but i.i that of all the other producer-distributors that
insist that you accept something you did not buy for
something you bought. It is about time that you put
an end to this “game.”
NOTE: If you want me to inform you if any of the
pictures a producer is delivering to you with another
title is or is not a substitution, it will be necessary for
you to send me the new title, as soon as you are noti-
fied by the exchange, as well as the old title. There is
no other way for me to get the facts.
114
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Actress” — with Norma Shearer
( Metro-Goldwyn-M April 28; 6,998 ft.; 81 to 99 min.)
Just fair! The story unfolds in England, and revol-
ves around the grandson (hero) of a nobleman, who
falls in love with an actress (heroine), but whose
grandfather objected to the match. Because, however,
the hero told his grandfather that he loved the heroine
and intended to marry her, the grandfather invites the
heroine to live with them so that each might find out
after a time whether he was still of the same mind.
The heroine is uncomfortable in a home where even
conversation was disturbing to the serene life of the
occupants of the house, until she becomes sick of it
all and leaves. The heroine and a friend, member of
the company, endure privations because of the shut-
down of the show. The hero, who had left his grand-
father, hears of her plight and writes to him asking
that he aid her. The grandfather calls on the heroine
and offers her aid, but pride makes her refuse it. For
the first time he sees the real character of the heroine.
The friend of the heroine induces the hero’s grand-
fathr to produce a play of his so as to give him an op-
portunity to aid the heroine without making it appear
as charity. He does so but is greatly surprised to see
his own grandson in the cast. The fine acting of the
heroine in an emotional scene that fitted her own
circumstances so impress the hero’s grandfather that
he removes all objections to their marrying.
The plot has been founded on “Trelawney of the
Wells,” by Sir Arthur Wing Pinero. It was directed
by Sidney Franklin. Owen Moore, Lee Moran, Gwen
Lee, Roy D’Arcy, Virginia Pearson, William Hum-
phrey and Effie Ellsler are in the cast.
“Half a Bride” — with Esther Ralston
( Paramount , June 23; 6,263 ft.; 72 to 89 min.)
Just fair. There isn’t very much to the story. It is
about a young girl, who believed in companionate
marriage. She was wooed by a young society man.
She makes the proposal to him that they should be
tied only by a trial marriage, of six months’ duration,
at the end of which time they were to be divorced if
they found out that they could not get along well. Her
father, who did not believe in such bosh, has her kid-
naped and taken aboard his yacht, the commander of
which was the hero, a young man the heroine despised.
They sail in the Pacific. The yacht is wrecked and the
two are washed ashore on an uninhabited island, where
they are compelled to wear crudely made skin clothes
and to eat anything they could catch, fish or game.
They are eventually rescued by a boat sent to search
for them. The heroine goes back to her world, but she
soon finds out how much she cared for the hero and
boards the ship on which he was to sail, promising
him to be his for life. They marry.
The scenes on the island are pretty passionate,
although they are not crude.
The story is by Arthur Stringer; it was adapted by
Doris Anderson and Percy Heath, and directed by
Gregory LaCava. Gary Cooper is the hero. William
Worthington, Freeman Wood, Mary Doran, Guy Ol-
iver and Ray Gallagher are in the supporting cast.
“Warming Up” — with Richard Dix
( Paramount , August 11; 6,509 ft.; 75 to 93 min.)
Without the “talk,” this picture is pretty fair. It is,
like every one of the Dix pictures, a comedy drama,
both comedy and drama being of the light vein. Most
of the laughs are caused by subtitles, being words put
in the mouth of Richard Dix, the hero. There is some
comedy caused by the situations, too, but not much of
it.
The story is that of two ball players, (hero and vil-
lain), between whom there is bad blood, because both
loved the same girl. The villain hated the “looks” of
the hero because the latter was “horning in” and could
not stop the heroine from showing a liking for him.
The hero, on the other hand, hoped that he would
some day become a big baseball star, like his rival, and
then put the proposition to the girl. All the while he
thought that the girl (heroine) was only a maid in the
house; he did not know that she was the daughter of
the owner. When calling on the heroine one evening
he saw the villain through the window putting a ring
July 21, 1928
on the heroine’s finger and took it for granted that she
had accepted the villain’s marriage proposal. He goes
back disconsolate. He gets from bad to worse as a ball
palyer until on the day the World’s Baseball Series
started he is disqualified for bad playing. On the last
day of the last game he begs the manager of the team
to put him on to pitch when their one good pitcher
had dislocated his arm. The manager puts him on but
his playing did not show an improvement, until the
heroine, having been informed that his bad playing is
the result of his grief on account of what he thought
her promise to marry the villain, makes to the hero a
signal indicating that she would be his forever. The
hero then brightens up and pitches such a wonderful
game that his team win the series.
There isn’t much to the plot, but there is enough
substance in it to give fairly good satisfaction.
With the “talk,” “Warming Up” will do more to
drive people away from the theatres than ten honest-
to-goodness “rotten” pictures. To begin with, the syn-
chronization is out of “tune” in most places, in that
the sound is heard first and the accident happens after-
wards. This occurs in the heroine’s home, where the
hero is caught in the house and hides in the ice box.
A bulb is seen falling, but the sound is heard before
the bulb had started on its mission to the floor. Later,
the sound is heard and afterwards occurs the act of
the hero that caused it. But the worst part of the film
is in the ball game; the sound is simply maddening —
enough to drive one to distraction. It would have been
bad enough even if the sound had been recorded at the
time the picture was being “shot”; but since the syn-
chronization was done afterwards, it is simply exasper-
ating.
The story was written by Sam Mintz; it was di-
rected by Fred Newmeyer. Mr. Dix does well in the
hero's part. Jean Arthur takes the part of the heroine.
Claude King, Philo McCollough, Wade Boteler, Billy
Kent Schaefer, and others are in the supporting cast.
“Telling the World” — with William Haines
( M ctro-Goldwyn-M ., June 30; 7,184 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
This style of pictures, cut to order for Mr. Haines,
have begun to get tiresome. Mr. Haines again is pre-
sented as a supreme egotist, who wants the world to
think him all-wise, and who feels that no one should
deny him what he wants. He meets the heroine, a
chorus girl, and becomes fascinated by her beauty.
Fie takes her to her home and stays there all night.
When her landlady in the morning tells her to go
because she was conducting a “respectable dump.”
the hero takes the heroine to his rooms. The fact that
it is considered improper for a young woman to re-
main through the night in the same room with a single
man did not enter the thoughts of the hero. There is
some comedy here and there, and a few thrills. The
thrills occur in what is supposed to be China, where
the hero went to find the heroine; she had joined a
traveling American show when she thought that the
hero did not have it in his mind to marry her. There
he learns that the heroine had been arrested and was
accused of the murder of the governor of the province,
the head of the military forces having made the ac-
cusation against her to hide the fact that it had been
he that had murdered the governor. By jumping on
the Chinese guards and entering the wireless room,
he forces the operator to send to the American battle
fleet a message acquainting the admiral of the plight
of the Americans. It is in the scenes that show the
American aeroplanes flying over the Chinese and
bombing them, and in the later scenes where the
sailors are seen charging, that most of the thrills
occur.
The screen drama is by Dale Van Every. It was
directed well by Sam Wood. Anita Page is the her-
oine; she is pretty and acts well. Eileen Percy, Frank
Currier, Polly Moran, Bert Roach, and William V.
Along are in the cast. It is a newspaper story, in which
the hero is shown as having been disowned by his
wealthy father, and later obtained a job as a reporter.
It should do for a program entertainment. But ex-
hibitors that avoid sex plays should be careful about
this one, for in the scenes that show the heroine in
the hero’s rooms, it is plainly evident that the hero
did not have the best of intentions towards the
heroine. In any event, it is not a picture for children.
115
HARRISON’S REPORTS
July 21, 1928
‘'Detectives”' — with Karl Dane and
George K. Arthur
(M eiro-Goldzvyn-Maycr , June 9; 5,842 ft.; 67 to 83 min.)
Not as good as the other comedies with this pair of
actors in the leading parts, but it is a pretty good
comedy just the same. Picture-goers of the rank-and-
iile should receive much enjoyment out of it.
This time Karl Dane is a detective, but he is pre-
sented as a simple-minded fellow, on whom George K.
Arthur, who is a bell boy in a hotel, plays tricks, mak-
ing the hotel guests and employees laugh at his ex-
pense. Accidentally, the pair detect and cause to be
arrested a gang of crooks, who had stolen a valuable
pearl necklace from one of the guests of the hotel.
The scenes in the cook’s lair, where the two heroes
were trapped along with the heroine, are pretty thrill-
ing. Trap doors, sliding panels, disappearing chairs,
and the like are made use of in those situations. The
scenes that show Air. Arthur masquerading as a
woman cause many laughs.
The plot has been founded on a story by Robert
Lord and Chester M. Franklin; it has been directed by
Air. Franklin himself. Alarceline Day takes the part of
the heroine; she is charming.
“Ladies of the Night Club” with Lee Moran,
Barbara Leonard and Ricardo Cortez —
{Tiff any -Stahl, May 15; 6,553 ft.; 76 to 93 min.)
A pleasing little sentimental piece of the life of an
actor. It is another “Pagliacci,” only that the actor that
loves the girl does not die; he simply goes on acting
and trying to make people laugh while his heart is
breaking. There is considerable mild comedy all the
way through, this being contributed by Air. Aloran,
who takes the part of a vainglorious actor, a man who
thinks that there is no other actor like him in the
world, and that the cabaret and theatre patrons should
consider it a favor for the fact that he condescends to
entertain them. The situation where Air. Aloran is
shown being told by the heroine that she was going
to marry the wealthy man that wooed her is pathetic.
But the most pathetic situation is that which shows
the owner of the cabaret, a woman, consoling the hero
and urging him not to let the loss of the girl “get”
him, the hero bracing up and going on with the act
as a result of that encouragement.
The story is that of a team of actors, a man and a
woman (hero and heroine), who keep on struggling,
but who are unable to “land” a good contract, until
the representative of a woman that conducted a cab-
aret sees them; he likes her and her acting so well that
he offers her a “fat” contract. But she is unwilling to
accept the fine offer because it did not include her
partner, to whom she was grateful for having taught
her what she knew. The cabaret owner is compelled
to hire also the hero. They make a success at the cab-
aret. A wealthy young man meets the heroine and falls
in love with her. He eventually proposes and she ac-
cepts. The hero, who loved the heroine, was ready to
propose, too, but when he heard that she gave her
promise to the wealthy man, he holds back his confes-
sion of love and goes on with the act, carrying his
sorrow with him, determined never to let her know
how much he cared for her.
The story was written by Grauman Kohn. The pic-
ture was directed by George Archainbaud. Barbara
Leonard is good as the heroine, and Lee Aloran as the
hero. The love affair between Ricardo Cortez and
Aliss Leonard is clean. Douglas Gerard and Cissy
Fitzgerald also are in the cast.
“Grip of the Yukon” with Neil Hamilton,
Francis X. Bushman and June Marlowe
( Universal- Jewel , November 25; 6,599 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
The chief trouble with this picture is the fact that
it is too evident that the stuff used for the reproduc-
tion of snow is an imitation. And a poor imitation at
that. There is nothing extraordinary about the story
either. It is about two partners, who half frozen in the
wilds of Alaska see a cabin and enter it, to be con-
fronted by the gun of a gold-crazy prospector; he had
thought that they had followed him to find out where
he was getting his gold from. They spend a fearful
night, but towards morning they find an opportunity
to jump on him with an intention to disarm him, but
the demented prospector is killed by the accidental
discharge of his own gun. Later the two meet the
heroine, a young girl from San Francisco, daughter of
the dead man; she had been sent for by the villain,
owner of the dance hall, who planned to use her to
rob her father of his mine. The youngest of the part-
ners falls m love with her, and when he sees her in
financial difficulties he aids and protects her, particu-
larly when the villain tried to make her work in his
hall as a dancer to pay her back debt to him. Soon the
partners learn that the heroine is the daughter of the
dead man. They want to tell her the truth but fear to
do so lest the heroine fail to understand the exact cir-
cumstances of her father’s death and turn against
them. The two partners induce the heroine to live
with them in their mine. One day the young partner
finds the heroine in his partner’s arms and feels so
jealous that he has a fight with him. They decide to
part. The elder partner goes to the sheriff to reveal
the fact of the old man’s death and to take the blame
himself so as to leave the hero free to marry the heroine ;
but the sheriff, who had conducted an investigation,
had come to the conclusion that the old man's death
was the cause of self-defense on the part of him that
had shot him.
The plot has been founded on a story by Charles A.
Logue. It has been directed by Edward Laemmle, Jr.
Otis Harlan, as the doctor, contributes considerable
comedy of the mild sort. Burr Alclntosh takes the part
of the gold-crazy miner.
WHO IS RIGHT? HESS OR ERDMANN ?
The following news item appeared in the Daily
Review of July 11 under the heading, “NO BLOCK
BOOKING INJUNCTION ASKED”:
“Gabriel Hess of the Hays organization yesterday
corrected the erroneous report that George Schade of
the Schade Theatre, Sandusky, Ohio, has obtained any
injunctions against 14 distributors in the Cleveland
district, or that block booking was involved in the
action which was brought, as reported in the trade
press yesterday.
“Schade, who was dissatisfied with an arbitration
award against him, sought legal action against the
distributors when they demanded deposit security to
continue further service to the theatre.
“Upon application of the distributors for an ad-
journment in order to prepare their papers, the court
granted an adjournment provided the distributors
continued to serve the exhibitor until the issue was
settled. . .
This is what Garbiel Hess apparently gave out.
Now read what George Erdman, General Alanager of
the Cleveland Local, who is active in the defense of
Schade’s interests, and who is one of the prime
movers in this case, has to say in a letter to this office
under date of July 13:
“Dear Pete:
“Just received Daily Review under date of Wednes-
day, July 11th, this A. Al. wherein Hess goes to bat
relative to the injunction secured by George Schade.
You can see from this, as welll as from the top scare
line in the Film Daily, issue of Tuesday, July 10th.
‘Gets Temporary Block Booking Injunction in Ohio,’
that these publications are getting their information
from sources that are not responsible. . . .
“Please let me advise you of just one point which
will clear up the real reason for this injunction. United
Artists had a claim against George Schade. This claim
was filed and at the final hearing by the Joint Board
of Arbitration, Air. Schade did not appear nor was
he represented.
“Our Association has taken the stand that the ex-
hibitor members of the Joint Board of Arbitration
refuse to hear any case against an exhibitor who is not
present at the time of the hearing, or is not repre-
sented, as we claim this is not arbitration, that it is
a one-sided affair. So when Schade’s case came up for
final hearing, the exhibitor members refused to hear
the case. The distributor then took their own action
and no doubt voted unanimously, which is three of the
distributors in favor of United Artists.
“Of course, Schade did not recognize this award,
which was obtained in this manner and the results
you know. So if you care to use this to get the real
issue and probably teach the other trade journals to
get the correct low-down, go ahead and use it. ...”
“G. W. Erdmann.”
“P.S. The correct name of the attorney representing
Schade is, Joseph N. Ackerman.”
116
HARRISON’S REPORTS
PLAYING A DANGEROUS GAME
It seems as if Will H. Hays and a small group of
those he reprsents are determined to drag the moving
picture industry to a political fight in a desperate
effort to serve their selfish interests, regardless of the
consequences to the great majority of those that are
engaged in it, who feel that this industry should remain
neutral.
What the consequences of this action on the part of
Mr. Hays and of the others will be has been plainly told
to the industry by Hon. James J, Walker, Mayor of
New York City. Speaking in LosAngeles to the publi-
city men, among whom were Will H. Hays, Joe
Schenck and Louis B. Mayer, the Mayor declared that
the moving picture industry has been delivered into the
hands of one of the major political parties, and that if
it did not take care to stay neutral the political party
that is “out” will see to it that legislation is resorted to
in order to make it suffer. He told his hearers plainly
that if the industry should not stay out of the field of
partisan politics, the law he put on the statute books in
New York State making Sunday opening possible may
be repealed. And I am sure that Messrs. Hays,
Schenck and Mayer heard him say it and understood
plainly the tenor of what he said.
For the last several months the head of the producers'
organization has been accused of backing Mr. Hoover.
Mr. Hays denied it, of course. He could not do other-
wise. But evidently he thinks that the democratic party
consists of leaders that cannot do any thinking, or that
they do not know what has been going on in his office.
Does he think they are ignorant of the fact that Mr.
Lockwood, Herbert Hoover’s field manager, was on
the payroll of his (the Hays’) organization for several
months prior to the nomination of Air. Hoover? Does
he think that his sending C. C. Pettijohn to the Houston
Convention in an effort to put Mr. Woolen of Indiana
over as a vice-presidential candidate, thus playing with
both political parties, is a secret to the Democrats?
Does he think that the Democrats are ignorant of the
fact that in the presidential campaign of 1920 C. C.
Pettijohn received nearly $30,000 ($6,015.33 on August
25; $6,065.00 September 21; $14,607.63 August 14;
$1,244.25 October 19; and $149.53 October 21) from the
Republicans for film propaganda work? Isn’t this why
they did not give Pettijohn a “tumble” at Houston?
Does he think that the Democrats have forgotten that
Louis B. Alayer, too, told Air. Hoover a few months ago
that the motion picture industry was back of him?
Air. Hays has, of course, the right to remain a Repub-
lican and to express his personal sentiments for Air.
Hoover, if he so felt. But the matter differs when he,
because of his position, exceeds his personal privileges
and tries to influence an entire industry to think the
way he thinks. Let him quit “kidding” himself that his
activities are unknown to the Democrats.
This paper would suggest all exhibitors to keep out
of partisan politics for their own good. If a candidate
for an office, national, state, or local, has done some-
thing for the motion picture industry, something that
has benefited the exhibitor, vote for him, no matter
whethes he is a Republican, a Democrat, a Prohibition-
ist, or even a Socialist. In fact it is your duty to vote
for such a candidate so as to show to the other candi-
dates how you stand by your friends. If neither of the
candidates has done anything against the industry, then
send them a questionnaire and let them commit them-
selves as to where they stand on questions that affect
the motion picture industry. Ask them if they are in favor
of them, and vote for the one that is for them. If both are
favorable, then give them both a “break.” If only one of
them is, then throw all your strength back of him
and give him the use of your screen. If there is any
doubt in your mind as to where a particular candidate
stands, always vote for the one that will avoid co-
operating with Will Hays, for the more political power
Air. Hays gets the greater will be the depth of your
slavery. Don’t forget that his arbitration system, which
you are unable to shake off, has robbed you of the
rights of trial .by jury, the cornerstone of your liberties.
We have had enough of Haysism. Let us have no
more of itl
July 21, 1928
BE SURE TO GET A GUARANTEE
On the day “King of Kings” was to start its engage-
ment at the Rivoli Theatre, last week, Western Electric
Company threatened to secure an injunction against
Publix, owners of the Rivoli, on the ground that they
are using a talking machine other than their own, con-
trary to the terms of the contract with them. The pic-
ture has been fitted up with sound effects and music
with an R. C. A. Photophone, (instead of with a Vita-
phone.
But some way or other, the trouble was patched up
and Publix was allowed , to proceed with their original
plans. No doubt the fact that Publix is a big customer
has had a great influence in settling this trouble.
This incident ought to help put every exhibitor on
his guard. No doubt many instruments will be offered
you that may be liable to litigation. So before you pay
any money to anybody, make sure that the owner of the
device has full rights to the patents, and that, in case
any injunction should be served on you to stop you
from using the instrument you bought, the seller shall
be obligated to step in and undertake your defense, at
his own expense.
Keep every letter, including the envelope, you get
from those you intend to buy a talking machine from.
BUY YOUR PICTURES WITHOUT THE
SOUND
I.ast Saturday I went to see “Warming Up,” with
Richard Dix, the first synchronized Paramount picture.
While looking at it and hearing its characters talk,
and to the mechanical music that accompanied it, my mind
was thinking about the Paramount executives and the
other producer-distributors, who have gone “crazy” on
this fad. I was wondering if every one in this industry
has lost his sense of proportion! They must have, if
one is to judge by “Warming Up.”
What the Publix and Paramount executives would
describe as a “talking” picture is really a picture ac-
companied by a “jumble” of sounds, and suitable only
for lumberjacks, truck drivers, and longshoremen.
These are used to noises and don’t mind the additional
noises created by the talking outfit in “Warming Up.”
But mark my word, if they keep on making such
pictures, fifty per cent, of the picture-going custom will
be driven away from the picture theatres. No person
of even fair culture can stand these noises; they are
maddening.
My suggestion to you is to be careful this year more
than you have ever been. The best plan to follow is
this: Buy the pictures without the sound, even if you
have a talking machine installed. When the pictures
are produced and you get a favorable report on the
“sound,” then buy the sound rights. Or, make a con-
tract to pay a certain amount of money only if you
should use the sound. In this way you will be protected
from such “sound” effects as those that accompany
“Warming Up.”
ASTOR THEATRE BUILDING
1531 Broadway
New York City
July II, 1928.
Dear Air. Harrison:
Producer-owned circuits declared that they would
not show “Dawn."
When I read your review in HARRISON’S RE-
PORTS, that was enough for me. I booked it for my
Alayfair, at Asbury Park, and am pleased to inform
you that 1 played to the largest business I have ever
had in that theatre, during the hottest week we’ve had
this season. As a result I booked it for my entire cir-
cuit, to play it extra days in each place.
Times are hard and we exhibitors cannot afford to
overlook a good bet. So I thought of telling you about
it so that you might pass the good news to other
exhibitors.
With appreciation for the splendid work you are
doing, I am,
Yours very truly,
Walter Reid.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. :Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, JULY 28, 1928
No. 30
GIVE UNTIL IT HURTS!
The necessity of using all the editorial space in the
last two months for the purpose of giving you the facts
about the 1928-29 two-dollar ••flops” and about the
1927-28 substitutions as well as whatever data 1 could
gather about talking pictures made it impossible for me
to say something about an injunction Hon. Thomas U.
Garnahan, of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny
County (Pittsburgh), Pennsylvania, granted to an ex-
hibitor, enjoining the exchanges from using against him
that blackjack called "additional securities,” which Mr.
Will H. Hays has been kind enough to install in this
industry at the time he first entered it. A controversy
arose between an exhibitor, member of the Pittsburgh
exhibitors’ organization, and United Artists, as a result
of which he was summoned to appear before the board
of arbitration, and, when he refused to do so, all the
members of the him board of trade sent him a letter
demanding the penalty prescribed in the arbitration
rules. The exhibitor applied for a temporary injunc-
tion, and after the case was heard on June 1, the court
continued the injunction until the case is tried in the
courts.
The language the court used in granting that injunc-
tion created a sensation. “There are some things in
these contracts,” J udge Garnahan said, “that do not
seem to me to be right. . . . The contracts look to me to
be very one-sided contracts. The contracts are said to
have been made by the representatives of the exhibitors
as well as of the distributors, but the contracts them-
selves are all in the interest of the distributor and the
exhibitor does not seem to have very much to say about
them. Pie has nothing to do personally with the making
of his own contract, not a word. He can’t say whether
he will or he will not; these contracts are submitted to
him and the business is controlled by an organization
and he is told, ‘You can sign this contract or refuse to
sign it, just as you please.’ Now, that is exactly the sit-
uation, but if he does not sign it, he does not do any
business, and if he does sign it, he will agree to what is
in the contract, and almost every provision in that con-
tract js in favor of the distributor, so far as I can under-
stand.
“So far as arbitration is concerned, there is a provi-
sion about arbitration, but what has the exhibitor to do
with that? He does not have any choice in the selection
of the arbitrators at all. The arbitration arrangement or
agreement or clause is made by a representative of the
exhibitors and distributors and they get together — the
national organization provides for that, the national or-
ganizations of each — and they arrange these clauses in
the contracts. Those provisions in the contract, every
one of them, is for the protection of the distributor, as
far as I can see. There is a provision that three ex-
hibitors may sit on the arbitration board and three of the
distributors and the three distributors are taken right
from the very people who compose that board, there
are 14 of them; and the other three are taken from a
large organization, and the exhibitor has nothing to say
about it at all; he cannot open his mouth about it and he
has got to accept their decision or accept none . .
* * *
It is hardly necessary for me to elaborate on the lan-
guage Judge Garnahan used except to say that his
Honor is unaware of the fact that the national organization,
which is supposed to represent the interests of the ex-
hibitors and to protect them whenever they are threat-
ened, is in the hands of Mr. Hays; by political manipu-
lation, he has been able to put it into his pocket. There
has been not a single contract committee meeting but
has been under the influence of Will H. Hays, in the
beginning, he used to invite the members of the ex-
hibitor conmiittee to some high-class club (the Union
Club, in preference), and there feed them, give them
his benediction, and then send them home happy in the
thought that they associated with a former cabinet
minister and touched the edge of his mantle. When this
“gag” wore off, he abandoned it for a cleverer one; he
has been sending his political manipulator, C. C. Petti-
john, to the exhibitor conventions to talk to the boys
and to make them think the Hays way. At the Trade
Practice Conference his manipulator went so far as to
send to the delegates wires urging them to register at a
particular hotel. And some of them did, and were no
doubt propagandaed to death. Any wonder, then, that
a conscientious judge like Hon. Thomas D. Garnahan
found the contract one-sided, all for the distributor and
nothing for the exhibitor? Any surprise that the new
contract is worse than the contract that has just been
discarded? And so long as there are exhibitors that are
willing to “ride along” with Mr. Hays, the contract will
be what it now is — a one-sided affair.
* * *
This is not, however, what I started to tell you: The
Pittsburgh exhibitors, whose organization has always
stood for the protection of the interests of the inde-
pendent exhibitors one hundred per cent, has decided to
go after the film club of Pittsburgh because of this case.
They intend to prosecute the case to the limit and will
not rest until they have accomplished their object. I
know almost every one of the exhibitors in that zone;
know their spirit, and the fighters that they are, and I
am not in any doubt as to the outcome. And they have
as their standard bearer in this fight a brilliant lawyer,
Mr. O. K. Eaton. I have had a talk with Mr. Eaton and
I can tell you that he has espoused the cause of the ex-
hibitor as no other man has ever espoused it. He wants
to see this thing through. And I know that he will.
But it takes money to a fight a case in the courts and
to take it to a higher court if necessary ; not for the law-
yer’s fees but for other expenses. What Mr. Eaton may
get out of this case will be but an infinitestimal part of
what he deserves. But to gather the necessary data and
documents requires the expenditure of a respectable
sum of money. And the treasury of the Pittsburgh or-
ganization is not in a position to bear all the burden.
Individual contributions have been made to it, but more
is needed. So you have to come to the rescue. It is the
chance of your lifetime to put an end to this unlawful
combination that has been opressing you for years.
There has never been a time when your chance to win was
as bright as it is now. Give until it hurts. I start the con-
tribution campaign with $50 of my own, taken from
my meagre savings. And if more is needed later on, I
promise to give more. Give, then, until it hurts. Make
your check payable to Mr. Alec Moore, Treasurer. Mr.
Moore is the chairman of the committee for the defense
of the exhibitors’ constitutional right. Messrs. John M.
Alderdice, Nathan Friedberg and Fred J. Herrington are
the other members of the committee. Address Mr. Moore
in care of M. P. T. O. of W. Pa., Hotel Henry, Pitts-
burgh, Pa.
Give! Give until it hurts! Let us once for ever put
an end to lawlessness!
P. S. HARRISON.
118
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Prowlers of the Sea” — with Carmel
Myers and Ricardo Cortez
( Tigany-Stahl — July 20; 5,160 ft.; 60 to 73 min. )
Just a fair picture; it is a conventional story directed
and acted according to pattern. The story revolves around
the days before the Spanish-American War when Cuban
spies were smuggling guns and the troops were more or
less demoralized by bribery and liquor. The young captain
(hero) put in charge of the coast guards is tricked by the
beautiful sister of a gun smuggler into relaxing his vigil-
ance long enough to allow the guns to be landed. But
because she had fallen in love with the hero, she saves his
life by offering hers instead. There are a few dramatic
scenes such as the luring away of the guards by the pretty
dance hall girls and the landing by stealth of the cargo;
also the discovery by the captain's aide of the situation and
his summoning of the remaining troops to capture the
rebels. The love story between hero and heroine is inter-
esting in that the girl was forced to carry out her part of
the bargain after she had become so fond of the hero.
Miss Myers as the seductive vamp is very good. Mr.
Cortez is a likable hero. George Fawcett as the grug but
kindhearted General is good. Others in the cast are Gino
Corrado, Frank Leigh and Frank Lackteen. The story
was suggested by Jack London’s “The Lancashire Queen’’
and was directed by John G. Adolphi from a scenario by
John Francis Natteford.
“Into No Man’s Land” — with Tom Santschi
and Betty Blythe
( Excellent-Regional — June 15; 6,536 ft.; 76 to 93 min.)
A weak story with the action slow and long drawn out
makes this just a fair program picture. It is a crook-
melodrama with a war background. The story revolves
around a gentleman crook, leader of a notorious gang, who
is also a millionaire, posing to his daughter and his friends
as a man of the social world. His daughter is in love with
the district attorney, who suspects who he is. The opening
scenes in the jewelry story where the gang commits a
daring daylight robbery is thrilling and leads the spectator
to expect more action. But the scenes unfolding the love
story between the district attorney and the heroine are
dull and the action does not liven up until a member of
the gang is slain by the leader. The scenes in his office
where he decides to give up his profession for the sake of
his daughter, which lead to the quarrel between the men,
are fairly tense, as is the scene where the murdered man’s
“moll” tells the district attorney who had committed the
murder. Some sympathy is aroused for him when he en-
lists in the Canadian forces so that his daughter might not
discover the kind of man he was ; also when he and the
district attroney, who had later enlisted in the American
army, were both wounded and he permitted the district
attorney to be rescued. Again, when disguised, he returns
to his daughter’s home, after he was thought dead, because
he had removed the identification tag from a dead sol-
dier’s arm and put his own on, he arouses some sympathy
because of his self-sacrifice by which he prevented his
daughter from further heartbreak, even though his son-in-
law recognized him.
The picture is based on Elsie Werner’s and Bennett
Southard’s story, “You’re in the Army Now,” from a
scenario by Elsie Werner ; it was directed by Cliff Wheeler.
Tom Santschi in the double role of society millionaire and
crook and later the homeless wanderer is quite good.
Betty Blythe in her small role of the “moll” is good, too.
Jack Daugherty is a pleasing district attorney and lover.
Syd Crossley contributed the very little comedy which
takes place in the trenches. Josephine Norman is the
heroine.
“Gang War” — with Olive Borden, Jack
Pickford, Eddie Gribbon and
Walter Long
(F B 0, Nov. 18 ; footage not available now)
This is a powerful underworld melodrama, with tense
suspense and strong thrills. It is what the title implies, a
war between two gangs of bootlegger-crooks, in which
machine guns are used by the one gang against the other,
and in which the ground is strewn with dead bodies after
the shootings. In one situation, the havoc created by the
machine gun, fired from an automobile, is the worst seen
July 28, 1928
in pictures. Though a strong underworld play, no bad
taste is left, for the reason that a good love story is shown
between a young man and a young girl (hero and heroine),
not crooks, and a crook is shown sacrificing his life for the
love of the girl by deliberately entering the lair of the
opposite gang and being killed, this sacrifice being done
by him in order to square himself with the heroine, whom
he had forced to marry him. This part has been given to
Eddie Gribbon. The part of the leader of the other gang
has been given to Mr. Long. Both do well in their respec-
tive parts. Miss Borden makes a good heroine, and Jack
Pickford a good hero. In the scenes where the young hero
is shown tortured by the one gang, who sought to force
him to say where the leader of the other gang had gone,
he awakens the spectator’s warm sympathy by his refusal
to “squeal.” It is, in fact, this behavior of the hero’s that
is supposed to have made the husband of the heroine,
leader of one of the gangs, rush into the other gang’s
quarters and put himself in the path of their bullets ; the
young hero had shown him what it meant to love.
In the development of the story hero and heroine are
shown as having found happiness in their marriage.
The plot has been founded on a story by James A. Creel-
man. The direction is by Bert Glennon; it is good. The
acting by all the principals is good.
“Just Married” — with a Special Cast
( Paramount , July 14; 75 to 93 min.)
A corking good farce-comedy of the bed-room sort. It
is old material, well enough, but it has been handled in
such a way as to make it refreshing. Most of the action
unfolds on board a ship, and takes place in two staterooms,
similarity of names furnishing the cause for the complica-
tions and misunderstandings between married persons and
between two single persons (hero and heroine ) that are
forced to pass as married so as to avoid scandal.
The scenes that show James Hall (hero) just waking
up from bed and finding himself in a stateroom where in
the other bed there was a woman (heroine) sleeping, will
give cause for many laughs. There are, in fact, laughs
all the way through, some of them being of the side-
splitting variety. William Austin is at his best. He is a
very good comedian even ordinarily. Arthur Hoyt con-
tributes his share of the comedy, james Hall is good as
the hero, and Ruth Taylor, as the heroine. Harrison
Ford, as the hero’s friend; Ivy Harris, as his wife; Lila
Lee, as the dress model in the Parisian Shop, who had
been jilted by William Austin in preference for Ruth
Taylor — all do very good work. Wade Boteler, Mario
Carillo, and Maude Turner Gordon are in the cast.
“Green Grass Widows” — with Johnny
Harron, Gertrude Olmstead and
Walter Hagen
( I'iffany-Stahl , June 10; 5,334 ft.; 62 to 76 min.)
The value of this picture lies almost solely in the fact
that Walter Hagen, the famous golf star, is in the cast ;
for the story is inconsequential. It d.eals with a young
college boy, who received from his father a telegram in-
forming him that he had become bankrupt, but that he, in
conformity with his dead wife’s wishes, would try to find
money to keep him in college. The hero, having regard
for his father, decides to give up college. But his room-
mate suggests that he enter the golf tournament to win
the prize. This would pay his tuition fee if he should win.
They scrape up the entry fee, but they are shocked when
they hear that Walter Hagen was to be a competitor ;
they are sure that he (the hero) would lose. But in the
course of a game Walter Hagen learns how much the
winning of the tournament would mean to the hero and
to the girl whom he loved and whom he wanted to marry
that he purposely makes some bad playing, and gives the
hero a chance to win the game. There is a mild laugh
here and there but the interest is centered chiefly on Mr.
Hagen and on golf playing. Picture-goers that are golf
enthusiasts or enjoy watching a golf game will, no doubt,
find satisfaction in this picture; those that do not, will un-
doubtedly be bored with it.
The plot has been founded on a story by Wellyn Totman.
The direction is by A1 Raboch. Hedda Hopper, Ray
Hallor, Lincoln Stedman and John St. Polis are in the
supporting cast. _ __
119
HARRISON’S REPORTS
July 28, 1928
“United States Smith” — with Eddie
Gribbon and Lila Lee
( Gotham , June 1 ; 6,600 ft.; 77 to 93 min.)
A good comedy drama. It is full of action and not a
little pathos with an interesting love story between two
rivals for the same girl, one the Sergeant in the Marines
who is the champion prize fighter and the other a Corporal
in the Army, also the champion prize fighter of his
branch. The hardboiled Sergeant rescues an orphan wait
from his companions and after giving him the name of
United States Smith, he has him made mascot of the bar-
racks. Because he wanted to give the little fellow a good
education he accepts the bribe to throw the fight for $5,000.
But the boy, overhearing the conversation when the men
came to pay him the money, rushes to the ringside and
persuades his hero to save the honor of the Corps. The
sub-titles as well as the situations cause the laughs. The
situation where the Sergeant spreads glue on the biscuit
which was to go to the Corporal, but which he got him-
self, is a particularly funny one. The champion fight
is realistically fought and although the Marine won, the
Corporal won the girl. Eddie Gribbon as the roughneck
but very tenderhearted Marine is very good indeed. Micky
Bennett as United States Smith does very well. Lila Lee
is a charming heroine and Kenneth Harlan is pleasing as
the fighting Corporal. It is a good program picture for
any house. The picture was directed by Joseph Henabery
from the story by Gerald Beaumont.
“Forbidden Hours” — with Ramon Novarro
( M etro-Goldwyn, June 16, 4,987 ft.; 58 to 71 min.)
This is not a bad picture. The trouble with it, how-
ever, is the fact that it does not offer anything new. It
is a fictitious kingdom story in which a young monarch
falls in love with a commoner and, despite the “reasons
of state” insists upon marrying her, abdicating his
throne rather than give up his love. The story closes
with the people’s recalling the king along with the girl.
The acting by Ramon Novarro is not bad. In fact, in
one particular situation it is the best he has ever done.
It is in the carriage, after he had, what he thought, dis-
covered the heroine with his cousin in a room in a com-
promising situation; his love for her was so strong that,
despite his doubts about her fidelity, he returns to her.
His mopping of his forehead and the restlessness he
betrayed; his heart-broken appearance, are done per-
fectly. But the story is weak just the same. The scenes
in the room where the hero had lured the heroine are
very passionate. It is plainly evident that the hero had
been conquered by his sexual desires, and immediately
after sexual thoughts entered his head he relented and
begged the forgiveness of the heroine. The effect of
such scenes is to kindle the sexual desires of the warm-
blooded spectators, but they do not make the picture a
better drama. It would have been just as good, and per-
haps better, without such a twist.
The plot has been founded on an original story by
A. P. Younger. The direction is by Harry Beaumont.
Renee Adoree is the heroine, and Roy D’Arcy the
villain.
Note: This picture was sold merely as a Novarro
production, release No. 730. No story or even author
was given. Therefore you have to accept it as not being
a substitute. But if it was produced within the life of
your contract or prior to your signing the contract and
Metro-Goldwyn failed either to assign play-dates or to
summon you before the arbitration board, demanding
that you play and pay, or pay for it, you are not obli-
gated to accept it. On the other hand, if it was pro-
duced after the life of your contract expired, you are
compelled to accept it, unless, of course, you took ad-
vantage of the provision in the last three lines of the
second paragraph in the 18th clause. This provision
specifies that, in case there is a three-month delay in the
production of a picture, either party has the right to
cancel by giving a written notice to the other party
within ten days immediately following the three-month
delay. Because of the fact that un-made pictures are
not, as a rule, dated, one is naturally forced to compute
the three-month delay starting from the last day of
the one-year life of. the contract. The life of the con-
tract begins on the first play-date contained in the second
clause, and ends twelve months afterwards. In the ab-
sence of a play-date in that clause, such play-date is set
in accordance with the provisions in clause nine. In
such an event, the three-month delay must be com-
puted twelve months after the play-date set in accor-
dance with this clause’s provisions. In other words,
if the picture was play-dated in accordance with Clause
9 and set as of, say, May 15, 1927, the life of that con-
tract lasts until May 15, 1928. If the picture was de-
layed in the making until August 15, 1928, then either
party has the right to cancel it by giving a written
notice of cancellation to the other between August 15
and 25, but not later than August 25. The next ques-
tion is for you to find out when “Forbidden Hours’’ was
produced. This you can do by demanding of the arbi-
tration board to subpoena the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
production records. Remember that an arbitration
board has the right, by law, to subpoena any records
pertaining to a case before it.
“Hot News” — with Bebe Daniels
( Paramount , July 14; 6,528 ft.; 75 to 93 min.)
A scream! It is, in fact, as good a comedy as Bebe
Daniels has ever produced. Of course, without the good
acting of the popular Miss Daniels and the skillful direc-
tion by Clarence Badger the picture would not have
been as effective a comedy medium. Miss Daniels
causes laughs all the way through the picture by the
way she outwits another news-reel camera man (hero),
who was always boasting that he was the most wide-
awake news-reel cameraman on two feet. The scenes
where the heroine lures the hero into her car, the hero’s
car having been wrecked, and throws his film away so
that when he reaches the scene of the disaster of a
Japanese ship finds himself without film when he wants
to take pictures, are laugh-provoking. The scenes later
on where the hero’s assistant brings him a lone can of
film, more comedy is provoked; the hero used that
precious film to photograph what he thought a real
rescue. You can imagine how the audience laughs when
it sees the hero discovering to his amazement that the
rescued person was none other than the heroine herself,
who had “beaten” him to it by entering the stranded ship
and taking pictures. The closing scenes are thrilling.
They show the hero and heroine abducted by the villain
so that they might not give him away for the robbery he
had committed; he had stolen a precious jewel from a
Maharajah, visiting this country, whom he had beaten
on the head with a cane and made unconscious. The
heroine had seen the crime; in fact, she had photo-
graphed it. The villain had carried the unexposed nega-
tive with him, but the right negative had already been
taken away by the heroine’s assistant and an unexposed
negative had been put in its place by him. By aid of
the pictures the heroine had taken, the criminal's identity
becomes known; and through the wireless directions
the hero had sent fro mthe villain’s boat, in which he
and the heroine were prisoners, a U. S. ship rushes to
their rescue.
The story was written by Harlan Thompson and
Monte Brice. Neil Hamilton is the hero. Paul Lucas,
Alfred Allen, “Spec” O’Donnell and others are in the
cast.
CHESTER B. BAHN’S EAGLE EYE
Mr. Chester B. Bahn, motion picture and dramatic
critic of the Syracuse Herald, Syracuse, N. Y., seems to
possess an eagle eye for detecting advertising in motion
pictures. In the issue of last Sunday, after condemning
the unnewspaper way by which Warner Bros, intro-
duced the newspaper story in “The Lion and the
Mouse,” he says :
“Incidentally, I wonder how much Western Union
paid for that ‘Lion and the Mouse’ talking sequence in
which Lionel Barrymore demonstrates how to send a
telegram over the W. U. wire system
“Will Warner Brothers volunteer the information?
Personally I think the advertising would have been
cheap at $25,000.”
120
HARRISON’S REPORTS
July 28, 1928
THE “SOUND” PROVISION IN THE
NEW CONTRACT
Many exhibitors that signed contracts early have re-
ceived a request from the distributors to sign a Rider
containing the following provision:
“No license of sound records or right to use sound in
connection with any of the photoplays hereby licensed
in contract number , approved 1928,
is granted thereunder. If any of the film furnished by
the distributor contains such records no right to repro-
duce sound therefrom is granted hereunder. All rights
are reserved by the distributor and will be granted only
by further separate written license.”
The same provision, slightly modified (the number of
the contract and the date on which it was signed are
omitted for the reason that such data are contained in
the body of the contract) is stamped on all contracts now.
Some exhibitors take the first line of this provision to
mean that they have no right to use any kind of sound
in connection with a picture, where the provision is
stamped on the contract, even if they use such sound
independently of the film itself.
While that line may be given such an interpretation, I
don’t believe that the producer-distributors meant to
have it so interpreted. Yet, no one is sure in this busi-
ness; some of these days a producer may get it into his
head to prevent an exhibitor from using a Victor phono-
graph as a substitute talking machine while his (the
producer’s) film is shown on the screen. So the best
thing for you to do is to ask the distributor to define
more clearly this provision.
In connection with this provision, let me say that the
exhibitor has no right to use the synchonization of a
particular picture, unless he has contracted for the
rights. But I have been informed that some exhibitors
have closed contracts solely on the promise of the sales-
men that half of the pictures he buys will be syn-
chronized. Inasmuch as the contract specifies that verbal
promises are not taken into consideration, he will find it
difficult to establish his claim to the sound rights.
The best way for exhibitors to protect themselves, in
case they want the sound rights along with the film, is
for them to make the salesman write it in the contract.
Then there can be no misunderstanding.
Let us say this, however: Those that have signed an
application for a contract early in the season and have
received their copy and have it in their possession, are
not obligated to sign any Rider. They can sign it if they
want to, but they cannot be forced to sign it, even
though they do not intend to install a talking machine.
THE ANACORTES CASE
I ant sure you remember that case in Seattle, where
Warner Bros., by presenting to the arbitration board
new evidence in their case against Waldo Ives, of
Anacortes, succeeded in inducing the board to reopen
the case it had decided against them and in favor of
Mr. Ives. The second case resulted against Mr. Ives.
No doubt you remember also that Mr. Ives, helped by
Mr. Hone, the secretary of the exhibitors’ organiza-
tion, went to the courts with it. Mr. Hone now in-
forms me that the Judge has decided against Warner
Bros. In other words, the court declared that the
arbitration board had no right to reopen the case on
the ground of new evidence.
THE SYNCHRONIZED “WARMING UP”
“Warming up,” the first Paramount picture to be syn-
chronized this year, is drawing big crowds at the Para-
mount Theatre, this city. All records, for attendance
have, in fact, been broken.
Lest any one think it is the quality of the synchroniza-
tion that is doing the business let me state certain facts
to you: In the last two weeks the weather in this city
has been very warm. The discomfort is the greater be-
cause of the heavy humidity. People seek places where
they can feel comfortable. And the Paramount, being
artifically cooled, offers a refuge from such discomfort
That is why great crowds are thronging into the theatre.
Another reason is the fact that Paramount-Famous
Lasky has announced to the public that this is their first
synchronized picture. And there are six million in-
habitants in this city, and several more millions within
a radius of fifty miles, and five hundred thousand people
enter the city daily. Besides, Richard Dix is a popular
star. So it’s no wonder that the picture is drawing.
In bringing this matter to your attention again, I
think that I ani rendering a great service not only to you
but also to Paramount; for they are all “hopped” up
and may continue synchronizing their pictures that way,
to the detriment of their own business as well as of the
business of every one of their customers. Let them not
remain under the illusion that because their first syn-
chronized picture is drawing they have synchronized it
successfully. The public does not know what they are
going to see when they go in.
1 have no criticism to make of the picture itself;
though not as good as some of the other Richard Dix
productions, it is, nevertheless, a good entertainment.
Without the “talk,” it ought to give pretty good satis-
faction. But let us have no more so-called synchroniza-
tions of this kind ; they cannot “rule the sound waves.”
RUNNING TO COVER!
Since I made the suggestion to you to take all sub-
stitution complaints to the post office authorities, the
exchanges have changed the tone of their letters to ex-
hibitors. Prior to my making that suggestion, they
used to send letters insisting that the pictures under
dispute were not substitutes, and demanded immediate
play-dates, threatening arbitration proceedings. But now,
they no longer make threatening statements. Here is
a specimen of a letter from an exchangeman to an
exhibitor:
“Replying to your letter of July 13th, with reference
to pictures ,, we cannot understand why
you are cancelling these pictures. If you refer to your
copy of the contract it is clear enough to see that you did
not buy anything else but the above. In the event that
you could cancel these pictures we could not understand
why you should want to get out of playing this class
of productions.”
Well, I might just as w'ell enlighten all exchangemen
who, like this exchangeman, do not quite understand
why the exhibitors, like this exhibitor, refuse to play
substitute pictures, even though they may be good pic-
tures. This is a right that has been guaranteed to the in-
dividual by the law's of this land, which law's specif}'
that no one can force another person to accept some-
thing he did not contract for. It makes no difference
that the picture is good ; their rights are in no wdse af-
fected by this fact. They bought a striped suit, and a striped
suit they want, even though a plain suit may be of bet-
ter material, and may fit the buyers better. That is
not for the sellers to determine : it is the buyers’ right.
No doubt some of the substiution cases will reach the
arbitration boards. If so, and if the awrards are ren-
dered against you because of your failure to appear,
don’t forget that your rights to enter a complaint with
the post office authorities and with the Department of
Justice are in no wise affected.
This paper desires to wTarn the exhibitor arbitrators
not to attempt to hear cases in which clear substitutions
are involved. If they do, and they decide against the
exhibitor, they may have a hard time explaining their
action to the post office authorities or to the Department
of Justice in case any one attempted to enforce the award.
Don’t be a party to a fraud 1
WHERE ARE THE BIG BUSINESS
“PULLERS?”
I was at the Capitol Theatre last Sunday afternoon,
going in at 1 :30 and coming out at 3:30.
The bill consisted of the usual acts with the Jazz
Orchestra. The picture on the bill was “Telling the
World,” with William Haines, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.
There were fewer than four hundred persons in the
orchestra. The house seats over five thousand.
What is the moral of this? When the Metro-Gold-
wyn-Mayer salesman comes around with his high-
pressure sales talk to convince you that Metro-Gold-
wyn-Mayer pictures draw customers from the sky,
ask him to tell you why don’t they drawr such customers
for the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Loew houses?
I have included also the Loew' houses because I
noticed a screen announcement at the Locw’s American
to the effect that the price for the Saturday matinees
at Loew’s New York Theatre has beat lowered to 25c.
from 40c. that it w'as. A clear admission that their pic-
tures and the pictures of the other producers are im-
potent to overcome the bad business depression that
now prevails.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the aot of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, AUGUST 4, 1928
No. 31
WHEN IS A CONTRACT OUTLAWED?
It seems as if it is not yet clear in the minds of all
exhibitors when a contract becomes outlawed by its own
terms. The result of this is that the exchangemen, who
are thoroughly instructed on diis subject, are able to get
the best ot them. The Hays organization sees to it that
the members of the film boards of trade get an interpre-
tation of any clause that might sound ambiguous to them.
In this way the exchangemen arbitrators appear at the
meetings of the arbitration boards thoroughly equipped.
On the other hand the exhibitor arbitrators, who have no
one to advise them on such matters, must rely on their own
interpretative powers. They thus appear at the arbitra-
tion meetings under a disadvantage.
The circumstances under which contracts become out-
lawed were clearly put to the exhibitors in the articles,
"Arbitration and Your Rights Under It,” which were
printed in these columns about two years ago. Yet lately
1 have received so many inquiries on the subject that a
restatement might not be out of place. I have been
prompted to treat of the subject again particularly be-
cause of a case in Utah, in which the exhibitor's rights
were clear ; but in the trial of the case, the board was dead-
locked just the same.
This exhibitor signed a contract with Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer on January 4, 1926.
Because a year had elapsed and the exchange neither
assigned play -dates nor brought him before the board, the
exhibitor refused to play the remaining pictures, claiming
that the contract was outlawed because of latches.
Naturally the Metro-Goldwyn- Mayer exchange brought
the exhibitor before the board, demanding performance of
the contract.
The exhibitor and the exchange were each represented
by counsel.
The exhibitor argued through counsel that, because of
the agreement between the representatives of the exhibi-
tors and of the producers in May, 1926, to consider a con-
tract outlawed one year after a breach, his contract was
outlawed. The Metro-Goldwyn attorney contended that
the agreement in question does not apply to this case,
because it was made after the exhibitor had signed his
contract. He presented a letter from Mr. Gabriel Hess,
attorney for the Hays organization, sustaining this point.
This attorney contended also that, where there has been
a voluntary agreement to submit a dispute to arbitration,
the exhibitor-Havs agreement does not apply.
Let us for the present not smile at the contention of the
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer attorney that there was a “volun-
tary agreement” or that there ever is a voluntary arbitra-
tion agreement between unaffiliated exhibitors and dis-
tributors and remain serious so as not to divert our at-
tention from the substance of the question :
Contracts for one picture without any play-date are
outlawed one year from the day they were signed. In
other words, a contract signed on July I, 1927, for one
picture without any play-date became outlawed on July
1, 1928. This position is sustained by almost every zone
in the country. I have letters to that effect from the sec-
retaries or presidents of at least ten zones — Philadelphia
(where a contract that lay dormant for one year will not
be even arbitrated, according to Mr. George Aarons, sec-
retary of M. P. T. O. of Eastern Pennsylvania, Southern
New Jersey and Delaware), Michigan, Texas, Minne-
sota, Oklahoma, Connecticut. Western Pennsylvania, In-
dianapolis, New York, and Cleveland.
A contract for a group of pictures becomes outlawed
one year after the play-date specified in Clause 2. In
ca$e there is. no play-date anywhere on the contract, then
it becomes outlawed one year after the first play-dated or
exhibited picture, under the following further conditions,
the result of precedent : If the exchange assigns play-
dates to die exhibitor, but fails to take him before the
arbitration board, then the contract becomes outlawed
one year after the first play-date so assigned. If the ex-
change fails to assign play-dates or to summon the ex-
hibitor before the board, then it becomes outlawed one
year after the first picture was play-dated or exhibited.
(The distinction "play-dated or exhibited” is made because
a picture may be piay-dated on, sav, July 15, and not
played until July 30; or it may be played prior to the
play-date set. In such an event, the life of the contract
starts on the play-date, if the exhibition takes place after-
wards, or on the exhibition date, if the exhibition takes
place prior to the play-date.)
This opinion, which is sustained by New York and by
all uninfluenced exhibitor bodies in the United States,
holds true where all pictures contained in the contract
were made during or prior to the life of the contract.
In case one picture, or more pictures, were made after
the contract expired, then, if the contract is of the Uniform
Contract form, the kind that was in effect prior to May,
1926, the distributor must deliver the unmade pictures, no
matter when he makes them, and the exhibitor must accept
them, whenever delivered. But if it is of the unreformed
Standard Exhibition Contract form, the form that has just
been discarded, then either party may cancel the contract
for the unmade pictures by giving to the other party a
written notice of cancellation within ten days after the delay
in production reached three months. How shall such delay
be computed has been explained in the foot-note in the
review “Forbidden Hours,” which was printed last week.
According to this opinion, the contract of the Utah
exhibitor discussed in this editorial was outlawed one year
after the first picture was play-dated or exhibited.
Notice that according to my informant, Mr. Gabriel
Hess, of the Hays organization, stated that the arbitra-
tion rules in effect at the time the contract was signed
must govern a dispute arising out of such a contract, and
not the rules in effect at the time the case is tried. Such
an opinion is, indeed, peculiar : Arbitration rules are
changed only because they are found in practice inequit-
able. If, then, we should accept Mr. Hess’ opinion as
correct, we accept that arbitration is not the settling of
disputes amicably under fair and equitable rules. This
naturally is contrary to logic, common sense and even to
law, even though I am not a lawyer and Hess is, and a
great one.
If arbitration is to be what the term implies, then the
arbitration rules in effect at the time a case is tried must
govern the case.
But here is one question that this paper will ask : Who
has given the right to Mr. Hess to instruct arbitrators?
About two years ago Mr. A1 Steffes, President of M. P.
T. O. of the Northwest, informed Mr. Hays that, as a
result of interference with the arbitration boards on the
part of the Hays organization, his organization withdrew
from arbitration. Mr. Steffes accused Mr. Hays of the
fact that his organization, by communications addressed to
the secretaries and to members of the Film Board of Trade,
instructed them how to act, how to decide and how to
vote; what they could do and what they could not do in
the consideration of cases before them. “With three
members of each board paid employes of a few closely
knit distributing companies whose problems are identical,”
Steffes wrote in part, “you will readily understand that
it is very difficult even under the best of conditions for
them to give an unbiased decision. Such a decision be-
( Continued on last page)
122
“Loves of an Actress” — with Pola Negri
( Paramount , Aug. n; 7,159 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
If your patrons have retained their admiration
for Pola Negri, they should enjoy “The Loves of
an Actress,” which seems to be an attempt to pre-
sent Miss Negri in a role that made her famous in
America ; she takes a similar part to that she took in
“Passion,” released by First National several years
ago. As in “Passion,” so in “Loves of an Actress”
— she is a beautiful woman with many lovers. But
she does not love any of them ; only she allows them
to spend their money on her. This goes on, of
course, until she meets a young man (Nils Asther),
and falls madly in love with him.
The picture is a tragedy, in that the heroine kills
herself rather than give the hero up, and rather
than disgrace him by living and not giving him up.
The young hero had been appointed as an attache
to the French Embassy, in St. Petersburg, Russia.
But one of her lovers, whom she had given up, but
who loved her deeply just the same, threatened to
publish her letters to him and thus bring disgrace
upon the young hero if she had dared marry him.
At first the heroine dared him to publish the letters,
but after careful reflection she realized what it
would mean to the hero and agrees to give him up.
When the hero calls on her, she pretends that she
does not love him and that she loves the man in
whose arms she had been found by the hero. The
hero leaves heart-broken. The heroine takes poison
during the performance in which she is supposed to
take poison and to die. She gives one of the best
performances in her career, hue dies afterwards.
There are several pathetic situations in the pic-
ture. That of her death after the act is the most
pathetic of them all. The picture has been pro-
duced lavishly. Miss Negri does as good a bit of
acting as she has ever done. The story has been
written by Ernest Vadja. It is of an early period
and unfolds in Paris, France. It has been directed
well by Rowland V. Lee.
Picture-goers that love tragedy should enjoy
this picture particularly well.
Note: It is synchronized, with the disc (Vita-
phone) method. The characters are not made to
talk ; music is the only thing used. In some situa-
tions singing is given. The results are good.
“Road House” — with Maria Alba and
Lionel Barrymore
(Fox, July 22] 4,991 ft.; 58 to 71 min.)
As an entertainment, it is mediocre. As a con-
veyor of a moral, it is poor. It is a picture of the
program magnitude, and treats of the hypocrisy of
some people, who in the light pose as moralist, but
in the dark play poker and drink. In this instance
the father is shown giving his son a freedom be-
yond what was good for him. As a result, the boy
gets mixed up with a gang of thieves. He falls in
love with a girl, confederate of the gang. His in-
fatuation for the girl is so great that when his father
remonstrates, he leave home in anger ; and when
his girl upbraids him for being a coward, he steals
several articles from his father’s store just to please
her. He eventually takes part in a hold-up, in
which one of the confederates shoots and kills the
owner of the cabaret. The hold-up took place in
the cabaret, at a time when his own father was
August 4, 1928
playing poker with some friends, of the same cali-
ber. The father happens to see his son immediately
after the murder, and when the boy jumps through
the window, he jumps, too, overtakes him, takes
him in his car, and leads him to the police station,
there making him tell to the authorities all he knew
about the murder. At the trial, the boy is found
guilty of manslaughter, but the judge suspends sen-
tence and castigates the parents for being the really
guilty parties. The boy learned his lesson.
The story is by Philip Hurn. It was directed by
Richard Rosson.
“Undressed” — with Bryant Washburn
( Sterling-Regional , July 15; 5,309 ft.; 61 to 75 min.)
Just fair! It is a society drama with the usual
scenes of stinginess in a wealthy family because the
father refuses to give his wife and daughter allow-
ances. As a result, they have to obtain money by
various means. His daughter (heroine) in order
to pay a gambling debt, poses for the villain, an
artist, who is engaged to her cousin, and because
she will not fall in love with him, he changes her
portrait to make it appear as if she had posed in the
nude. The mild suspense is caused when the fiancee
of the villain, discovering the heroine coming from
the artist's studio, where she had gone to pay the
money her mother had raised to pay off the debt by
selling her own clothes, in a fit of jealousy, hits him
with a heavy instrument and leaves him dead, as
she supposed, and the various people, her aunt and
uncle and the heroine’s fiance discover the body;
also when the nude portrait is discovered by the
hero, who is ready to give up his sweetheart, when
the villain, who had in the meantime recovered
from the blow, is made to confess his deed by his
own fiancee ; she gives him up.
The hero is a rather youthful looking chap and is
played by Buddy Messinger. David Torrence is
the stingy millionaire and Hedda Hopper is the
wife. Bryant Washburn is the villain and Virginia
Vance is his fiancee. The picture was directed by
Phil Rosen. Nothing naughty but the title; but it
is only of neighborhood calibre.
“Domestic Troubles” — with Louise Fazenda
and Clyde Cook
(Warner Bros., March 24; 5,164 ft.; 60 to 73 min.)
A mediocre program picture. It is supposed to
be a farce comedy, but there is veryr little comedy
in it, and the farce is of inferior grade. Besides, it
is vulgar in several situations, in that it has the
hero's twin brother, a single man, impersonate the
hero, a married man, while the hero is in jail. This
sort of action is shown placing the heroine and the
twin brother in an embarrassing situation when
there is time for them to go to bed. An end is put
to their embarrassment by the eventual release of
the hero from jail and by his return home.
The plot has been founded on a story by Gra-
ham Baker. It has been directed by Ray Enright.
Betty Blythe is the married woman. Louise Fa-
zenda is the vampire.
“Skip” it if you can.
Note: No facts were given in the work sheet
to help one determine whether it is a substitution
or not. In the early contracts, not even the title of
it was given.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
August 4, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
122
“Lost in the Arctic”
(Fox, release date not yet set; 5,474 ft.; 63 to 78 min.)
This is not a drama ; it is a travelogue. It is, in
fact, an expedition sent to the arctic to ascertain the
fate of eight persons, who were separated from the
main expedition, conducted by Vilhjalmur Stefans-
son in 1913. Mr. Stefansson commanded six ships
at that time. One of them, the Karluk, was crushed
in the ice and eight men set out to reach land. But
they disappeared and for ten years they left a doubt
as to their fate. This expedition cleared the mys-
tery bv discovering their remains and other evi-
dence of their fate on Herald Island, which lies
within the arctic zone.
The expedition ship is shown making its start
and the picture shows the hardships the explorers
went through before they reached Herald Island
and found the evidence of the perishing of the lost
explorers. On their way to Herald Island they
are shown passing near an island inhabited by mil-
lions of Cormorants, later another island inhabited
by millions of seals, and still later another island in-
habited by walrus ; it shows them capturing a wal-
rus, and later a polar bear. While the party was on
Herald Island and examining the evidence of the
perishings of the lost explorers, the water is seen
freezing and the ship sounding the danger signal
recalling the party so that they might sail away
before their ship were frozen in the ice.
The picture on the whole is interesting. Some
parts of it are even thrilling. The capture of the
huge walrus, for example, is one such situation.
The chase and capture of a polar bear is another
incident that is thrilling. But the chase and cap-
ture of a huge whale is the most thrilling incident of
them all.
Cultured picture-goers should enjoy ‘‘Lost in the
Arctic." Even the picture-goers of the rank and
file should enjoy such a picture for a change. But
any attempt to show it at increased prices of admis-
sion will undoubtedly result in failure. The picture
is timely on account of the fate of the Nobile Ex-
pedition. This incident could, in fact, be exploited
to good advantage. But in order for exhibitors to
profit by it. the picture must be released immedi-
ately. Delay in the release may prove fatal to the
exhibitors as well as to Fox Film Corporation.
“Skirts” — with Sydney Chaplin
(Metro-Goldwyn (British), May 12; 5,813 ft.; 67 to 83 m.)
This picture is a two-reel slapstick comedy
stretched out to six reels. There is no story to
speak of. it being made up of a series of situations
supposed to be funny. Its story is the thread-bare
plot dealing with a newlywed husband of two weeks
who has the usual mother-in-law trouble. Syd
Chaplin is the newlywed husband and Betty Bal-
four is the chorus girl, who keeps him away from
the mission he is supposed to attend while his wife
and her mother go away for a visit. There are the
usual running in and out of room scenes caused by
the complications of a mistaken identity when the
hero tried to give the necklace, which the chorus
girl had given to him to prevent her prize-fight
lover from getting it back after his mother-in-law
had found it ; he had to give it to his wife, pretend-
ing he had bought it for her. In the cabaret where
he had gone he gets mixed up with the chorus,
climbs balconies, breaks up the party and escapes
into his friend’s apartment. At home his friend
pretends to be a burglar and the prize-fighter, also
disguised as a burglar, attempts to get the necklace.
This causes most of the comedy laughs.
The picture brought a few laughs, but it boasts
of no original ideas. It was directed by Tess Rob-
bins and Wheeler Drydon from the stage play “A
Little Bit of Fluff,’’ by Walter W. Ellis.
Because of Mr. Chaplin it is worth booking.
“Beau Broadway” — with Lew Cody, Sue
Carol, and Aileen Pringle
(Metro-Goldzvyn, rel. in October; 6,037 ft.)
The main idea of this story is the efforts of the
hero, a ladies’ man, to convince his ward, willed
him by his dead friend, that he is a respectable
church-going person, when the girl at the same time
was disappointed because of the fact that he showed
a total lack of romantic disposition. The story ends
with the disclosure that each loved the other, with
the result that they marry.
There isn't much to the story, and the specta-
tor’s interest is aroused only fairly tense. The pic-
ture is supposed to be a comedy-drama, but the
laughs are not very numerous. And these, not of
the strong sort.
The redeeming feature about it is the good act-
ing of Mr. Cody, who takes the part of the hero,
and of Sue Carol, who takes the part of the heroine.
Miss Pringle, too, does good work ; she takes the
part of one of the hero’s women, whom the hero
had to give up because of the heroine, and who
kept after him. In the end she, of course, gives
him up because she realized that he loved the hero-
ine, but not until after she had taught the young
heroine to wear beautiful clothes, making the hero
pay for them along with the beautiful clothes she
had selected for herself.
The plot has been founded on a story by F. Hugh
Herbert. The picture has been directed by Mal-
colm St. Clair.
“Making the Varsity” — with Rex Lease
(Excellent-Regional, July 10; 6,400 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
Just another college story winding up with the
hero winning the football game, which his wild
young brother tried to throw. Rex Lease is pleas-
ing enough as the captain (hero) of the football
team ; he had promised his mother on her deathbed
to look after his young brother, who had a gift for
getting mixed up in all kinds of trouble. The young
brother at least is human, whereas the hero is al-
most toq^good to be human. The young man, hav-
ing flirted with the sister of a gambler, who ran a
tavern, forges his brother’s name to checks in order
to meet his debts. And because he had something
on him, the gambler induces him to throw the game.
The hero learns of this through a fellow-student
who dogged the steps of the young brother and
tried to keep him out of the game. When another
man was needed, the coach put him on and his team
started to lose. To keep the knowledge of his
brother’s treachery from others, the hero kicks his
brother below the belt and knocks him out so that
he is sent to the hospital where he eventually re-
covers. The hero kicks the ball successfully and
saves the day for his team.
There is a love story between the hero and a co-
ed. Arthur Rankin is good as the bad boy. Others
in the cast are Gladys Hulette, Florence Dudley
and Carl Miller. The picture was directed by Cliff
Wheeler from a story by Elsie Werner and Bennett
Southard. It should please audiences that like their
college pictures.
124
HARRISON’S REPORTS
comes impossible when pressure or criticism is brought
to bear upon them from their own ranks. . .
To this stinging criticism, Mr. Hays replied partly as
follows :
“I am thoroughly sympathetic ... to the suggestion
that every one should keep ‘hands off’ of our various
boards of arbitration. No one should ever suggest to any
member of an arbitration board, whether he be an ex-
hibitor or a distributor member, how any case should be
decided or what the arbitration board dr any individual
member should do in any case.
"I note your particular objection has to do with certain
letters which you say emanate from this office. I know,
of course, that you do not mean to suggest that they
come from this office, but rather from the home office of
the Film Boards of Trade, as I am sure you know that no
letters are sent by this office covering any such subject
matters to the Film Boards of Trade, or their secretaries,
or to boards of arbitration. . . .”
The letter tries to make a distinction between the Hays
organization and the Home Office of the Film Boards of
Trade (don't smile), and promises to request his Mr. C.
C. Petti john to instruct the members of the film boards
of trade to vote in accordance with their consciences. And
yet he permits Mr. Hess to send a letter giving instructions
as to how the arbitration rules should be construed, and the
letter is used as an argument in the case. This shows that
Mr. Hays has forgotten his promises, and fails to keep
faith with the exhibitors.
An arbitration board, as constituted, is a law in itself.
The arbitrators are the sole judges of the facts as well as
of the law ; they' are supposed to be guided by equity and
justice, and are to use common sense in judging cases.
Any restrictions, then, imposed on them by outside parties
is unethical and highly' improper.
This paper calls the attention of the Arbitration Asso-
ciation of America to this case and requests that an in-
vestigation be made to ascertain the facts and to take the
necessary measures to prevent a repetition of the scan-
dalous conduct of the Hays organization. HARRISON’S
REPORTS will be glad to give the Association all the
facts it has in its possession.
THE M. P. T. O. A. CONVENTION
IF any one of the HARRISON’S REPORTS sub-
scribers is planning to attend the M. P. T. O. A. Con-
vention at Toronto, Ontario, with the hope that the
national organization this time may do something that
will help the independent exhibitor, let him save his
money. M. P. T. O. A. is now under the complete domi-
nation of Will H. Hay's.
If there were any other point more remote than Canada,
the Hays henchmen would have ordered the convention
held there ; but there is not.
Let exhibitors show that M. P. T. O. A. now hasn't
the least hold on unaffiliated exhibitors by keeping away
from it. It is the only way by which you could protest.
HARRISON’S REPORTS directs this appeal particu-
larly to Canadian exhibitors, who, through worthy senti-
ment, might be inclined to attend that convention.
Let there be not even a single unaffiliated exhibitor
present !
If you really want to help your cause effectively, send
a check to Mr. Alec Moore, in care of M. P. T. O. of
W. Pa., Hotel Henry, Pittsburgh, Pa. Mr. Moore is
the Chairman of a committee appointed to defend the ex-
hibitor of that zone in the famous case in which Mr.
Eaton, the attorney for the exhibitor, has been able to se-
cure an injunction forbidding the exchanges from demand-
ing of the exhibitor “additional securities” until the case is
tried. The demand for such securities, which are the
penalties provided tor by the rules of arbitration, is un-
fair and has been used against you with full force and
effect. Help the Pittsburgh exhibitors establish law and
order in this business. Send your check now.
SOUND PICTURES
The following is a typical letter this paper receives
from exhibitors almost daily :
“I like to ask you a few important questions in refer-
ence to ‘Talking Pictures’ equipment for an exhibitor
in a town of 8,000 population, with a threatre seating
400. The present business averages $300 a week.
“(1) Can a small exhibitor such as I am exist in the
business unless he installs an instrument to play sound
pictures?
August 4, J.928
“(2) Are the sound pictures at present a novelty',
destined to become extinct when the novelty wears out
or are they going to stay with us forever?
“(3) If I have to install any of this equipment, what
is the best outfit to begin with, that would enable an ex-
hibitor to play Fox, Metro-Goldwyn, Paramount, First
National, Universal, and the others, or is there not such
an instrument in the market?
‘‘(4) Do you think the public will attend the theatre
that shows sound pictures more than they did before?
“(5) How much will the sound pictures cost more
than the silent pictures?
"(6) Have you any idea how much they charge for
instruments other than Vitaphone, which is too high for
me? What would a Movietone or other instruments cost
for a small theatre? Is the price standard or whatever
they can skin?
“I was at the Stanley Theatre, in Pittsburgh, and saw
and heard ‘Tenderloin’ and didn’t think the mechanical
music could compare with the sweet organ music. Unless
it is improved, I could just as well play a record on
Yictrola and get better results.”
* * *
The questions asked by this letter will be explained
thoroughly either in next week’s issue or in the issue
after next week. I am gathering the material necessary
for the complete enlightenment of all exhibitors. In the
meantime, if you are contemplating taking a trip to
New York City for the purpose of investigating the
“Talking Picture” field personally, wait until you read
this article ; your coming here will not help you under-
stand the situation any better than will be explained in
that article. You will then be in a position to know
whether a trip is necessary or it will be simply a waste of
money.
“BRUTAL BUSINESS
“One of the large film companies, whose executives
ought to know better, has been dragging a feeble old lion
all over the country to advertise one of its movie pro-
ductions. The aged beast is confined in a cage mounted
on an auto truck which is topped off with a circus cal-
liope.
“The usual stunts consist of showing the lion on street
corners while the calliope bellows to catch the crowds,
hauling the poor beast out of the cage and into the City
Hall to be greeted by the Mayor, and staging a banquet
in one of the hotels where the lion presides at the head
table.
“This sort of callous brutality is considered ‘good ad-
vertising.’
"Boston is scheduled to be visited by the cavalcade of
animal torturers on Wednesday. We know Boston peo-
ple will resent this kind of an exhibition.
"Mayor Nichols is too kind hearted a man to allow a
poor old dumb beast to be dragged into City Hall for a
little cheap publicity. If it is within the power of Police
Commissioner Wilson to prevent the hippodromitig of the
unfortunate animal through our streets we feel sure he
will do it.
“It isn’t the danger to the public to be considered in
hauling the animal on leash through the streets and into
public buildings. The lion’s age and feebleness make him
harmless and dope fed to him renders him about as bel-
ligerent as a sheep. For several weeks he has been
paraded around the country in the heat, confined for the
most part to a little cage on a hot automobile.
“This particular film company is without shame. It is
significant that most of the objectionable sex films have
been made by this concern and that the gross caricatures
of the Irish race which appeared on the screen were pro-
duced by it. Its officials have no sense of decency.
“But it may be possible to prevent public cruelty to
dumb animals in Boston’s streets and public buildings.
At least we can refuse to be parties to it.” — The Boston
Post of July 23.
(Editor’s Note: As a result of this article the Boston
officials were aroused and declared their opposition to the
proposed lion reception at the city hall, and even to the
parade of the lion. Mayor Nichols stated that such a
scheme is brutal business and he will have no part in it.
Police Commissioner Wilson stated that, while he could
not stop the parade, he would deny Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
a license for the use of the calliope. He stated also that he
would shoot the lion if the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer officials
should take it out of the cage.)
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New Yerk, under the aot of Marok 3, 1879.
IlAURISON'S
Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Pokey: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRIS ON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X SATURDAY, AUGUST 11, 1928 No. 32
1927-28 SUBSTITUTIONS— ARTICLE No. 4
Fox Substitutions
“NO OTHER WOMAN” (June io) : The original
title of this one is supposed to be “The Blonde Panther.”
But no facts were given in the Work Sheet to help one
know who would be the author of the story, or what kind
of story it would be. Only the director was given — Frank
Borzage. The finished product, however, has been di-
rected by Lou Tellegen. I fear you will have to accept it.
“CHICKEN A I.A KING” (June 17) : The original
title oi this one was supposed to be "Atlantic City.” No
author was given, but the Work Sheet stated that it was to
be a “romantic story of broken hearts of the world’s play-
ground.” In other words, it was to be a picture taken in
Atlantic City, which is the world’s playground, winter and
summer. The finished product, however, has nothing to
do with Atlantic City; it is a farce-comedy, with a bed-
room farce twist in it. It surely is a substitution.
“FLEETWING” (June 24) : Fox claims the printer
mixed his lines and put the explanation for “Always Faith-
ful," a dog story, in the space opposite “Fleetwing,” a horse
story, and the facts about "Fleetwing" in the space oppo-
site “Always Faithful.” A mistake such as this is possible.
You will be compelled, therefore, to accept “Fleetwing."
“THE FARMER'S DAUGHTER" (July 8) : Fox in-
forms the contract holders that the original title of this
one was “Holiday Lane.” If so, then it is a story, star, and
director substitution and therefore you are not obligated
to accept it for the reason that “Holiday Lane” was to be
a picture that would, according to the Work Sheet, be
“hitting the high spots on the Gay White Way — jazz, spice,
joy and life along the ‘wickedest’ street in the world,” with
Earle Fox, Nancy Nash, and J. Farrell McDonald, to be
directed by J. G. Blystone ; whereas the finished product
(“The Farmer’s Daughter”) is a comedy-drama with a
rural background, in which the chief character is a crook,
and which was directed by Arthur Rosson and acted by
Marjorie Beebe, Warren Burke, and Arthur Stone. (I
haven’t seen it yet but I understand that it is “rotten.”)
You don't have to accept it.
“ROAD HOUSE (July 22) : The original title of this
one is supposed to have been “None But the Brave.” But
“None But the Brave” was sold with Madge Bellamy and
Edmund Lowe, and was to have been founded on the stage
success by Brandon Fleming and Bernard Merrivale, and
was to be directed by J. G. Blystone ; whereas “Roadhouse”
is from the original story by Philip Hurn, it has been di-
rected by Richard Rosson, and has Maria Alba. Warren
Burke, and Lionel Barrymore in the leading parts. A clear
substitution of storv, stars and director.
“NONE BUT THE BRAVE” (August 5) : The Work
Sheet describes this picture as foilows : “A comedy that
made London laugh itself out of the fog. Based on the
stage success by Brandon Fleming and Bernard Merrivale,
with Madge Bellamy and Edmund Lowe.” J. G. Blystone
was given as the director. But the finished product has
nothing in common with this description ; for it has been
founded on the story by James Gruen and Fred Stanley,
has been directed by Albert Ray. and has Charles Morton,
Sally Phipps, and Farrell Macdonald (J. Farell McDon-
ald), in the leading parts. It is an out-and-out substitution
and you don’t have to accept it.
Note: I fear that “None But the Brave” is another case
of "Mother Machree.” Fox may have made the original
“None But the Brave,” but it may have turned out so good
that he is holding it back, hoping to change its title and to
sell it to you for more money next season. The fact that the
title “None But the Brave,” which he has “slapped” on
the picture he is trying to foist on you, has no relation
whatever with the story or theme, strengthens my suspi-
cions. I shall watch for it closely. Remember that Madge
Bellamy was promised with it. I have just been informed
by an exhibitor that Fox is delivering “Road House,”
which is supposed to be “None But the Brave,” of the
1927-28 season, in place of “Joy Street,” which has been
sold in the 1928-29 group. Both pictures have the same
leads. If the information is correct, then it is my opinion
that “Joy Street” has turned out to be a very good picture
and Fox is trying to deliver “Road House” in its place so
that they might sell it to you later on for bigger money.
Watch out !
The first part of the Fox program was analyzed in the
issue of June 16. The analysis of this company’s pictures
is now complete.
First National Substitutions
“THE CODE OF THE SCARLET” (466) : Because
all Ken Maynard pictures were sold as a star series, this is
not a substitution.
“GOOD-BYE KISS” (539) : This belong to the 1928-
29 season group.
“THE HEAD MAN” (454) : The original title of this
one is supposed to have been “Kelly’s Kids,” which was
sold as Charlie Murray No. 2. The 1927-28 campaign
book did not give the author, but described the picture as
follows : “A flock of rough-neck youngsters let loose on
Murray as the harrassed ‘old man’.” “The Head Man,”
however, which was produced under the working title
“Boss of Little Arcady,” has been founded on a story by
by Harry Leon Wilson, and revolves around a politician
who lost his power when he took to drink, and whose grown
daughter helps bring him back to his former state. It is
manifestly a different picture from “Kelly’s Kids,” inas-
much as no rough-neck youngsters are let loose on Murray
as the harrassed old man. It is, therefore, a substitution.
“HEART TO HEART” (458) : The original title of
this picture is supposed to have been “Tell the World,”
Astor-Hughes No. 2. But “Tell the World,” was, accord-
ing to the First National campaign book, to have been
founded on a story by Howard Irving Young, whereas
“Heart to Heart” has been founded on a story by Juliet
Wilbur Tomkins. It is a clear story substitution.
“HEART TROUBLE” (427) : This is supposed to
be Harry Langdon No. 2, which was originally titled
“The Nineteenth Hole.” But according to the First Na-
tional 1927-28 campaign book, “The Nineteenth Hole” was
to have been a golf story. The following is a description
given in that book : “Golf as it shouldn't be played ! —
Crashes in on the most popular sport in America. Figure
for yourself the chances for unforgettable gags ! The golf
interest means an extra draw for every theatre that shows
it.” “Heart Trouble.” however, which once was called
“Here Comes the Band,” has nothing to do with golf, and
is a story by Arthur Ripley, with the World War as a
background for Harry Langdon’s love affair. It is clearly
a story substitution.
“THE W RIGHT IDEA” (463) : This picture was
sold merely as Johnr.v Hines No. 3. No story, or author
was given — not even the title. So it is not a substitution.
“THE BARKER” (543) : This picture belong to the
new season’s group.
“OH KAY” (430) : This was sold only as a Colleen
Moore No. 2. Not a substitution.
Note : The first part of the First National program was
analyzed in the issues of June 23 and 30th. The analysis of
this company’s product is now complete.
( Concluded on last page)
126
HARRISON’S REPORTS
August 11, 1928
“White Shadows of the South Seas” — with
Monte Blue
( Metro-Goldwyn ; no release date set yet; 7,968 ft.)
A very good entertainment. It is refreshingly different
in that the action unfolds in Polynesia ; the beautiful scen-
ery of those regions forms the background of the story,
which is a good drama. The principal man part is taken by
Air. Blue; but the woman lead is taken by a Spaniard, who
does as good acting as any veteran screen player. In fact
die natives, who are used in the cast, seem to be natural
actors. The story is good although not sensationally so;
but many of the incidents shown will, I am sure, prove ot
great interest to the American picture-goers of all classes.
The scenes that show the natives, for example, diving for
pearls at dangerous depths, are of great interest. The scenes
showing one of them being overcome by the water pressure
and brought to die surface unconscious is so well done that
one feels as if seeing a real occurrence. The scenes that
show die hero, a doctor, working on the unconscious body
of the little boy, who is supposed to have drowned, should
bring tears to the eyes, particularly at the moment when
the youngster’s life is shown coming back. This brought
joy not only to the father, mother, sister of the boy and to
the hero, but also to all the natives. The scenes that show
the natives catching huge tortoises, too, should prove in-
teresting to all picture-goers. There are other interesting
and thrilling sights. The beauty of the scenery is almost
indescribable.
The plot has been founded on the book by Frederick
O'Brien. Manifestly the object of the author was to show
the bad treatment that the natives received in the hands of
whites — the diseases that are their lot because of the min-
gling of whites with them, the slavery, and every other
cruelty of the white race. The hero, a white derelict,
formerly a doctor, sympathizes with them, treats them and
defends them from the whites. He eventually falls in love
with the chief’s daughter. In the end, he loses his life in
defending the natives ; he is shot and killed by a cruel white
pearl trader.
Monte Blue does excellent work. Raquel Torres, a Span-
iard, takes the part of the heroine with art. Robert An-
derson is the villain. W. S. Van Dyke directed the picture
creditably.
Note : This picture has been synchronized, with the disc
system. So far as the music is concerned, it is very good,
and in some place excellent. Such places are where singing
is given. But the parts that show one of the natives mourn-
ing the death of his son aloud, and the hero laughing aloud,
is low to the point of vulgarity ; it should disgust all picture-
goers of even the average intelligence. This picture would
have, in my opinion, made a success with or without the
mechanical music.
“The Cavalier” — with Richard Talmadge
( Tiffany-Stahl ; Sept, release; 6,800 ft.; 79 to 97 min.)
Good. It is a mild “Mark of Zorro,” with Mr. Talmadge’s
part like that of Douglas Fairbanks. Only that it is not so
speedy. Mr. Talmadge does his acrobatic stunts well. His
part is sympathetic in that he undertakes to defend the
helpless Spaniards, persecuted by the whites. He also de-
fends the heroine, a girl of the Spanish aristocracy, who
had left Spain and had gone to California to marry the
villain ; she wanted a fortune for the sake of her aunt, and
he wanted to climb socially. The hero masquerades as a
peon, but at night time, or when the occasion requires it,
he is the invincible cabalerro, defender of the weak, and
avenger of the abused. He falls in love with the heroine.
She, too, falls in love with the mysterious cabalero, little
realizing that he was the man that was posing as a peon and
serving her. In the end, he makes his indentity known to
her. His life is placed in jeopardy many times, but he is
always able to outwit the villain and his men. He and the
heroine escape and eventually go back to Spain.
The action is fast all the way through. Some of the
situations are thrilling. In the situations where the hero
is shown detected and arrested, the suspense is strong;
the spectator is apprehensive about his fate. The scene
where the hero is shown jumping over a chasm with his
horse, the villain falling into the chasm and getting killed
when he attempted to follow the hero, who was running
away with the heroine, too, is suspensive.
The plot has been founded on the novel “The Black
Rider,” by Max Brand. It has been directed well by Irving
Willat. Barbara Bedford makes a charming heroine.
Stuart Holmes is a good sergeant. David Mir, David Tor-
rence, and others, are in the cast.
“None But the Brave” — with Charles Mor-
ton, Sally Phipps and Farrell Macdonald
(J. Farrel McDonald)
(Fox, Aug. 5 ; 5,713 ft.; 66 to 82 min.)
This is an attempt to create a role somewhat similar to
the role impersonated by William Haines. It is a fairly suc-
cessful imitation. The first half of the picture is slow and
tiresome ; the second somewhat makes up for the short-
comings of the first half. In the second, the action is fast,
there is comedy, and tender pathos. The pathetic part is
where the hero strikes the little boy, who worshipped him,
on the head and fells him, the child becoming unconscious.
The hero is almost out of his mind when he realized what
he did. The child, of course, recovers, and from that mo-
ment on the two become inseparable friends. And, of
course, as in the William Haines’ pictures, Mr. Morton is
made to pursue the heroine and eventually to make her fall
in love with him in a way that in real life would have
brought him nothing but slaps in the face, but that in pic-
tures prove successful one hundred per cent. There are
thrills, too, caused by outboard motorboat races. In the
race often one fast running motorboat is shown almost
riding over another fast running motorboat. Such sights
have never been seen in pictures. They seem to be truly
dangerous feats.
The plot has been founded on a story by James Gruen
and Fred Stanley. It was directed by Albert Ray, the
director who has several comedy successes to his credit.
With the first half of the story better, Mr. Ray should have
produced a knockout. Sharon Lynn, Tom Kennedy, Billy
Butts, Alice Adair, Tyler Brook and a dozen or so bath-
ing beauties are in the cast. A few scenes are in natural
colors ; they show the beauties in bathing costumes.
On the whole it is a good picture.
“Forgotten Faces” — with Clive Brook,
Mary Brian and Jack Luden
(Paramount, Aug. 18; 7,640 ft.; 88 to 109 min. )
Good. It is slightly morbid, but there is much healthy
sentiment in it. The spectator sympathizes with the hero,
a crook, serving time, who wants to come out of the prison
in someway so as to prevent his depraved wife from letting
their grown-up daughter know what her father is. She
had been reared ignorant of the fact that her father had
been serving time. The spectator's interest is held pretty
well throughout, and the suspense in some of the situations
is tense. The situation in his daughter’s home, for ex-
ample, where the hero is shown leading his wife from one
dark room to another, finally lighting a match and showing
his face to her is one of them : the hero’s wife had been
driven almost crazy by the hero through mental suggestion
until she, when she confronts the hero, shoots and kills him.
And that is what the hero wanted — to make it impossible
for her to tell their daughter that he, her father, had
served a term in the penitentiary, even though in suc-
ceeding he had to offer his life as a sacrifice. The scenes
of his death are pathetic.
The story, which is by Richard Washburn Child, deals
with a hero who shoots and kills his wife’s paramour in his
own home. Before his arrest he and his confederate take
his child and leave it on the doorsteps of a wealthy man’s
home. The hero is arrested, tried, convicted and sen-
tenced to a long term in the penitentiary. Years later his
wife, who had not reformed, tricks his pal into giving her
the name and home of her daughter. She then goes to the
jail and tells the hero with fiendish delight that she was
going straight to their daughter to tell her that she is the
daughter of a convict. The hero stops a jail break. For this,
he is paroled. By a clever ruse he succeeds in becoming a
butler in the home where his daughter was reared, his
object being to prevent his wife from revealing to their
daughter his past. He succeeds at the sacrifice of his life.
Victor Schertzinger has directed it. Baclanova, William
Powell, Fred Kohler, and others are in the cast.
August 11 , 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
127
“Ransom” — with Lois Wilson
( Columbia , June 7 ; 5,584 ft.; 64 to 70 min.)
Just fair. The acting and directing are conventional al-
though its suspense is mildly tense. The story revolves
around a wealthy widow (heroine) and her four-year-old
son. She is in love with a chemist (hero) who manufac-
tured a very deadly poisonous gas which a notorious Chi-
nese criminal in San Francisco wanted to obtain for the
purpose of battling against his enemy, the police. And be-
cause his own spies had failed to get it on account of the
good fight put up by the negro nightwTatchman ; he has the
heroine’s child made captive in his den and held for ransom,
his purpose being to make the heroine use her friendship
for the hero to get a sample of the gas.
The scenes in the den where the child is held a prisoner
and where the heroine is taken, are fairly suspensive be-
cause she is taunted by the sight of her little one, who is
kept in another room. The scenes where she goes to the
laboratory and fights w'ith the hero, who refused to give
her the gas, knowing how harmful it was, are quite sus-
pensive ; there she locks him in a closet and unwittingly
takes an empty bottle. The most suspensive scenes are
those that take place in the den with the hero shooting
away at the Chinamen, who had been locked in one room
where he eventually hurls the bottle of gas, thereby putting
them all to death. The heroine and her little boy are res-
cued by the police the negro had brought to the scene. Miss
Wilson is good as the heroine and Edmund Burns is good
as the hero. Blue Washington is quite good and William
V. Mong is acceptable as the Chinese criminal leader of the
underworld.
The picture was founded on a story written by George
Seitz and directed by him. Others in the cast are James
Long and Jackie Combs.
“Powder My Back” — with Irene Rich
( Warner Bros., March 10; 6,185 ft.; 72 to 88 min.)
Just fair. The story is not very strong. It unfolds in a
small town and shows a candidate for mayor going after
the show' in which the heroine was the star on the grounds
that her show wasn’t good for the young folk of that towm.
He has it closed down. The heroine determines to “get”
the hypocrite. She arranges a fake automobile accident in
front of his home and is taken in so that the doctor might
be sent for. The fake doctor advises that she must not be
moved. The candidate is thus forced to let her stay at his
home. In time she makes him fall in love with her. But be-
cause her plan was taking the wrong direction in that the
son of the candidate had fallen in love with her and had
forgotten his sweetheart, a sweet little girl, the heroine
tells the candidate the truth and leaves the house. The
young man calls on her and tells her how much he loves
her. The young woman calls on her, too, and upbraids her.
The heroine assures the young woman that she was not
after her sweetheart and begs her to let her reform the
young man. By making him believe that she W’as old, she
makes him go back to the young woman. The heroine had
fallen in love with the candidate for mayor and since he,
too, had fallen in love with her, they marry.
The plot has been founded on a story by Jerome Kingston.
It has been directed by Roy Del Ruth. Audrey Ferris,
Andre Beranger, Anders Randolf, Carrol Nye and others
ai e in the cast.
“The Mysterious Lady” — with Greta Garbo
( Metro-Goldwyn , Aug. 4; 7,652 ft.; 88 to 109 min.)
Good. It is a play in which suspense abounds. The
scenes, for example, where the hero, a young Austrian of-
ficer, who had been shorn of his rank and put in prison
for treason because important state papers had been stolen
while in his possession, is show'll in Russia, where he had
gone, after escaping from the Austrian prison by aid of his
father, in the same place where the heroine was with other
Russians of the intelligence department, is indeed strongly
suspensive. The spectator fears lest the heroine give him
away. The later scenes, where the heroine opens the safe
and takes the documents out of it to give them to the hero,
the head of the intelligence department coming in just at
that time, are other such scenes. Previous scenes, where
the head of the intelligence department is shown trying to
find the note the heroine had written for the hero and put
into the piano music sheets, too, are strongly suspensive.
There are other such scenes in other parts of the film.
Miss Garbo does good work. Conrad Nagel is pretty good
as the hero. Gustav von Seyffertitz is good as the head of
the intelligence department. Fred Niblo has directed the
picture well.
The story is that of a young Austrian officer who becomes
infatuated with a beautiful stranger, little realizing that she
was a Russian spy. She, too, falls in love with him. Flis
father informs the hero who the heroine is and when he
meets the heroine again while on a state mission, the hero
upbraids her, calling her love false. Scorned, the heroine
steals the papers from him and escapes into Russia. The
hero is sentenced to prison for treason. His father helps
him escape. He goes to Russia in an effort to recover the
papers and to find out who in the war office was in the pay
of the enemy. The heroine recognizes him but her love for
him is so strong that she, not only does not give him away,
but also helps him recover the papers and secures for him
the name of the traitor. The two escape into Austria,
where they marry.
Note : The original title of this picture was “None But
the Brave,” and was to have been founded on the book
“War in the Dark,” by Ludwig Wolff. The story of “A
Mysterious Lady” is the same, well enough, but the pic-
ture was promised with John Gilbert and is being delivered
with Greta Garbo and Conrad Nagel. It is a star substitu-
tion and you don’t have to accept it if you so see fit.
FBO NO DIFFERENT
( Continued from other side)
an exhibitor bring Pathe before a board. It would be only
j ust.
Out of the Specials, they have decided not to make “Rip
Van Winkle,” but will make, or have made, “Power” and
“Craig’s Wife.” They will, however, deliver them during
the 1928-29 season.
In the case of these Specials, the picture that is left out
would, in my opinion, have proved the best money-maker.
Almost every man, woman and child has read “Rip Van
Winkle,” and I am sure that everybody would have seen
the picture.
In this, the Specials group, “Power” and “Craig’s Wife,”
will be delivered. But that will be little consolation to you.
You bought them during the 1927-28 season, made your
plans to show them during that season, and now you are
told that you couldn’t have them that season but you may
the next.
The fact that Pathe-DeMille was on the verge of bank-
ruptcy and Joe Kennedy saved the organization is little
consolation to your box office, especially at this time. The
producers should not sell pictures unless they feel sure
that they will have money enough to make them with.
All this shows what a “game” still is the moving picture
business. The sad thing about it, however, is that you
have no remedy for such a condition. And you will not
have a remedy even in the future, so long as Will H. Flays,
through his manipulator, is able to manipulate the contract
and give you no more than he feels like giving you.
How long, oh, how long, will these conditions be tol-
erated by you ?
W. A. SIMONS AMUSEMENT CO.
W. A. Simons, Manager
Missoula, Mont., July 3i, 1928.
Mr. P. S. Harrison, Editor,
HARRISON’S REPORTS,
1440 Broadway,
New York City, New York.
Dear Mr. Harrison :
Enclosed please find our check for $10.00 covering sub-
scription on your very valuable reports that we have been
receiving for the past many years.
We might incidentally say, that we enjoy your reports,
your attitude, and feel that you are doing everything that
you can for the benefit of the independent exhibitors and
from the present indications it looks as though there might
be very few in time to come.
With my kindest regards.
Yours very truly,
W. A. SIMONS.
128
HARRISON’S REPORTS
August 11, 1928
Columbia Substitutions
“RANSOM” (June 7) : The original title of this one
is supposed to be "San Francisco.” Though no author was
given in the 1927-28 campaign book, “San Francisco” was
described as society-underworld spectacle. The finished
product is an ordinary underworld melodrama ; nothing
spectacular about it, but the story unfolds in San Fran-
cisco. For this reason it cannot be declared a substitution.
You have to accept it.
"THE WAY OF THE STRONG” (June 19) : In the
campaign book it was stated that this picture would be
founded on a story by Octavus Roy Cohen, whose book
deals with, to use the exact language in the announcement,
"a girl who had everything that money could buy but
yearned for something money couldn’t buy.” The finished
product is described in the press sheet as an underworld
melodrama, and says in a heading that the "Exploits of
Famous New York Gangster Furnish Background for
Gripping Motion Picture.” This press sheet gives no
author. This proves conclusively that it is a story sub-
stitution. I may be able to see the picture this week in a
threatre. If I do, I shall watch the introductory title closely
to see what author is given credit for the story. Watch
the review for the information. But 1 am sure that
it is a substitution, for the omission of the author’s name
from the press sheet does not seem to be accidental.
“BEWARE OF BLONDES” (July 1) : The 1927-28
campaign book described this as a picture to be founded on
a story by Pierre Dumond, "who . . . knows his blondes !”
The press sheet does not give the author’s name evidently
in an effort to hide it from watchful eyes. But you can
always find it in the introductory title. It is there where 1
shall look for it when 1 see it, if it is shown in a theatre
here. It is no doubt a substitution.
“SAY IT WITH SABLES” (July 13) : The annual
campaign book described this as a story by Dorothy Howell,
“whose screen stories for past Columbia Successes,” to use
the language of the book, “have meant profits at the box
office.” The finished product, however, has been founded on
a story by Frank Capra and Peter Milne. It is a story sub-
stitution and you don’t have to accept it.
“VIRGIN LIPS” (July 25) : The campaign book stated
that this picture would be founded on a story by Jack Lait,
“Nationally Known Syndicate Writer and Playwright.
Author of ‘Help Wanted,’ ‘One of Us,’ ‘The Boy Friend,’
and other famous plays and stories.” The finished product,
however, is by Charles Beahan. Such being the case, it is
not the picture you bought, and therefore you are not
obligated to accept it.
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Substitutions
“FORBIDDEN HOURS” (780) : For analysis of this
picture read footnote in review printed on page 1 19, issue
of July 28.
"THE COSSACKS” (842) : Not a substitution.
“TELLING THE WORLD” (810) Haines No. 4:
Not a substitution.
“FOUR WALLS” (835) : Not a substitution.
“WAR IN THE DARK” (883) : Read the review in
this issue.
“HER CARDBOARD LOVER” (829) : Not a substi-
tution.
Universal Substitutions
The Universal program was analyzed completely in the
issue of June 30. The following information may be added,
which has been obtained by a closer study :
“MIDNIGHT ROSE” (A5701) : This picture was sold
Mary Philbin and has been delivered with Lya de Putti.
"STOP THAT MAN” (A5707) : The original title
of this one is supposed to have been “The Girl Show” ; but
the two titles do not belong to the same story for the reason
that “The Girl Show” has been described by the Universal
campaign book as follows: “Life with the Follies of the
Tank Towns! — A wrestler who meets all comers!- — At-
mosphere, jazz, heart beats, and laughs in a sure-fire for
entertainment. A William Wyler production with All
Star Cast” ; whereas “Stop That Man” has been founded
on a story by George Hobart, and has nothing to do with
jazz, being a story in which Arthur Lake got himself and
his policeman brother in trouble by posing as a policeman
himself. (See review on page 50, issue of March 31.)
Pathe Substitutions
This program was analyzed completely in the issue of
June 30. There is nothing more to add.
Warner Bros. Substitutions
The Warner Bros. Program was analyzed completely in
the issue of June 30. There is nothing more to add for the
reason, as said in the June 30 issue, that Warner Bros, sold
merely titles and the finished product cannot be “pinned
down.” It is a bad state of affairs when a producer hasn’t
the courage to say what stories he is going to put into
pictures. He wants to leave the door open so that he may
foist on you any junk he sees fit, and to withhold any good
pictures that he may accidentally produce. Know what you
are buying ! Don’t buy a cat in a bag !
F B O Substitutions
As said in the issue of June 30, I have not been able to
discover any substitutions in this company's 1927-28 prod-
uct. 1 expect to scrutinize it more closely this week. In
the meantime, if you have been notified by them of any
change of title, inform this office at once; it will furnish
the clue.
Paramount Substitutions
As said in the issue of June 3o, I have not been able to
discover any substitutions in this company’s program.
F B O NO DIFFERENT FROM THE REST
Last year F B O sold 18 Gold Bonds and 12 Master
Showmen. They did not make any so-called Specials.
This year they are selling 24 Gold Bonds. They have no
Master Showmen. Instead, they are selling 6 Specials.
Last year they cried themselves into your hearts by tell-
ing you that they were a small concern and needed help.
And you, in order to give a "little fellow” a “lift,” booked
their pictures and paid them more money for them. I felt
sympathy for them myself.
The 1927-2S product did not come up to the standard of
the 1926-27. And nobody knows what they will turn out
to be this year. “Gang War,” thought a good picture
(but not great), does not mean that the other product will
come up to the standard of this one : One swallow does not
make a summer.
But this is not the important fact : Last year they begged
those of you that bought their product to permit them to
allocate the prices themselves. And you, good-heartedly,
permitted them to do it. They then piled up most of the
money on the Gold Bonds, putting low program prices on
the Master Showmen.
This year they have taken the prices for the Gold Bonds
as a basis, and are asking an increase over the fictitious
prices they themselves created. They have no Master
Showmen this year to lighten your burden by putting small
prices on such a brand. Instead, they are selling you six
Specials, demanding prices that are not demanded even by
the biggest of the producer-distributors.
And we all thought that F B O being little fellows,
needed a lift. And we gave it to them. Which shows that
you dare not be a good-natured fellow towards the sellers
in this business. If you do, you get the worst of it in the
end.
And I admit that I was as guilty as any of you in think-
ing that they needed a “lift,” being little fellows.
I have often cautioned you not to permit the exchange-
men to allocate your prices, pointing out the danger to you.
1 even cited an instance where Paramount allocated the
prices on the Menjou pictures, the case being that of an
exhibitor on Long Island, and afterwards they used the
fictitious prices they created for the Menjou pictures for
that exhibitor to ask him twice as much the following
season.
Don’t let them do it again ! Allocate vour own prices !
* * *
While talking about F B O, we might just as well talk
also about its step-sister — Pathe-DeMille (now Pathe).
Last year, they sold you 26 DeMille Master Group and
10 DeMille Specials.
Of the Master Group they have delivered onlv 18 ; they
have announced that they will not make 8 out of the total
26. The following are the pictures that they will not make :
“He’s My Man,” “In Bad with Sinbad,” “Such is Fame,”
“Free and Easy,” “The/ New Yorker,” “Self Defense,”
“Heart of Katie O’Doone,” and "What Holds Men.”
Now, it is nothing unusual for a producer now and then
to be unable to make a picture or two because of unforseen
conditions. But when a producer makes only sixty-nine
per cent of the product, it is down-right bad faith. And
arbitration boards should cancel the entire contract should
( Continued on other side)
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the pest office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing' Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1,1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, AUGUST 18, 1928
No. 33
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments
The question that is troubling almost every one con-
nected with motion pictures today is whether the talking
pictures are here to stay, or are merely a novelty,
destined to pass out of existence as soon as their new-
ness wears off. It is puzzling to the producers and dis-
tributors, it is puzzling to the artists, and it is puzzling
to the exhibitors, small as well as big.
Some say that there is no merit in this invention;
some, that no theatre will be able to exist unless it in-
stalls a talking picture device; but the majority are at
sea and are seeking to be enlightened.
To say with accuracy whether talking pictures are
here to stay or will soon die out is, of course, out of the
question; one must be endowed with occult powers to
see what is going to happen in the future. But one can
make a study of them, bring to aid what occurred in
kindred businesses so that, with whatever knowledge
one can muster, one may be able to arrive at certain
conclusions.
It is with the object of helping exhibitors form their
own conclusions by presenting to them whatever facts
are at our disposal and by expressing certain opinions
that I have undertaken to write this article.
Let us for the present let the question of the fate
of talking pictures for another part ot this article,
confining ourselves to other relevant questions:
The question next in’ importance to the future of
the talking pictures asked most frequently is: What is
the best instrument in the market? To enable you to
determine this answer for yourself, let me present you
with the facts that 1 have been able to gather after
close study.
There are three types of instruments made: the disc
type, the film type, and a combination of the two.
The type that is a combination of the two uses the
film as a “disc," the grooves running alongside the film.
The reproduction is by needle, just as it is in the phono-
graph. But because the instrument using this type
of film is still in embryo form, let us leave it to one
side at present; we may discuss it only when it is manu-
factured. and the demonstrations prove that it is suc-
cessful beyond any doubt.
Of the other two types, the disc type is, as every one
of you no doubt knows, a duplication of the phono-
graph, on a large scale. The moving picture machine is
coupled to the disc turntable, and run by the same
motor. There is a starting point on the film and a start-
ing point on the disc. The two must start at the same
time, from these given points. If one should start
ahead of the other by more than one-eighth second,
the result is disastrous; the voice and the motion work
against each other, disconcerting the spectator.
The film type has the sound imprinted on the film
itself, in the form of a sound track, of about one-eighth
inch in width, running alongside the film between the
sprocket holes and pictures. When a piece of film is
cut off, the words or the sound is cut off also. From this
you will readily see that the film can never get out of
synchronism except for a short length whenever a piece
of film is cut off and is not replaced. This occurs be-
cause of the fact that the sound is not recorded on the
same spot as is the action, for the reason that, on account
of mechanical requirements, the sound aperture (slit)
is twenty frames ahead of the moving picture aperture
through which the motion is projected on the screen,
film of this length being required to cover the distance
between the moving picture machine aperture and the
—No. 1
slit, as well as to form the required loop. The picture
gets out of synchronism for twenty frames every time
a break occurs and the part removed is not replaced in
the patching. But the time during which the picture
is out of synchronism is of so short a duration that it is
hardly noticed; because of the fact that the twenty
frames are run in one second, the film remains out of
synchronism only for one second (or for 20/24ths of a
second, to be exact); that is, until the patch, leaving the
moving picture aperture, reaches the sound-track aper-
ture (slit). Even then, the motion and the sound still
are synchronous in case no more than three frames are
removed in the patching and are not replaced, for the
reason that the one can, as it has been observed, be
ahead or behind the other one-eighth of a second with-
out bad results. And three frames represent but one-
eighth of a second, for, in talking pictures, the moving
picture machine is run at 90 revolutions per minute,
or, at one and one-half revolutions per minute; and as
each revolution “eats" 16 frames, 24 frames are run at
each minute. And three frames are one-eighth of the
twenty-four.
Recording
Let us now deal with the recording process of the
two types :
In the disc type, the sound waves strike the dia-
phragm of a microphone. This generates electricity,
which causes the steel point to cut into the revolving
record, “chiseling’ out undulations that correspond to
the strength and the volume of the sound. As said in
these columns before, there is a disadvantage in this
method of recording, in that the .energy required to set
the diaphragm into motion (to overcome the inertia)
must be deducted from the energy generated by the
sound, which sound is to be “chiseled" into the record
in the form of undulations. In dealing with the energy
generated by speaking or by other sound we are dealing
with faint power, and anything lost anywhere on the
“road" must be deducted from the result. And that is
exactly what happens in this type of recording. And
that is why the overtones, so necessary in harmonics,
do not record themselves on a disc record. Strike a bell
once and you will notice, if you will observe carefully,
that there are other notes, of different pitches, super-
imposed on the basic note. These are what in acoustics
are called “overtones." They are absent in the disc
method of reproduction.
Another defect in the disc type of reproduction is the
fact that the low frequency sounds (bass notes) and the
high-frequency sounds (high notes) do not record
themselves, either at all, or faithfully, for this reason:
There are 100 grooves on an inch of record. In the low-
frequency sounds, the oscillationssideways are so wide
that the steel point breaks the wall of the next groove.
For this reason the talking picture producers dare not
record sounds below a certain range. In the high-
frequency range, the steel point works so fast that,
instead of “carving” out the sound path, it chips it,
with the result that such tones are not natural when
reproduced.
In the film type, a delicate mirror in one system,
hung on fine wires so that it may oscillate freely, reflects
on the film (which is reserved for the sound track) light,
received from a lamp conveniently placed. Another
film system uses the microphone arrangement. In
( Continued on last page)
130
“Lilac Time”<^-with Colleen Moore
( First National , release date not yet set ; 8,967 ft.)
Another good war picture, of the "Legion of the Con-
demned” and "Wings” type. In quality, it is of about the
"l^egion of the Condemned” grade ; in spectacularly, it is a
little better. Several aeroplanes are seen crashing on the
ground in such a manner that one is positive that they
crashed actually and not by prearrangement. There are
thrills a-plenty, caused chiefly by these aeroplane crashes.
But there is also deep pathos, the result of a good story,
capably acted by Miss Moore and Mr. Gary Cooper, who
takes the part of the hero. The action unfolds in France,
and Miss Moore is shown in a role of a "godmother” to a
corp of English aviators. She lived near the field, and each
time they returned from an expedition she counted them to
see if all "her children” had returned. It is when one of
them failed to return that causes the pathos. The love
affair between Miss Moore and Mr. Cooper is powerful ;
it almost equals that in “The Big Parade.” It was after
the two had fallen in love that the hero is ordered to go
with the others on a bombing expedition. The Germans
were breaking the allied lines everywhere and the seven
comrades were ordered not to return alive but to stop the
Germans at all costs. All had been downed except the hero.
In his return trip alone he is met by a formidable enemy in a
monster machine. The memory of his lost comrades so en-
rages him that he attacks him. Each downs the other. The
hero’s aeroplane falls to the ground near the heroine’s
destroyed home. The heroine extricates him from the
wreck and succeeds in inducing the driver of an ambulance
to stop and to take him to a hospital. But she is almost
out of her mind when she is not allowed to accompany him.
Heart-broken she walks from place to pkjce until she
eventually learns where he had been kept. The hero’s
father, who did not approve of his son’s love affair with
the heroine, tells her that his son is dead. The son, how-
ever, was not dead but only seriously wounded. The heroine
buys a bunch of lilacs, her favorite flower, and asks a soldier
to place them near his “body.” The hero wakes up and
when he finds the heroine’s favorite flowers near his pillow
he guesses that she was somewhere near him. He rises
from the bed and goes to the window. He calls her aloud
but the noise of the passing trucks drowns his voice, until
he eventually is able to call her attention to him. She rushes
to his rooms and they embrace. It is in these scenes where
most of the pathos occurs. It is doubtful if tender-hearted
persons will be able to suppress their emotions. Women
should abandon themselves to their tears.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by Jane
Cowl and Jane Murphy. The picture has been directed by
George Fitzmaurice. Burr McIntosh, George Cooper,
Cleve Moore, Eugenie Besserer, Emil Chautard and others
are in the cast.
“Stocks and Blondes” — with a Special Cast
( FBO , Sept. 9, 5,430 ft.; 63 to 78 min.)
Boresome ! There is not much "meat” to the story, and
therefore the hard work of the players does not produce
results. The theme is trite ; and its background is business
— just what the average person does not want to see in
pictures. The hero is a messenger for a Stock Exchange
broker, but he can make no headway. The heroine’s danc-
ing partner, a gold-digger, advises the heroine to give up
hoping that the hero, her sweetheart, would make a success
in life and to take up some moneyed man. The hero loses
his job, and his hopes. At the cabaret the heroine is intro-
duced to a wealthy man, who afterwards turns out to be
the hero’s former boss. At the table she overhears him
talking to another man about certain stocks that would
go down and then up a certain number of points, and she
advises the hero to trade in that stock accordingly. On
the tips the heroine and other cabaret girls arc able to
give the hero, he becomes wealthy. But after making a
success he forgets the heroine. The hero’s former boss
hears of his contemptible conduct and breaks him. The hero
goes back to the heroine, begs her forgiveness, and assures
her that he will never again forget her.
The plot has been founded on an original story by Dudley
Murphy, by whom it has been directed. Gertrude Astor is
the gold-digger; Jacqueline Logan the heroine; Skeets
Gallagher the hero, and Albert Conti the Wall Street
broker.
August 18, 1928
“The Way of the Strong” — with a
Special Cast
( Columbia , June 17 ; 5,752 ft.; 67 to 52 min.)
Not a bad underworld melodrama. It has its exciting
moments, the result of shooting with machine guns, and its
moments of pathos. It manages to keep the spectator
interested all the way through.
The purity of love, even in the heart of a bootlegger, and
the sacrifices it demands is the theme. In the development,
an underworld character, leader of a band of bootleggers
and stick-up men, is shown as having love for music.
Circumstances so shape themselves that he comes across a
beautiful blind girl (heroine), playing a violin for a living.
He gives her a position. Her music charms him at first,
but afterwards he is charmed by her beauty and eventually
falls in love with her. His pianist, a young man, falls in
love with her, too. When the girl, moved by the kindness
he had shown to her, wants to feel the features of his face
so that she might know how handsome he is, the hero, who
has a disfigured, ugly-looking face, shoves the pianist to
her and she feels the pianist’s features. She thus convinces
herself that the man that had been so kind to her is "hand-
some.” The enemy gang leader’s mistress finds out that
the hero is in love with the blind girl and so informs the
gang leader. With the aid of his men he abducts her. The
mistress, seeing that she is about to be discarded, informs
the hero of the heroine’s whereabouts. The hero and his
men rush to the place and a battle ensues, during which
several from each side are killed. The police arrive but the
hero, the pianist, and the heroine escape. The hero, realiz-
ing that he was not god enough for the heroine and that
his pianist could make a better husband for her, tells them
to escape. He then deliberately allows himself to be shot
by the police, who were following in an automobile.
The plot has been founded on a story by William Coun-
selman ; it has been directed by Frank Capra. Mitchell
Lewis is the hero ; Alice Day the blind girl ; Theodore von
Eltz the pianist ; Margaret Livingston the mistress, and
William Norton Bailey the leader of the enemy gang.
Note: The Columbia campaign book promised that this
picture was to have been founded on a story by Octavus
Roy Cohen, and since the finished product has been founded
on a story by William Counselman, it is not the picture you
bought and therefore you are not obligated to accept it.
See also analysis in last week’s issue.
“The Vanishing Pioneer” — with Jack Holt
and Sally Blane
(Paramount, June 23 ; 5,834 ft.; 67 to 83 min.)
A11 interesting Western full of thrills and suspense. It is
based on a Zane Grey novel, and unfolds in the days when
the West was young and the pioneers trekked over the
deserts for the purpose of establishing homes when they
were successful in discovering water. Jack Holt is very
good in the dual role, as leader of the band of pioneers,
and as his son (hero). Sally Blane is the charming heroine
whose faith in the hero saved his life when he was sus-
pected of double-crossing the settlement by selling out his
water-rights. William Powell is the suave villain who is
entrusted by the Mayor of the neighboring city to make a
deal to get a supply of water from the pioneers. He is in
reality head of a band of crooks in league with the sheriff
(Fred Kohler), who is a reformed crook; he eventually
falls for the villain’s plot to gyp the settlers out of their
property. There is a situation in his office where a settler
had gone to buy back his property when he is shot, by the
villain and the hero is blamed for it ; it is fairly tense with
suspense as is the scene in the jail where he outwits his
captives and escapes. There is a great deal of hard riding
by the villains to catch the hero and to fasten the blame on
him, in the eyes of the settlers. When the hero at the point
of a knife makes the villain confess that it was he who had
forged his (the hero’s) signature to a deed and they dash
off to the dam where the villain’s men had turned off the
water to make the rest of the settlers surrender, there is
suspense and not a few thrills. When the Mayor comes in
time to discover what kind of man he really wras, the hero
is vindicated and the villain is given his just deserts. The
picture wras directed well by John Waters. There is a
clever dog in it.
The picture should please children as well as adults.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
HARRISON’S REPORTS
131
August 18, 1928
“Heart to Heart” — with Mary Asior and
Lloyd Hughes
( First National, July 22; 6,071 jt.; 70 to 86 min.)
Very good. The interest is held well all the way through.
There is considerable human interest of the mild sort ; and
tnere is some mild comedy. The love affair between Miss
Astor, as the heroine, and Lloyd Hughes, as the hero, is
charming. Air. Hughes does good work; and so does Aliss
Astor ; she looks and acts the part of a princess, and as her
part requires her to be democratic, she wins the spectator's
sympathy for it. Louise Fazenda contributes considerable
comedy as the young princess’ aunt. The scenes where the
young princess called on her aunt and was not recognized
are comical. The aunt and the neighbors took her as the
expected seamstress, and were talking to her about the
princess, whom everybody was expecting. Lucien Little-
field contributes his usual share of comedy.
The plot has been founded on a story by Juliet Wilbur
Tompkins. The picture has been directed by William Beau-
dine. Thelma Todd, Raymond McKee, Eileen Manning,
Virginia Gray and others are in the supporting cast.
It is a substitution. See analysis in last week’s issue.
“Say It With Sables” — with Francis X.
Bushman and Helene Chadwick
( Columbia , July 13 ; 6,401 ft.; 74 to 91 min.)
Not bad. It is a society drama with a melodramatic mys-
tery twist, not without suspense. The first few reels, dis-
closing the gold-digging abilities of an adventuress, who
had fallen in love with the son of a man whose mistress
she had been, are rather slow but when the son brings his
fiancee home to meet his parents there is considerable in-
terest awakened ; one likes to know how the father would
take it. The mystery develops in her room where the hero,
his father and someone unknown had visited the apartment,
the unknown person having committed the murder. Her
maid is suspected by the spectator because she had tried
to blackmail her mistress. The son is suspected because
of the way he had sneaked out of the room. The father,
coming to the room in a careful manner, removes all traces
of the murder and leads the detectives to believe she had
committed suicide. The scenes in their home are quite filled
with suspense as the father declares he had committed the
murder, the son first denying and afterwards, to protect
the father, saying he had committed it. But the detective
does not believe either of them and, through an earring he
he had found in the victim’s hand, he discovers that the
boy's mother had done it. But he shields her and the
world is lead to believe that she had shot herself.
Francis X. Bushman is excellent as the father who
wanted to shield his son whom he was very fond of ; and
so is Arthur Rankin, as the son. Helene Chadwick is good
as the step-mother who, in her desire to protect her family
from the clutches of the sable-coat hunting gold-digger,
relieves them ofher presence. June Nash is sweet as the
step-sister who is very much in love with her step-brother
whom she finally marries. The picture is based on a story
by Frank Capra and Peter Milne and it was directed by
Frank Capra well.
Note: This is a substitution. See last week’s analysis.
“The Head Man” — with Charles Murray
( First National, July 15; 6,502 ft.; 75 to 93 min.)
Good ! There is much pathos in it, and more comedy, the
result of the good acting by Air. Murray and by his support.
Air. Lucien Littlefield, for example, makes a good friend
of the hero, sticking to him through and through. Loretta
Young is young and pretty, and does good work, helping
the picture considerably. Larry Kent, too, makes a good
hero. But it is Air. Alurray that walks away with the
acting honors. There is comedy in whatever he does as
the hero, except when his daughter feels sad because he
continues to drink, despite his promises to give up drinking.
Then there is pathos. The part gives Aliss Young much
sympathy ; she is shown being loyal to her father and never
ceasing in her effort to make him regain his self-respect.
It is commendable loyalty'. The situation where the hussies
of the town, headed by the politicians, call on the hero
with the object of inducing him to leave town because they,
the politicians, feared him on account of the fact that he still
had a big following, left him from the days when he was
mayor of the town and a respectable citizen, has pathos and
comedy, mostly comedy.
The plot has been founded on a story by Harry Leon
W llson. it was directed by Eddie Cline. It revolves
around the efforts of a daughter to make her father give
up drinking and to come back to his former self. She suc-
ceeds— her father gives up drinking and once again he is
elected mayor, defeating his opponent, and she marries the
young man who loved her and who, too, helped her in her
efforts to reclaim her father.
It should please everywhere, mostly the women patrons,
for it is chiefly a woman’s picture.
“The Cowboy Kid” — with Rex Bell
{Fox, July 21 ; 4,293 ft.; 49 to 61 min.)
\\ hile it is full of slapstick comedy', in this so-called
\\ estern, it is a fair enough picture. Rex Bell is very
good as the boy' who always is around when a bank robbery
or a stage coach is about to be held up. Alary Jane Temple
is the heroine who is rescued by the hero when she goes
after the motor truck which was to save her father, the
banker, from ruin, after the bank had been robbed. There
is comedy contributed by Alice Belcher as the homely
singer with the beautiful voice, who is in love with the
deputy sheriff, and by the sheriff ; he is vain and afraid to
fight. Joseph DeGrasse is good as the heroine's father.
Brooks Benedict is the villain. The picture is based on a
story by Seton I. Aliller, directed by Clyde Caruth.
GIVE UNTIL IT HURTS!
The darkest page in the history of the motion picture
industry is being written these days, by the arbitration
boards. Exhibitors are being “murdered” by these
boards. An exhibitor has contracted for certain pic-
tures, and the exchange hands him entirely different
pictures, in some cases with mediocre players when he
bought them with stars. He discovers that the pictures
the exchange delivers are not the pictures he bought
and refuses to accept them. The exchange writes a let-
ter to the exhibitor threatening him with arbitration
board proceedings. The exhibitor still refuses to accept
them, even after play-dates have been assigned to him.
The exchange enters a complaint with the Film Board
of Trade, and the secretary puts the case on the cal-
endar, notifying the exhibitor to that effect.
On the day of the trial an exhibitor may refuse to
appear because of the inconvenience to him; when
one lives two hundred miles away' from the exchange
city, he cannot make the trip with pleasure, especially
during the warm weather. So the case is decided by
default, thanks to the steps the Hays organization took
to have Amendment 4A of the New York Arbitration
Act passed.
But even if the exhibitor attends the session of the
board; it makes no difference; he gets the worst of it
just the same. Numerous such cases have been reported
to this office.
Just think of it! You have the facts in your hands
by which you prove that the pictures the exchange is
trydng to foist on you are not the pictures you bought
and yet the arbitration board renders a decision against
you.
Air. Hays is certainly entitled to the big salary- he gets
if not for anything else at least for having installed in this
industry arbitration injustice. He has served the producers
well with it.
I am very sorry to say to those who appeal to me for
help that I cannot help them. I wish that I had the
power to undo the injustices but I cannot. The only'
way- that I can help you is again to suggest to y'ou to
send a check for whatever amount you can to Air. Alec
Aloore, chairman of the committee that has been ap-
pointed by the Pittsburgh exhibitors to fight the “pen-
alties” demand of the exchange of Mr. Gorris, the
AIcKeesport exhibitor. The lawyer of the organization,
Air. Eaton, a fine gentleman, has been able to secure
an injunction forbidding the exchanges from demand-
ing penalties of the exhibitor until the case is tried. Send
3'our check to Air. Aloore, in care of AI. P. T. O. of W.
Pa., Hotel Henry, Pittsburgh, and help the boys take
the blackjack away from Hay-s’ arbitration boards and
re-establish law' and order in this industry.
Give all you can! Give until it hurts!
132
HARRISON’S REPORTS
either case recording is far superior to that of the disc
system, and is capable of recording a greater range
either of high or low frequency sounds.
Recording on Film
There are two types of recording of sound on film:
the variable density, and the variable width.
The variable density system is used by Western Elec-
trict, and the variable width by the R. C. A. Photo-
phone. The Fox-Case Movietone uses the variable dens-
ity system. (For the sake of clarity, let it be said that
the word “Movietone” does not denote a particular
type of talking machine; it has been used by Fox for
their own instrument. The same instrument may be
given a different name by another company. The same
is true of the Vitaphone; it is a name applied on their
own system by Warner Bros. Another company may
secure the rights to the same kind of instrument from
Western Electric and call it by another name. But for
convenience, let us use the words “Vitaphone,” to de-
note the disc type, “Movietone” to denote the variable
density type, and “Photophone” to denote the variable
width type.)
The Movietone, or variable density, sound track, con-
sists of different density lines running across the sound
track, over the entire width. The density of the lines are
the result of the strength and quality of the sound. If
the sound is soft, the lines are very light; if the sound
is strong and has great volume, the lines are dark.
The Photophone (variable width) sound track is
black on one side, and transparent on the other, the
division line resembling sometimes a saw, with the
teeth of different lengths, sometimes a miniature moun-
tain range. The division line is always irregular, and its
shape depends on the pitch and volume of sound.
In both types a ray of light strikes the sound track
and reaches the photocell, reproducing the sound that
was recorded on the film. (How the sound is produced
is omitted because it is outside the scope of this ar-
ticle.) But in the Movietone type the light that passes
through the sound track and reaches the photocell is
regulated by the density of the lines on the emulsion,
whereas in the Photophone type the amount of light
that passes through the sound track is regulated by the
width of the transparent part of the sound track. Fig-
uratively speaking, in the Movietone system the amount
of light that goes through the film to reach the photo-
cell is regulated by curtains, drawn across its path
or removed from such path, just as the requirements
of sound dictate, whereas in the Photophone system
such light is regulated by a sort of valve.
Reproduction
The greatest enemy of good reproduction is imper-
fections in developing or dirty sound track. It causes
a ground noise. Of the two film systems, the Movie-
tone is subject to ground noise more than is the Photo-
phone system, for the reason that the sound shadings
of it can be affected by oil or by other dirt, whereas
the Photophone system, not depending on “shadings,"
cannot be affected to an equal degree. Grain structure,
too, enters into the matter; any defect in it will produce
a ground noise, just as will any defect in developing. A
defect on the Movietone sound track cannot be painted
over. Remember that we are dealing with fine shadings
of sound and any imperfections on the sound track of
the systems that use the variable density type of track
cannot help having a detrimental effect on the quality
of the sound.
In the Photophone, defect in the grain structure of
the emulsion as well as imperfections in developing
have no effect on the quality of the sound, for the reason
that the defective part can be painted over. Since this
type of sound recording and reproducing docs not
depend on shading, no matter how black the defective
part is made by painting, the effect on the sound is not
detrimental.
Types of Sound Reproduction
The Movietone and Vitaphone systems use the same
kind of horn, and the same kind of diaphragm. But it
is a different kind of diaphragm from that used in tele-
phone; it is not flat. It is like a cigar ash tray, cupped
at the one end, and with a flange at the other: it is made
out of duralumin, an aluminum composition. The
cupped part of the diaphragm is used for an air cushion
effect, by having a ball fit into the cupped part and kept
August 18, 1928
at some distance from it. When the diaphragm
vibrates, the air between its cupped part and the ball
acts as a cushion and prevents it from rattling.
But even though it is an ingenious piece of mechan-
ism, it has its limitations. It cannot stand overloading.
In sounds of great volume, it is liable to destroy itself.
In low-frequency sounds, it must rattle, for the reason
that the vibrations being few per given time, fewer than
the vibrations in the case of high-frequency sounds, the
air between its cupped part and the ball does not act as a
cushion in the same manner as it acts in the higher
frequency ranges.
The Photophone does not use a diaphragm; the paper
cone that is used for projecting the sound acts as a
diaphragm. The area of the cone is approximately six-
teen times greater than the area of the Western Electric
diaphragm, and, as the Photophone installation uses
sixteen cones, whereas the Vitaphone and Movietone
use an average of four horns, the Photophone system
has at least sixty times as much vibrating area as has
the Vitaphone-Movietone system. This enables the
Photophone to produce volumes of sound that cannot
be produced by the systems that use the horn, and to
reach low-frequency ranges that cannot be reached by
systems that use the Western Electric diaphragm. It is
my opinion, in fact, that no diaphragm-using system
can reach the volume or the frequency ranges that are
reached by the instruments that employ the cone sys-
tem of sound reproduction and projection. The cone
system produces a better quality of sound, too. There
is no instrument in the market at present that can give
out as melodious a sound as can the voice or the instru-
ment that produces the music; but the cone approxi-
mates the natural sound far more than does the horn.
Sound Projecting
The next thing of importance is the projection of
sound:
There are two types of sound projection: The horn
tjrpe, and, as said, the cone type.
The Vitaphone and the Movietone use the horn; the
Photophone, the cone, made out of paper.
The horn has several disadvantages:
(1) It cuts off the low-frequency sounds (bass notes).
As you know, the cornet produces high notes because
the blasts are sent through narrow tubes, and short.
On the other hand, the bass horn produces low notes
because the blasts are sent through wide tubes, and
long. Thus it is seen that low notes require length and
width in the tubes.
There is a limit in the talking picture field as to how
long the tube part of the horn can be made, and how
wide the horn itself. The horns used by the Vitaphone
and the Movietone are twelve and fourteen feet long,
(coiled), and can reproduce successfully low sounds
only up to a certain range. To reproduce the entire
range of low sounds it will require a horn so long and so
cumbersome that it will be necessary for the theatre
owner to install a winch to lift it up whenever he needs
to use the stage for some other purpose.
The paper cone system presents no such defects and
difficulties; it is in two sizes, either twelve or sixteen
inches in diameter, about six inches deep, and tapers to a
hole of about the size of a silver dollar. At the outer cir-
cumference it is mounted on soft, flexible kid leather,
and on the inside on three fine silk threads. It is nat-
urally placed close to the electro-magnets. This mount-
ing arrangement allows it to vibrate freely in and out,
like a piston, producing as good a quality of sound as
could be produced by a mechanism when one takes
into consideration present mechanical limitations.
(2) The horn distorts some sounds and suppresses
others. This occurs when the low-frequency waves
strike the sides of the horn. The result is unnatural.
This defect is noticeable in the human voice more than
it is in the musical or other sounds; the voice sounds
hollow, or as if “it has come out of a barrel,” as some
have put it.
The horn possesses some other defects. But as these
are not so important as the ones already mentioned,
they are left undiscussed for the present.
Next week: Interchangeability; prices for the dif-
ferent types and for theatres of different seating ca-
pacity; added cost of theatre operation because of the
installation of a talking picture device, and other mat-
ters of importance to exhibitors seeking light.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1924, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions .■ • • • 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14. B0
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X SATURDAY, AUGUST 25, 1928 No.J4
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments — No. 2
In last week’s article it was stated that, of the two
methods of recording sound, the disc and the film, the film
method is the better ; of the two film methods, the variable
density and the variable width, the variable width is slightly
the better ; that of the two methods of reproducing sound,
the diaphragm and the cone, the cone is the better ; and
that of the two types of sound projectors, the horn and the
cone, the cone is the better.
Supplementing those observations, I may say that the
disc method, being in my opinion wrong in principle, may
have to be discarded sooner or later, and that those of the
producers that use this method in making talking pictures,
may be compelled to adopt the film method or else go out
of existence. What makes me come to such conclusions
will be explained in the summary of these articles.
But no matter how wrong the disc method may be, in
principle as well as in theory, we are today confronted with
a condition that compels us to do a different kind of think-
ing. 1 am referring to the fact that theatres that are using
disc talking pictures are drawing large crowds. The only
theatres, in fact, that are making money now are those that
have a Yitaphone. I have been told by some of those that
have had such an instrument that they made the price of the
instrument within a short time after the installation, and a
profit besides, so that, if they should be called upon to scrap
it now, they would not be the losers in the least. Under
such circumstances, who is the exhibitor that will hesitate
to install a disc type of instrument, no matter how wrong
in principle it may be, if by so doing he will resurrect his
business?
Installation
The question now is one of installation. Can he have an
immediate delivery of an instrument, or a delivery within
a reasonable length of time?
1 have been informed that an order placed with Electrical
Research Products, Inc. (the selling organization for
Western Electric), now cannot be filled until next July;
the orders have been sent in so thick and fast that it is im-
possible for Western Electric to supply the demand. On the
other hand, Photophones will not be delivered in quantities
for some time. I understand on good authority that there
will be about 300 delivered this year and about 3,000 in
1929. Under the circumstances, one has to wait for a long
time for an installation, no matter whether he wants the
one instrument or the other.
In my opinion, placing an order for an instrument now
when one cannot have it installed until a year from now, is
altogether unwise. One cannot tell what improvements
will be made in the talking instruments in twelve months.
An instrument may be invented that will give out sound so
natural that may make the present instruments obsolete.
Things are happening fast in this industry and one cannot
take chances. It is well for the big exhibitor to go ahead
and install one now, no matter what kind, because he, if
an improved instrument should be placed in the market, can
afford to spend an additional twenty or thirty thousand
dollars for the new instrument ; but not so with the small
exhibitor; he cannot spend ten or fifteen thousand dollars
twice in a short time. For this reason, it is my opinion that
it will pay a small exhibitor, unless he can have an imme-
diate installation, to wait for developments.
Interchangeability
The next important question naturally is about inter-
changeability.
I put the question to some executives of Electrical Re-
search Products, Inc., and they shrug their shoulders ; they
would not commit themselves. I put the same question to the
executives of RCA Photophone, Inc., and they pointed
out to me a recent statement by Mr. Sarnoff, president
of the Photophone Company ; also to an advertisement in
the June 30 issues of the trade papers. The advertisement
stated as follows : “The question of interchangeability of
sound films made by the Photophone process with those
made by other processes of sound recording on film, is
settled.'’ The statement by Mr. David Sarnoff, given
out August 7, is as follows:
“As a convenience to exhibitors and with a view of
obtaining complete interchangeability of sound films
made by the Movietone and the Photophone processes,
RCA Photophone has now adopted a sound track 80
mils in width, but which retains the Photophone method
of recording. Tests made in studios and theatres with
a variety of sound motion picture subjects prove con-
cluvisely that Photophone films not only play inter-
changeably on Movietone projectors but also give
normal and satisfactory speech and musical quality
perfectly synchronized. The 80 mil Photophone sound
track requires no modification whatever of the Movie-
tone sound projector; neither is the operating proced-
ure of Movietone changed in any way.
“I know of no reason, technical or otherwise, why
sound films recorded by the Photophone process can-
not be satisfactorily played on either Photophone or
Movietone machines installed in theatres. Also, the
Photophone Company has no objection to sound films
recorded by the Movietone process being played on
Photophone machines installed in theatres.’’
In other words, Mr. Sarnoff says that his company
has no objections if an exhibitor should show over his
Photophone talking pictures made by other processes;
and as Western Electric has not issued any statement
saying that it will not permit its films to be shown over
other instruments than of its own make, the matter of
interchangeability is settled definitely.
The settling of this problem will, no doubt, have a salu-
tary effect upon the business, for it will make it possible for
exhibitors to use any kind of sound film on their instru-
ment. It is also possible that this interchangeability applies
to all instruments, no matter by what concern made. But
this is a matter about which an exhibitor will have to ask
his lawyer.
Supply of Talking Picture Service
The next question that must be settled is that of the
supply of service. Warner Bros., the pioneers in the talk-
ing picture field, are able to supply a full line of talking
picture service. Next to Warner Bros, comes Fox ; Fox,
too, has done pioneering work, on license obtained from
Western Electric. Other producers that have closed an
agreement with Western Electric are : Paramount, Metro-
Goldwy-Mayer, United Artists, First National, Universal,
Hal Roach and Christie. So an exhibitor that uses the
Western Electric combination disc and film instrument is
assured of an uninterrupted supply of talking picture serv-
ice, short subjects as well as features.
V\ hat is the situation with the Photophone instrument?
FBO (their break with RCA as reported in the trade
papers is inaccurate), Pathe, Sennett and Tiffanv-Stahl
have already tied up with the RCA Photophone Company.
Columbia also may tie up with them. I have also been in-
formed on good authority that RCA will soon be produc-
ing short subjects as well as features themselves. Their
object will be to carry on experimental work by producing ;
also to assure the users of their instruments of a service.
(Continued on last page)
134
HARRISON’S REPORTS
August 25, 1928
“The Terror” — All-Talking Vitaphone
Special
( Warner Bros., Nov. 20; 7,774 ft.; 90 to no min.)
This is the second Warner Bros, all-talking picture that
has been released so far, the first one being “Lights of
New York”; but there is as much difference between the
two pictures as there is between day and night. “Lights
of New York” is a piece of junk, in spite of the fact that
it is drawing big crowds, (being a novelty it couldn’t
help but draw), whereas “The Terror” is an honest-to-
goodness melodrama. It is, in fact, Griffith’s “One Ex-
citing Night,” United Artists’ “The Bat,” and Universal’s
“The Cat and the Canary,”— all in one. The picture is
thrilling in itself ; but the sound effects as well as the
talking of the characters add greatly to the suspense as
well as to the other entertaining qualities. The scenes
that show the characters (Louise Fazenda and May
McAvoy) screaming, their screams being heard, give the
spectator a thrill that the silent action alone could not
give him, at least not to the same degree. The picture is
full of suspense all the way through, this being caused
by the mystery that surrounds the identity of the terrible
murderer and by the fear lest the characters with whom
the spectator sympathizes suffer some calamity. It is
the kind of story that sends chills down one’s spine.
Comedy is not lacking, either ; most of it is caused by that
fine actor, Edward Everett Horton. But no little of it is
contributed by Mr. John Miljan; every time some weird
thing happens he takes it upon himself to tell the other
characters by starting with a “This reminds me of. . . ,”
of some mysterious murders that had taken place years
before. The spectator comes to know that every time he
will open his mouth he will tell some weird murder story,
the kind that put a fright into the hearts of the other
characters. As a result, everybody laughs. Miss Fazenda,
too, contributes considerable comedy with her fine acting.
Miss McAvoy is excellent as the heroine; her voice
registers better in this picture than it did in “The Lion
and the Mouse.” The stage experience Alec B. Francis
has had now tells; it comes in handy not only in the
acting but also in the talking. Mathew Betz, Holmes
Herbert, Joseph Girrard, and Frank Austin are in the
cast.
The plot has been founded on the play by Edgar Wal-
lace, and deals with the offorts of the authorities to
learn the identity of a murderer, who mutilated his vic-
tims horribly. They succeed ; a Scotland Yard operative,
posing as a simple-minded golf player, enters the heroine’s
father’s house and makes himself at home, unraveling the
mystery. He wins the heroine as a wife.
It should please everywhere ; but its value without the
talk is, in my opinion, about twenty per cent : of the
value with the talk.
“Beware of Blondes” — with Matt Moore,
Dorothy Revier, and Roy d’Arcy
( Columbia ; July 1, 5,649 ft., 65 to 87 min.)
Not a bad mystery drama. The opening scenes unfold
in a rather thrilling way when a jewelry store robbery is
prevented by the hero (Matt Moore). As a reward, he
is given a trip to Honolulu to take a celebrated emerald.
Being warned against blondes, he is suspicious of every
one he meets on board the ship until the heroine (Dorothy
Revier) has a thief arrested for coming into her cabin
and tells the hero she is a detective. They fall in love
with each other but the heroine, pretending to be working
hand in hand with “French Harry” (Roy d’Arcy) with a
gang of crooks, has to dupe the hero and capture the gem.
The spectator is lead to believe that she is the real crook
until the hero, having traced the crooks, when they are
bidding against a fence for the jewel, discovers that she
is as she said she was — a Protective Association Detec-
tive. He learns that the real gem had been sent to the
right party and the crooks were fighting over a fake.
There are no humorous situations but Mr. d’Arcy is good
as the suave crook that makes love to the heroine, think-
ing she is “Blonde Mary” the crook. Matt Moore is
good as the sap hero, who is almost afraid of his shadow,
in his efforts to shake off the blondes, which were so
numerous on board. Dorothy Revier is quite good as
the blonde, making love to the hero to learn the where-
abouts of the gem and leading the crooks on to believe
that she was in league with them.
No author is credited with the story which was directed
by George B. Seitz. But it is a substitution. See
Analysis in issue of August 1 1.
“Four Walls” — with John Gilbert
( Metro-Gold. -Mayer , Aug. 11; 6,620 ft.; 76 to 94 min. )
It seems as if John Gilbert has been sacrificed in this
picture. There isn’t much to the story. He is presented
as an underworld character, who gives up the old gang
and determines to go straight. There isn’t much sympathy
to such a part by its very nature, but this time it is not
helped any because the hero is not shown doing any worth-
while things. There are thrills, caused by the sight of the
hero going into the old haunts for the sake of the heroine,
whom he loved, and being confronted by the new leader of
his own gang. The shooting affair, during which the
hero takes the heroine in his arms and escapes to the roof,
is pretty thrilling, too. Suspensive is the situation where
the detective calls on the hero’s home to interrogate him as
to the cause of the death of the gang leader. Miss Carmel
Myers awakens some sympathy when she tells the detective
a white lie to divert his suspicions from the hero. Mr.
Gilbert does good work. So does Miss Crawford and the
other players in the cast, among whom are Vera Gordon,
Robert Emmet O’Connor, Louis Natheau and Jack Byron.
William Nigh has directed it.
The original title of this picture was given in some
Work Sheets as “None But the Brave,” and its identi-
fication number 835. It was promised that it would be
founded on Ludwig Wolff’s novel, “War in the Dark.
The finished product (“Four Walls”), however, has been
founded on the stage play by George Abbott and Dana
Burnett. Consequently, it is a story substitution.
“The Scarlet Lady” — with Lya de Putti,
Don Alvardo, and Warner Orland
( Columbia , Aug. 1; 6,575 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
If Fox can assert that The Red Dance” is a special,
Columbia has a better right to call “The Scarlet Lady” a
special, for, from the point of view of general appeal,
“The Scarlet Lady” is the better of the two. But neither
is a special. “The Scarlet Lady” is a good picture, and
should give good satisfaction if shown at regular prices
of admission. But it does not deserve an increase in the
admission prices any more than does “The Red Dance.”
It is a story that unfolds in Russia, in the days pre
ceding the revolution, and shows the hero, member of the
Russian aristocracy, fall in love with the heroine, mem-
ber of a revolutionary organization. She was seeking
information from him. Soon she falls in love with him,
too, and tries to protect him from the evil designs of the
leader of their organization. The revolution takes place
and it is decided to put the hero to death, but the heroine
helps save him. The two escape into Austria, where they
marry.
There are a few thrills and the spectator is held in
pretty good suspense in some of the situations. The
production end is good, Mr. Allan Crossland having
handled it with skill. The acting of the principles is good.
Otto Mathieson and John Peters are in the cast. Bess
Meredyth wrote the story.
Its value to you should depend on the worth of the stars.
“The Speed Classic” — with Rex Lease
and Mildred Harris
( Excellent-Reg ., July 1; 4,535 ft.; 52 to 64 min)
Only a fair program picture. There are some mildly
amusing situations, such as the one in the Tia Juana jail
Where the hero is thrown by the burly generalissimo for
passing supposedly worthless checks, and the one of his
escape. But the story is familiar and weak. It revolves
around the son of a millionaire (hero), who is a speed
maniac. He is in love with the heroine (Mildred Harris),
who refuses to marry him because he will not promise
her to keep out of automobile races. Desperate, he goes
to Tia Juana, gambles and has a glorious time when his
mechanic at the request of the heroine goes in search of
him, when she finds out that the hero really loves her
very much. There is a race against time and gasoline to
get to the track in time. And of course the familiar
though not very thrilling automobile race occurs which
the hero wins. He also wins the girl. His rival both for
the heroine and in the race is De Malpa, the celebrated
racer.
The picture was directed by Bruce Mitchell, from the
story “They’re Off,” to which no author is credited. Others
in the cast are Mitchell Lewis, Otis Harlan and Helene
Jerome Eddy as the secretary, who fell in love with the
hero, instead of keeping him out of mischief as she was
employed to.
August 25, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
135
“Out of the Ruins” — with Richard
Barthlemess
( First National, Aug. 19; 6,100 ft.; 70 to 87 min.)
Very good ! It has strong heart interest. In some of the
situations the heart interest is so strong that picture-goers,
particularly women, will hardly be able to restrain their
emotions. This is effected not only by a pretty good story,
but also by excellent acting on the part of both Mr.
Barthelmess and Miss Nixon. The two make the love
affair as realistic as any love affair that has been seen
on the screen for sometime. They are shown as loving
each other with all their heart, and fearing: lest they be
separated. The action unfolds in Paris, during the world
war, and presents a handsome lieutenant (hero) of the
French army meeting a beautiful girl (heroine). He was
in Paris on a furlough. Little did he realize that the
girl was his chum’s sister, until the brother, who acted as
if his sister was a stranger to him and as if he himself
had been struck by her beauty, reveals the secret to him.
He first pretends that he made love to her, just to tease
the hero, who wanted an introduction to the “stranger.”
The hero and the heroine’s brother are recalled because
of the impending big German “push.” While the armies
lie inactive, the hero receives a letter from the heroine
telling him that her parents were trying to force her to
marry a profiteer. The hero is denied leave of absence
and he deserts. He reaches the heroine and they hide in
the attic of the hero’s mother's home. But the sight of
the maimed and mutilated soldiers returning from the
front so move the hero that he goes back and presents
himself to his captain. He is court-martialed and sen-
tenced to be shot. After the armistice the heroine sees
the hero and thinking that she had seen his ghost screams.
But soon it comes to light that it was not the hero’s
ghost but his original self ; he tells the heroine’s blinded
brother that his own men, who worshipped him, had not
shot him ; they merely wounded him, and he was found by
the Germans, who sent him to a prison camp, and liberated
him after the war ended. Hero and heroine embrace each
other full of happiness.
The plot has been founded on a story by Sir Phillip
Gibbs. The picture has been directed well by John Francis
Dillon. Robert Frazer takes the part of the brother.
Emile Chautard is the heroine’s father and Eugene
Pallette the profiteer.
It should please everywhere.
“The First Kiss” — with Gary Cooper
and Fay Wray
(Paramount, August 25; 7,640 ft.; 88 to 109 min.)
Good ! The first half is interesting the second half,
besides being interesting, is also appealing to the emotions.
This is brought about by the sight of a brother (hero),
refusing to prevent a heavy sentence for stealing when he
could do so by bringing his three brothers as witnesses ; he
had stolen in order to give them an education, just as he
promised he would ; he had found his grandfather dead,
and there was no other way for him to obtain the money.
The scenes in the court room where the heroine takes the
stand and tells the judge about the hero’s past life — that
he had sacrificed everything for his brothers, that he had
even sold the dream ship he had promised to build for her
in order for him to pay back the money he had stolen for
his brother’s are moving. The scenes later on where his
three brothers, whom he had helped go through the col-
lege. standing before the judge and pleading for mercy
for their brother, telling the court that it was they who
were really guilty, too, are moving. The love affair be-
tween Miss Wray and Mr. Cooper is charming; Miss
Wray, in particular, awakens warm sympathy by the
loyalty she had shown toward the hero, whom she did not
abandon when she learned what he had done. The theme
is a little dangerous in that it attempts to justify an un-
lawful act, but it has been handled so well that the moral
conveyed is wholesome. Leslie Fenton, Lane Chandler,
Paul Fix, Malcolm Williams, and Monroe Owsley are in
the cast. The plot has been founded on Tristan Tupper’s
novel, “Four Brothers.” It has been directed skillfully
by Rowland V. Lee.
“The Wright Idea” — with Johnny Hines
(First National; Aug. 6.; 6,225 ft.; 72 to 88 min.)
Not a bad comedy. It has a number of laughs scat-
tered throughout with a nice love story interwoven. The
hero (Johnny Hines) invents a blotterless and luminous
ink which he tries to market. Because he had rescued a
lunatic, who had taken him for a drive in a police depart-
ment car, where he meets the heroine (Louise Lorraine)
through a collision with her car, and because he accepts
as a reward a yacht which the lunatic claimed he owned,
he gets into many difficulties. A bond is stolen from the
heroine’s purse and although she suspects the hero, she
does not accuse him of the theft because she is in love
with him ; and to vindicate him, she has a blundering
detective shadow him. The scenes in her office where she
permits the hero to receive the men who were interested
in his invention are amusing in that he appears to be a
very wealthy man, the office being well furnished. There
are many amusing scenes on board the yacht. The leader
of the crew, which manned the yacht, was the real crook.
They were all bootleggers, trying to get beyond the three-
mile limit. Another amusing scene is when the heroine
sends in an actor to bid against the manufacturer, who
had come on board to further discuss the terms. Thinking
the whole thing a hoax, none of them buys it. And when
the radio announces that the yacht was reported stolen,
the crew puts out the lights and the hero, realizing that
he had been duped, fights the crew in the dark, doing
much running around. He had succeeded in writing the
word “HELP” on the side of the ship with his luminous
ink. This helps the police and the owner to find them.
Louise Lorraine is pleasing as the heroine. Fred
Kelsey contributes the comedy as the detective who always
caught the wrong man. Edmund Breese, Walter James
and Henry Barrows are in the cast also. The picture was
directed by Charles Hines from a story by Jack Townley.
Facts About Talking Pictures
(Continued from other side)
The price of the instrument will, as I understand, include
two simplex machines (Western Electric does not furnish
moving picture machines).
Originally the sound attachment was put before the ma-
chine head ; but RCA has made changes and put the sound
slit after the head, in the same position as it is in the
Movietone. In this manner, a Photophone instrument can
show a film made by the Movietone process, just as will a
Movietone be able to show a film made by the Photophone
process. I am informed reliably that RCA, too, are fitting
their instruments with dual turntables, so that also pictures
of the disc type of reproducing sound may be shown. The
turntables will be ready about November 1. About $3,000
additional will be charged. Photophone, Inc., is working
also on separate sound heads, to fit either a Simplex, or a
Powers, or a Motiograph machine. These will fit on the
machine the exhibitor already has. They will be ready for
delivery about December 1. A set of sound projectors,
consisting of four cones, will be furnished with these heads,
together with the amplifiers and whatever is needed. While
the outfit will be small, its quality will be guaranteed to
come up to the standard of the big instruments. The object
of the RCA Photophone executives is to manufacture some-
thing that will be within the reach of the small exhibitor.
The price has not yet been definitely determined; but it
will be soon.
These instruments will not be sold ; they will be only
leased, for a term of ten years. What they will do with
these instruments after the lease expires the Photophone
executives have not yet determined. But I have learned
on good authority that any improvements made on the in-
struments during the terms of the lease will be put on the
instruments that have already been sold or will be sold to
the exhibitors.
I11 addition to the regular talking pictures instrument,
RCA Photophone, Inc., is busy on a non-synchronous de-
vice, which will sell around $850. It will be fitted with the
regular sound projectors, of four cones. (It has not yet
been determined whether this instrument will be sold out-
right or only leased, as is the case with the talking instru-
ment.) By aid of this instrument an exhibitor will be able
to score his own pictures. The regular Victor records, used
on the Western Electric instrument, will be used also with
this instrument. The Victor Phonograph Company’s cue
sheet can be used. The instruments will be ready in quantity
about January 1.
Music Tax
The question of royalties, charged by the American Asso-
ciation of Composers, Authors and Publishers to those that
play music belonging to its members, irrespective of
whether it is on a sheet, on a record, or on the film
itself, remains exactly as it was before.
Next week: Cost of operation; cost of film, and other
relevant matters.
136
HARRISON’S REPORTS
August 25, 1928
I understand that they will synchronize pictures made also
by independent producers if such pictures can come up to a
certain standard of quality. So an exhibitor is sate, no
matter whether he installs the one type of instrument or the
other.
Prices
Let us now- give the prices of each of the instruments
offered by the two major companies:
Western Electric
Western Electric manufactures both kinds of instru-
ments, the disc (Vitaphone) and the film (Movietone)
types. These instruments are sold by Electrical Re-
search Products, Inc., a subsidiary of Western Elec-
tric, and its address is 250 West 57th Street, New York
City-.
The following are the prices this company charges
for its basic instruments: $8,500 for the 2S type, for
theatres that have fewer than 1,000 seats; $12,500 for
its 2SX type for theatres that have anywhere from 1,000
to 1,750 seats; and $17,000 for its IS type for theatres
of more than 1,750 seats. These prices are for either
the disc or the film type.
If an exhibitor should desire to have an attachment
to show also pictures in which the sound is recorded
on the film, $2,000 are added to the price of each class.
When an exhibitor wants a megaphone attachment,
so that he may be able to announce his coming attrac-
tions or other events from his office, he is charged $300
additional. There is also a $500 charge if he should
want to have a non-synchronous device, which is sold
also separately, so that an exhibitor can accompany his pic-
tures by phonograph record music.
The total charge for these extra attachments is $2,800.
This makes the price for the complete instrument for
the three classes of houses as follows:
2S (for fewer than 1,000 seats) $11,300
2SX (for 1,000 to 1,750 seats) 15,300
IS (for more than 1,750 seats) 19,800
For the non-synchronous device, Electrical Research
Products charges as follows:
$3,500 for theatres that have less than 1,000 seais;
$7,500 for theatres that have anywhere from 1,000 to
1,750 seats; and $12,000 for theatres of over 1,750 seat-
ing capacity. When an exhibitor eventually decides to
install a synchronizing device, $3,000 credit is given
on the $3,500 instrument, $7,000 on the $7,500, and
$11,500 on the $12,000 instrument, for the reason that,
outside of the box containing the turntables for the
disc records, everything is the same in the talking in-
struments, and therefore no other installation is re-
quired. (The sound projectors are the same.) In such
an event the exhibitor is required to pay- the difference
between the price of his non-synchronous instrument
and the price for the talking instrument, for the same
class houses, plus $500. This brings the total price (if
also the film attachment is ordered), as already- given
in the table.
For the convenience of those of exhibitors that have
bought or contemplate buying a non-synchronous in-
strument, the Victor Phonograph Company is cueing
the pictures of the different producer-distributors, in-
dicating the records by numbers. With a supply- of
about three hundred records, an exhibitor is able to
cover any feature. The records have the same music
on both sides, so that if one side should get scratched
the other side may be used without any delay or in-
convenience. There are two turntables to each non-
synchronous instrument so that it is possible for the
person that attends it to change records without inter-
rupting the music. (I understand that these records are
only leased.) These are good not only for the Western
Electric type of non-synchronous instruments, but also
for all other types.
Terms
The terms for the installation of a Western Electric
talking picture instrument are as follows: io% upon
the signing of the contract ($1,000 is the smallest sum
accepted as a down payment), 15% upon completing
the installation (by demand note), and the balance in
104 weekly payments, in addition to a weekly charge
for engineering services, as well as a charge for inter-
est and for insurance fee.
In the case of the 2S type, complete with Movietone
attachment, with the non-synchronous device, and with
the megaphone, the total price of which is $11,300, the
payments are as follows: $1,130 down, $1,695 (by de-
mand note) upon completing the installation, and
$122.80 weekly for 104 weeks. This $122.80 includes
$29.35 for maintenance (engineering services) and in-
terest on the money, as well as insurance fee.
On the 2SX type, the price of which is $12,500, and
complete with Movietone attachment, with a non-syn-
chronous cabinet and a megaphone attachment, $1 5,300,
the down payment is $1,530; upon completing the in-
stallation, $2,295 (by demand note), and $11,475 in 104
weekly payments of $169.80 each. In the weekly pay-
ments are included, as in the other class instruments,
the interest on the money due, insurance fee, and $43.75
for maintenance.
On the IS type, the basic price of which is $17,000,
and with the attachments $19,800, the down payment
is $1,980; the payment after the installation has been
completed is $2,970 (by demand note), and $221.80 a
week for 104 weeks for the balance, which is $14,810.
This weekly sum includes amortization, as in the two
other classes of instruments, interest on the money due,
insurance fee, and $59.50 for engineering services.
On the non-synchronous device, the payments are
similar in all three classifications — 10% down, 15%
(by demand note) upon completing the installation, and
the balance in 104 weekly payments, which are: $38.50
for the $3,500 instrument; $82.50 for the $7,500 instru-
ment, and $136.00 for the $12,000 instrument. These
payments include, as in the case of the synchronous
instrument, amortization, interest on the money due,
insurance fee, and engineering services.
(Note: Originally the charges for engineering services
were, $40, $60, and $80 respectively for the three classes of
theatres. But they were reduced last May 10%, and re-
cently they were reduced again.)
None of the Western Electric instruments, synchro-
nous or non-synchronous, disc or film type, are sold;
they are leased for a term of ten years. At the end of
the ten-year term they still remain the property of
Western Electric Company. Its executives have not
yet decided what shall be done with these instruments
at the end of the ten y-ears.
Photophone
RCA Photophone, Inc., whose address is 411 Fifth
Avenue, New York City, has four different prices for
four different classes of theatres, the class a theatre be-
longing to depending on seating capacity. Class D thea-
tres have fewer than 750 seats; class C, fewer than 1,500
and more than 750; class B, fewer than 3,000 and more
than 1,500; class A, more than 3,000.
The following are the prices:
Class D $ 8,500
Class C 11,000
Class B 13,500
Class A 17,000
The terms for payment are for one, two or three
years. Twenty-five per cent is received as down pay-
ment, and the balance in equal monthly payments.
In the one-year term contract, no charge is made for
interest. In the two year term contract, $750 is charged
for the class D; $1,000 for the class C; $1,000 for the
class B; and $1,500 for the class A.
In the three-year term, $1,250 is charged for the
class D; $2,000 for class C; $2,000 for class B; and
$3,000 for class A.
On the two-year term, the prices become as follows:
class D, $9,250; class C, $12,000; class B, $14,500;
class A, $18,500.
On the three-year term, the prices become as follows:
class D; $9,750; class C, $13,000; class B, $15,500; class
A, $20,000.
The monthly payments start one month after the
installation. The exhibitor is required to sign notes.
The prices are subject to change without notice.
This price does not include service charge; this
charge will be separate, but it will not in any event be
as big as that of Western Electric. RCA Photophone,
Inc., will have several theatres in one locality grouped
together and taken care of by one man. In the case of
the small instruments, it is hardly possible that a com-
pany man will be required to attend to them; any one
with a radio experience will be able to adjust anything
that may go wrong with it. The insurance fee is not
included in the purchase price, either; this has to be
paid for by the exhibitor himself.
( Continued on back of this page )
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
HARRISO TV’S REPORTS
SATURDAY, AUGUST 25, 1928
Vol. X
( P artial Index — No. 4 — Pages 105 to 126)
No. 34
Actress, The— Metro-Goldwyn
Beau Broadway— Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer .
Big Killing, The— Paramount
Cavalier, The— Tiffany-Stahl
Cossacks, The — Metro-Goldwyn
Cowboy Kid, The — Fox
Detectives — Metro-Goldwyn
Diamond Handcuffs— Metro-Goldwyn
Domestic Troubles— Warner Bros
Fleetwing — Fox
Forbidden Hours— Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Foreign Legion, ihe — Univ.-Jewel ■
Forgotten Paces — Paramount
Gang War — F BO
Goli Widows— Columbia
Green Grass Widows — I iffany-Stahl ....
Crip of the Yukon — Univ.-Jewel
Halt a Bride — Paramount
Head Man, The— First National
Heart to Heart— First National
Hot News — Paramount
Into No Alan’s Land— Excellent-Reg
114
123
107
126
106
131
115
no
122
III
1 19
106
126
■ Il8
.110
■ Il8
H5
1 14
.131
.131
119
Il8
Jazz Alad — Univ.-Jewel ..
Just Alarried— Paramount
Ladies of the Night Club— Tiffany-Stahl 115
Lilac Time — First National J30
Lights of New York— Warner Bros no
Lost in the Arctic — Fox - I23
Loves of an Actress — Paramount 122
Aladamoiselle From Armentiers — Metro-Goldwyn 106
Magnificent P'lirt, The — Paramount 106
Making the Varsity— Excellent-Reg 123
Aiichigan Kid, The— Univ.-Jewel 107
Modern Alothers — Columbia - Iot>
Alysterious Lady, The— Aletro-Goldwyn 127
Name the Woman — Columbia
None But the Brave — Fox . . .
Powder Aly Back — Warner Bros — 127
Prowlers of the Sea— Tiffany-Stahl 118
Racket, The — Paramount
Ransom — Columbia I27
Red Dance, The — Fox I07
Road House — Fox 122
Sally of the Scandals — F BO 111
Say it With Sables — Columbia *3i
Skirts — Aletro-Goldwyn- Alayer (British) 123
Stocks and Blondes — F BO - *3°
Stormy Waters — Tiffany-Stahl 107
Telling the World — Aletro-Goldwyn 114
Undressed — Sterling-Reg 122
United States Smith — Gotham-Reg 119
Vanishing Pioneer, The — Paramount 130
Warming Up — Paramount ..: JI4
Way of die Strong, The — Columbia 130
White Shadows in the South Seas — Aletro-Goldwyn . .126
FIRST NATIONAL EXHIBITION VALUES
546 Shepherd of the Hills — Jan. 1 Special
542 Helen of Troy— Jan. 8 Special
446 French Dressing — Jan. 15 900,000B
459 Sailors’ Wives — Jan. 22 800,0OOB
437 The Noose — Jan. 29 1, 300.000 B
445 The Whip Woman — Feb. 5 900,000 B
426 The Chaser — Feb. 12 1,OOO.OOOB
464 The Wagon Show — Feb. 19 700.000B
455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 1,100,OOOB
447 Mad Hour — March 4 900.000B
440 Burning Daylight — Alarch 11 950.000B
434 Heart of a Follies Girl — March 18 l,100,O0OB
448 The Big Noise — March 25 900.000B
451 Ladies’ Night — April 1 l,0OO,OOOB
436 Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — April 8 l,30O,00OB
461 Chinatown Charlie — April 15 800.000B
468 Canyon of Adventure — April 22 700.000B
444 Harold Teen— April 29 900.000B
449 Lady Be Good— May 6 900,0OOB
456 Vamping Venus — May 13 l,100,00OB
435 The Yellow Lily — May 20 1,100.000B
442 The Hawk’s Nest— May 27 950.000B
467 The Upland Rider— June 3 700.000B
460 Three Ring Marriage — June 10 800.000B
438 Wheel of Chance — June 17 (Roulette) 1,300,000B
429 Happiness Ahead — June 24 1,300,000B
466 Code of the Scarlet — July 1 700.000B
539 Good-Bye Kiss — July 8 Special
454 The Head Man — July 15 1,100,000B
458 Heart to Heart — July 22 800.000B
513 The Strange Case of Capt. Ramper — July 29.yoo.oooB
543 The Barker — Postponed
427 Heart Tr’ble (Here Comes Band) — Aug.i2.i,ooo,oooB
FEATURE RELEASE SCHEDULE
(Note: Notice that hereafter all synchronised subjects
will be indicated on the list as follozvs: “S” means that the
subject has been synchronised, but only with music — in no
part of the film do the characters talk; “PT” means that
the characters talk in some of the situations, and that the
remainder of the film is synchronized zvith music; "AT"
means that the characters talk all the zvay through.)
Columbia Features
Beware of Blondes — AL AIoore-D. Revier July 1
Say It with Sables — F. Bushman-H. Chadwick July 13
Virgin Lips — O. Borden-J. Boles (Reset) July, 25
The Scarlet Lady — Lya de Putti-Don Alvardo Aug. r
Court-Alartial — Jack Holt-B. Compson Aug. 12
Runaway Girls — Shirley Alason-A. Rankin Aug. 25
Street of Illusion — V. Valli-I. Keith Sept. 3
Sinner’s Parade — D. Revier- V. Varconi Sept. 14
Submarines — Jack Holt-R. Graves-D. Revier. ... Sept. 23
Excellent Features
Making the Varsity — Lease-Hulette (reset) July 15
Speed Classic — Lease-Harris (reset) July 31
Manhattan Knights — Bedford-Miller (reset) ... .Aug. 15
Life’s Crossroads — G. Hulette-Wm. Conklin Aug. 25
Power of the Press Sept. 10
Dream Melody Sept. 20
Confessions of a Wife Sept. 30
F B O Features
8246 The Fightin’ Redhead — Buzz Barton July 1
8237 The Trail of Courage — Bob Steele July 8
8219 Sally of the Scandals — B. Love-A. Forrest. .July 15
8247 The Bantam Cowboy — Buzz Barton Aug. 12
9221 Terror Alountain — Tom Tyler Aug. 19
9211 The Perfect Crime (PT)— C. Brooks Aug. 19
9201 Danger Street — W. Baxter-M. Sleeper Aug. 26
9233 Captain Careless — Bob Steele Aug. 26
9291 Dog Law — Ranger Sept. 2
9212 Taxi 13 (PT) — Conklin-Sleeper Sept. 2
9202 Stocks and Blondes — Logan-Gallagher Sept. 9
9203 Charge of the Gauchos — Logan -Bushman . . Sept. 16
9241 The Young Whirlwind — Buzz Barton Sept. 16
9213 Hit of the Show (PT) — Olmstead-Brown.Sept. 23
Fox Features
Painted Post — Tom Mix (Reset) July 1
Road House — Al. Alba-M. Burke (Reset) July 22
None But the Brave — Morton-Phipps (Reset) .. .Aug. 5
Street Angel (S) — Gaynor-Farrell (reset) Aug. 19
The River Pirate (S) — AIcLaglen-AIoran (reset) Aug. 26
Four Sons (S) — Alann-Collyer-Hall (reset) ....Sept. 2
Fazil (S) — Farrell-Nissen (reset) Sept. 9
Win That Girl (S) — Rollins-Carol Sept. 16
Plastered in Paris (S) — Cohen-Pennick Sept. 23
The Air Circus (S) — Rollins-Carol Sept. 30
Alaking the Grade (S) — Lowe-Moran Oct. 7
Dry Alartini (S) — Astor-Afoore-Gran Oct. 14
August 25, 1928 _ HARRISON’
Gotham Features
United States Smith— E. Gribbon-L. Lee (reset). July I
Midnight Life (Man Higher Up”)— Bushman Aug. 15
Head of the Family — V. Corbin Sept. 15
The River Woman — L. Barrymore-J. Logan Aug. 22
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Features
S45 The Adventurer— Tim McCoy-D. Sebastian. .July 14
No Release ••July 21
No Release July 28
833 Mysterious Lady — Garbo (“War in Dark”). Aug. 4
835 Four Walls — Gilbert-Crawford Aug. xi
829 The Cardboard Lover — Davies-Goudal Aug. 25
907 Our Dancing Daughters (S)Crawford-Brown.Sept. 1
914 Excess Baggage (S)-Wm. Haines-J. Dunn .Sept. 8
938 While the City Sleeps (S)— Chaney- A. Page. Sept. 15
042 Beyond the Sierras — Tim McCoy Sept. 15
918 The Camera Man — Buster Keaton — M. Day. .Sept. 22
902 Beau Broadway — Lew Cody — A. Pringle Sept. 29
Paramount Features
2729 Hot News — B. Daniels-N. Hamilton July 14
2775 Kit Carson — Fred Thomson July 21
2853 The Wedding March — Von Stroheim Postponed
2724 The Mating Call — Thomas Meighan July 21
2801 Warming Up (S) — Dix-Arthur (reset) .. .Aug. 4
2874 Forgotten Faces — Brook-Brian (reset) Aug. 11
2819 Loves of an Actress (S) Negri (reset) Aug. 18
2835 Just Married — Hall-Taylor (reset) Aug. 18
2870 The Water Hole — J. Holt-Carroll (reset) . .Aug. 25
2829 Sawdust Paradise (S) — Ralston-Bosworth. Sept. 1
2855 The Fleet’s In — Clara Bow Sept. 15
2862 Beggars of Life (S) — Beery (reset) Sept. 22
2839 Model from Montmartre — Petrovich (reset) . Sept. 22
2804 The First Kiss — Cooper-Wray (reset) Aug. 25
2852 The Patriot (S) — E. Jannings- Vidor Sept. 1
2814 Varsity (S) — Rogers-Conklin Sept. 29
Pathe Features
9522 Tenth Avenue — Varconi-Schildkraut-Haver.Aug. 5
9520 The Cop— William Boyd Aug. 19
9521 The Red Mark Aug. 26
9544 Man-Made Women — L. Joy-H. B. Warner. .Sept. 9
9512 Love Over Night — Rod La Rocque Sept. 16
9519 Craig’s Wife — I. Rich Sept. 23
9511 The King of Kings — H. B. Warner Sept. 23
Rayart Features
Mystery Valley — B. Roosevelt July —
The Divine Sinner — V. Reynolds-E. Hilliard July —
Man From Headquarters — E. Roberts-C. Keefe. Aug. —
Sweet Sixteen — Helen Foster-Gertrude Olmsted. Aug. —
The City of Purple Dreams — Fraser-Bedford. . Sept. —
Sisters of Eve — B. Blythe- A. Stewart Sept. —
Tiffany Features
Lingerie — A. White — M. McGregor (Reset) July 1
The Grain of Dust — Cortez-Windsor (Reset) July 10
The Albany Night Boat — Olive Borden July 20
Beautiful But Dumb — Patsy Ruth Miller Aug. 1
Domestic Relations — Claire Windsor Aug. 15
The Naughty Duchess — Southern-Warner Sept. 1
The Toilers (SM) — Fairbanks, Jr.-Ralston Sept. 10
The Power of Silence — B. Bennett-J. Westwood. .Sept. 15
United Artists Features
Tempest (S) — Barrymore-Horn (reset) Aug. 25
Two Lovers (S) — Colman-Banky (reset) Sept. 7
Woman Disputed (S) — N. Tahnadge Oct. 20
Battle of the Sexes (S) — Hersholt-Haver Oct.
Revenge (S) — Dolores Del Rio Nov. 13
Awakening, The (S) — Banky (song film) Nov. 17
Love Song (PT) — Boyd (song L. Velez) Nov.
The Rescue (PT) — Colman-Damita Nov.
A Tale of Two Cities — (Withdrawn)
Hell’s Angels (S) — Lyon-Nissen Roadshow
Universal Features
A5718 The Flyin' Cowboy — Hoot Gibson July 1
A 357 Quick Triggers — F. Humes July 15
Greased Lightning — Ted Wells July 29
A5722 Riding for Fame — Hoot Gibson Aug. 19
A 5730 Uncle Tom’s Cabin (S) — All Star .Sept. 2
A5732 Home, James — L. LaPlante Sept. 2
A5734 Anybody Here Seen Kelly — T. Moore. ... Sept. 9
1 REPORTS Partial Index, No. 4
A5735 The Night Bird — Denny Sept. 16
A359 Guardians of the Wild — Rex-J. Perrin. .. Sept. 16
A5733 Foreign Legion — L. Stone-N. Kerry Sept. 23
A5744 Grip of the Yukon — Marlowe- Bushman. Sept. 30
A360 The Cloud Dodger — Al. Wilson ........ Sept. 30
Warner Bros. Features
218 State Street Sadie (PT) — M. Loy-C. Nagel. .Aug. 25
228 Women They Talk About (PT) — Rich Sept. 8
227 Caught in the Fog (PT) — McAvoy-Nagel. . Sept. 22
ONE AND TWO REEL COMEDIES
Educational — One Reel
Felix the Cat in the Last Life Aug. 5
He Tried to Please — Collins-Hutton Aug. 12
Troubles Galore — Collins-Ruby McCoy Aug. 26
Cook, Papa, Cook — Murdock-Hutton-Cameo Sept. 9
Wife Trouble — Graves-Cameo Sept. 23
Educational — Two Reels
Kid Hayseed — -Big Boy-Juvenile Aug. 5
Goofy Birds — Bowers Aug. 12 /
Just Dandy — Drew-Mermaid Aug. 19 /
Wedded Blisters — Lupino-Boyd-Tuxedo Aug. 26 ^
Hot Luck — Big Boy-Juvenile Sept. 2 //
Pirates Beware — Lupino Lane Sept. *)* /
Girlies Behave — Drew-Ideal Sept. 9'
Call Your Shots — Al St. John-Mermaid Sept. 16 /
Polar Perils — Monty Collins-Mermaid Sept. 30*
F B O — One Reel
9161 Curiosities Sept. 26
F B O — Two Reels
Mickey’s Babies — Mickey McGuire Aug. 7
Joyful Days — Standard Aug. 14
Jessie’s James — Vaughn-Cooke Aug. 26
The Wages of Synthetic — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 2
Mickey’s Movies — Micky McGuire Sept. 2
You Just Know She Dares ’Em — Vaughn-Cooke. .Sept. 9
Horsefeathers — Barney Google-Davis-Hallum Sept. 9
Fooling Casper — Toots and Casper-Hill-Duncan. .Sept. 16
The Arabian Fights — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 16
Ruth Is Stranger Than Fiction — Vaughn-Cooke. .Sept. 23
The Sweet Buy and Buy — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 30
Mickey’s Rivals — Mickey McGuire Sept. 30
Fox — One Reel
The Lofty Andes Aug. 5
Snowbound — Varieties Aug. 19
Neapolitan Days — Varieties Sept. 2
Through the Aisles — Varieties Sept. 16
Spanish Craftsmen — Varieties Sept. 30
Fox — Two Reels
A Knight of Daze — Van Bibber June 10
A Cow’s Husband — Animal June 24
Daisies Won’t Tell — Imperial July 8
His Favorite Wife — Van Bibber July 22
The Elephant’s Elbows — Animal Aug. 5
Her Mother’s Back — Imperial Aug. 19
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
A Happy Omen — Oddity July 14
Nature’s Wizardry — Oddity July 28
The Eagle’s Nest — Oddity Aug. 18
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Cleopatra — Events July 7
Imagine My Embarrassment (S) — Qiase Sept. 1
Should Married Men Go Home — Laurel-Hardy. .Sept. 8
That Night — All Star Sept. 15
Growing Pains — Our Gang Sept. 22
Victorious Defeat (S) — Events Sept. 22
Is Everybody Happy ? — Chase Sept. 29
Paramount — One Reel
Koko’s Catch — Inkwell Imps July 7
News Reeling — Krazy Kat Aug. 4
Koko’s Qiase — Inkwell Imps Aug. 11
Baby Feud — Krazy Kat Aug. 18
Koko Heaves Ho — Inkwell Imps Aug. 25
Sea Sword — Krazy Kat Sept. 1
Koko’s Big Pull — Inkwell Imps Sept. 8
No Title — Krazy Kat Sept. 15
Koko Kleans Up — Inkwell Imps Sept. 22
No Title — Krazy Kat Sept. 29
Partial Index, No. 4
HARRISON’S REPORTS
August 25, 1928
Paramount — Two Reels
Walls Tell Tales — Stars & Authors (reset) Aug. 4
Dizzy Diver (S) — Dooley (reset) Aug. 11
Hot Scotch (S) — MacDuff (reset) Aug. 18
Stop Kidding (S) — Vernon (reset) Aug. 25
Skating Home — Chorus Girl Sept. 1
Two Masters — Stars & Authors (reset) Sept. 8
Vacation Waves (S) — Horton (set) Sept. 15
The Sock Exchange (S) — Vernon (set) Sept. 22
Oriental Hugs (S) — Dooley Sept. 29
Pathe — Two Reels
The Girl From Nowhere — Sennett Aug. 5
His Unlucky Night — Sennett Aug. 12
Smith’s Restaurant — Smith Family Aug. 19
The Chicken — Sennett Aug. 26
His Royal Slyness — Harold Lloyd (re-issue) Sept. 2
Taxi for Two — Sennett-J. Cooper Sept. 2
Caught in the Kitchen — Sennett-B. Bevan Sept. 9
A Dumb Waiter — ■Sennett-J. Burke Sept. 16
The Campus Carmen — Sennett Girls Sept. 23
Motor Boat Mamas — Sennett Sept. 3o
Universal — One Reel
Her Haunted Heritage — Hall-Highbrow July 2
Tall Timber — Oswald Cartoon July 9
Sandwiches and Tea — Drugstore July 16
Sleigh Bells — Oswald Cartoons July 23
The Trackless Trolley — Harold Highbrow July 30
High Up — Oswald Cartoon (reset) Aug. 6
King of Shebas — Drugstore (reset) Aug. 13
Hot Dog — Oswald Cartoon (reset) Aug. 20
A Hurry Up Marriage — Harold Highbrow (re.) .Aug. 27
Sky Scrapper — Oswald Cartoon Sept. 3
Hollywood or Bust — Horace in Hollywood Sept. 10
Universal — Two Reels
Newlyweds False Alarm — Jr. Jewels July 2
Reel Life — Stern Bros July 4
Cash Customers — Stern Bros. July 11
Big Game George — Stern Bros July 18
Good Scout Buster — Stern Bros July 25
Broke Out — Stern Bros Aug. 1
Newlyweds’ Anniversary — Jr. Jewel Aug. 6
McGinis vs. Jones — Stern Bros Aug. 8
Busting Buster — Stern Bros Aug. 15
She’s My Girl — Stern Bros Aug. 22
Husbands Won’t Tell — Stern Bros Aug. 29
Newlyweds’ Hard Luck — Jr. Jewel Sept. 5
Rubber Necks — Stern Bros Sept. 12
SYNCHRONIZED SHORT SUBJECTS
Fox Movietone
A short description of each of the Fox Movietone short releases to
date:
1. Lindbergh take-off and reception in Washington. Picture shows
historic take-off at Mitchell Field, L. I., reproducing the whir-
ring of the motor and the shouts of approbation from the
crowds. Then follows the reception and speeches in Washing-
ton, his meeting with Coolidge and politically great.
2. Gertrude Lawrence singing “I Don’t Know.” ‘‘Ranger Song,”
sung by J. Harold Murray, and “Spring Fever,” a piano duet
by the Rio Rita girls.
3. Voices of Italy. St. Peter’s Vatican Choir singing sacred
music. Medieval Latin Chants. Benito Mussolini, dictator of
Italy and founder of the Fascisti movement, speaks in Italian
and English of the bond between this country and his own.
4. American Legion in Paris. Speeches by Marshall Foch and
General Pershing and the great parade down the Champs
Elysee amid the cheers of former French comrades in arms.
5. Chic Sale in a characteristic comedy sketch entitled “They
Are Coming to Get Me.” He portrays an escaped lunatic who
lands in the pulpit of a church and delivers the sermon of a
tardy minister.
6. Raquel Meller appears in two Movietone shorts. In the first
she sings “Flor de Mai” and “Corpus Christi Day,” and in
the second she sings “La Mujer del Torero” and “Noi de La
Mare.”
7. Winnie Lightner — songs. “Nagasaki Butterfly” and “Every-
body Loves My Girl.”
8. Ben Bernie’s Orchestra plays the following: “A Lane in
Spain,” “Are You Going To Be Home” and “Scheherazade.”
9. West Point Drill. Speech by Colonel March B. Stewart, super-
intendent of the Academy, followed by the clocklike drill and
parade of the Cadets.
10. Kentucky Jubilee Choir singing “Old Kentucky Home” and
“Swing Low, Sweet Chariot.”
11. Nina Tarasova singing “There Once Were Happy Days.”
12. Anatole Friedland’s Ritz Revue, “On the Beach in Atlantic
City.”
13. “The Treasurer’s Report,” featuring Robert Benchley, the well
known author of “Love Conquers All” and dramatic critic of
Life. In this picture Benchley plays the part of a church treas-
urer. Benchley will also appear in “The Sex Life of the
Polyp,” an animal which has the same startling properties as
the Amoeba — that of reproducing itself by separating into two
parts, which parts separate into two again, etc.
14. “The Hut,” featuring Nina Tarasova and the Russian Cathe-
dral Choir. A musical production.
15. Beatrice Lillie, comedienne, singing “Rambling Along the
Highway” and “The Roses Have Made Me Remember."
16. “In a Music Shoppe,” a musical production based on the life
of the American composer, Stephen Collins Foster.
17. Pat Rooney, Marion Bent and Pat Rooney, 3rd, in a series of
songs and dances typical of the Rooney family.
18. George Bernard Shaw, celebrated Irish playwright, in a short
speech in which the gifted Shavian imitates Mussolini and
makes a few pertinent remarks about the impression his readers
get of him.
19. Richard Bonelli, leading baritone of the Chicago Civic Opera
Company, singing the Prologue from “Pagliacci.”
20. “The Family Picnic,” with Kathleen Key and Raymond Mc-
Kee. The nrst two-reel comedy to be made with full sound
effects.
21. Clark and McCullough, celebrated stage comedians in a farce,
“The Interview.”
22. Ruby Keeler, dancer, does a tap dance showing the adaptability
of this form of entertainment on the screen.
23. Joe Cook, star of "Rain or Shine,” in a short sketch, “At the
Ball Game.”
24. Betty Compton, featured in the Broadway musical success,
“Funny Face,” in a series of dances.
25. "Four A. M.,” with Marjorie Beebe, Sammy Cohen, Tyler
Brooke, Ben Bard and Henry Armetta. A two reel comedy
with full sound effects directed by William Conselman.
26. “Mystery Mansion," with Sumner Getchel, Toy Gallagher and
Ford West, written and directed by Harry Delf.
HOW TO FIND THE AGE OF YOUR
NEWS WEEKLY
The Newsweeklies of all the him concerns are not re-
leased at the same time in all zones. For instance, a News-
weekly that is released in New York City on a certain day
is not released in San Francisco, or in Seattle, or in Dallas,
until three or four or hve days later. The number of days
that elapse between the time it is released in this zone and
the time it is released in another zone depends on distance.
Naturally the distributors deduct from the New York re-
lease dates the number of days a newsweekly is in transit.
In order for you to find the age of the particular news-
weekly you use, hrst look in the New York release schedule,
printed in every Blue Section. Then look in the Release-
Day Chart, printed in the Blue Section of HARRISON’S
REPORTS occasionally (one has been printed in this is-
sue), and hud the figure that tells you how many days the
newsweekly has been in transit, so that you may add an
equal number of days to the New York release date.
Suppose, for example, you want to find out how old is
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Newsweekly No. 101, or the odd
number, which was released in the New York zone on
Wednesday, August 1. Look in the Odd Column of the
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer News in the Release Day Chart un-
til you come to the line opposite the zone which serves you.
Let us say that you are in Denver, Colorado. Look in
the Denver line and stop under the Odd Column of the
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer News. You will find that the re-
lease day given is Saturday, and the figure “3.” This
means that you must add three days to August 1, which is,
as said, the New York release date for that number of the
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer News, or, August 4. In other
words, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer News No. 101, which was
one day old in the New York City zone on Wednesday,
August 1, was one day old in Denver on Saturday, Aug-
ust 4.
The age of all the other weeklies, in all the zones, can be
determined by the same calculation. Where "o" is given,
it means that the particular newsweekly was released in
that zone on the same day and date as it was in the New
York City zone.
Take a little trouble and figure the age of your news-
weekly so that you may know whether you are getting it
at the age you pay for or not. Last week a Western ex-
hibitor asked me to determine the age of his Newsweekly
and found out that, though his contract called for an age of
thirteen days, he was getting it twenty-nine days old. The
Release-Day Chart was compiled after much hard effort
and a lot of thinking ; it was done for the purpose of pre-
venting any exchange from giving you a Newsweekly older
than the age you had it contracted for. Why not take
advantage of it ?
ARE ANY OF YOUR COPIES MISSING?
Look through your files of HARRISON’S REPORTS
and if you find any copies missing let us know and we shall
be glad to send you duplicate copies, free of charge. You
cannot tell when you will need the missing copies ; so why
not send for them now ? Some of these days you may want
to look up something and it may be printed in the copy that
is missing. Think of what it might cost you ! A’ little
work and a little trouble now may save you much money
later on.
CHART OF RELEASE DAYS FOR ALL N EWS WEEKLIES
International News
Pathe News
Fox News
Kinograms
Paramount N
ews
M-G-M News
Even Odd
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Even Odd
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Ret
Rel.
Albany
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sat 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Wed.
0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Atlanta
. .Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Boston
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
-Buffalo
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Butte
..Wed. 4
Sat 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
—
—
Tue. 3
Sat
3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Charleston
Thur. 1
—
—
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
—
—
—
Charlotte
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Chicago
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Cincinnati
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Cleveland
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed.
0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Columbus
. .
—
—
•
—
—
—
.
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
—
Dallas
. .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Mon. 2
Sat 3
Wed. 4
Sat
3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Denver
. .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Mon. 2
Sat 3
Wed. 4
Sat
3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Des Moines
. .Sim. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed.
0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Detroit
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
El Paso
. .
—
—
—
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
—
—
—
—
—
—
Indianapolis . . . .
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Jacksonville ....
Thur. 1
—
—
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
—
—
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
—
—
Kansas City
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Los Angeles
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Sun. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Tue. 3
Sat.
3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Memphis
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur..l
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Milwaukee
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Minneapolis . . . .
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sat. 3
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
New Haven
. .Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
New Orleans . . .
. .Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 5
Fri. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Mon. 2
Fri. 2
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
New York
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed.
0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Oklahoma City .
,..Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 4
Sat.
3
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Omaha
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. I
Peoria
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
—
—
Philadelphia
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Pittsburgh
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Portland, Ore. ,
. . AVed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Mon. 5
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
—
—
Wed. 4
Sun.
4
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Portland, Me. . .
..Sun. 1
Thur. 1
—
—
—
—
—
r
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
—
—
St. Louis
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Salt Lake City..
..Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Fri.
2
Wed. 4
Sat 3
San Antonio . . .
.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wed. 4
Sat.
3
—
—
San Francisco . .
. .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Sun. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Tue. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat.
3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Seattle
. .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Sat. 3
SaL 3
Tues. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat.
3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Sioux Falls
Thur. 1
—
—
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
—
—
WpH 0
Washington
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Wichita, Kans. .
. Mon. 2
Thur. 1
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wilkes Barre ..
. .
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
—
—
Winnipeg
—
Mon. 5
—
—
—
—
—
—
NEW YORK
Kinograms
5422 Even Number.. Wednesday, Aug. 15
5423 Odd Number ...Saturday, Aug. 18
5424 Even N umber. . W ednesday, Aug. 22
5425 Odd Number ...Saturday, Aug. 25
5426 Even Number.. Wednesday, Aug. 29
5427 Odd Number ...Saturday, Sept. 1
5428 Even Number.. Wednesday, Sept. 5
5420 Odd Number ...Saturday, Sept. 8
5430 Even Number.. Wednesday, Sept. 12
5431 Odd Number ...Saturday, Sept. 15
5482 Even Number. .Wednesday, Sept. 19
5433 Odd Number ...Saturday, Sept. 22
5434 Even N umber. . Wednesday, Sept. 26
5435 Odd Number ...Saturday, Sept. 29
International
65 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 15
66 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 18
67 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 22
68 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 25
69 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 29
70 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 1
71 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 5
72 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 8
73 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 12
74 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 15
75 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 19
76 Even Number ....Saturday, Sept. 22
77 Odd Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 26
78 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 29
RELEASE DATES OF THE DIFFERENT
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer
1 Odd Number ....Wednesday, Aug. 15
2 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 18
3 Odd Number Wednesday, Aug. 22
4 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 25
5 Odd Number Wednesday, Aug. 29
6 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 1
7 Odd Number Wednesday, Sept. 5
8 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 8
9 Odd Number Wednesday, Sept. 12
10 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 15
11 Odd Number Wednesday, Sept. 19
12 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 22/
13 Odd Number ....Wednesday, Sept. 26
14 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 29
Paramount
6 Even Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 15
7 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 18
8 Even Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 22
9 Odd N umber Saturday, Aug. 25
10 Even Number ...Wednesday, Aug. 29
1 1 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 1
12 Even Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 5
13 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 8
14 Even Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 12
15 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 15
16 Even Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 19
17 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 22
18 Even Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 26
19 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 29
NEWS WEEKLIES
Fox
93 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Aug. 15
94 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 18
95 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Aug. 22
96 Even Number Saturday, Aug. 25
97 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Aug. 29
98 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 1
99 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 5
100 Even Number ....Saturday, Sept. 8
101 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 12
102 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 15
103 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 19
104 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 22
1 Odd Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 26
2 Even Number Saturday, Sept. 29
Pathe
68 Even Number ..Wednesday, Aug. 15
69 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 18
70 Even Number ..Wednesday, Aug. 22
71 Odd Number Saturday, Aug. 25
72 Even Number ..Wednesday, Aug. 29
73 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 1
74 Even Number ...Wednesday, Sept. 5
75 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 8
76 Even Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 12
77 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 15
78 Even Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 19
79 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 22
80 Even Number ..Wednesday, Sept. 26
81 Odd Number Saturday, Sept. 29
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Hates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1928
No. 35
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments — No. 3
There is just one more detail necessary to make last
week’s article about the cost of the talking picture instru-
ments complete ; and that detail is, the fact that all instru-
ments. whether sold by Western Electric or by RCA Photo-
phone, Inc., are sold f. o. b. factory. In other words, the
exhibitor pays for the transportation from the factory to
his theatre. The common carrier is considered by both
these companies as the agent of the exhibitor. Conse-
quently. should the instrument be lost or destroyed while in
transit the exhibitor must look to the common carrier for
redress, it should be well for the exhibitor, therefore, to
insure the instrument from the day that it is shipped.
Is Installation in Small Theatres Possible?
The next question about talking pictures asked most fre-
quently is whether an exhibitor wrho is in a small town
and who has a small seating capacity can install a talking
picture instrument profitably or not.
To answer such a question with any nearness to accuracy
and to support it with facts, it is necessary for us to look
into the entire cost of showing talking pictures — instrument
installation maintenance, and cost of films. The cost of
installation and maintenance was covered adequately last
week. There now remains for us to deal with the cost of
the film to the exhibitor.
The cost of the film to the exhibitor naturally wall de-
pend, in the main, on the cost of the pictures to the pro-
ducer. Now and then the cost of a particular picture to the
exhibitor will depend on that picture’s drawing powers.
If it made a great hit, for example, the exhibitor is charged
more for it. But in the main, it is cost of production that
will govern the rental price to the exhibitor.
Let us now look into the conditions at the studio to see
what is happening there and at what cost are talking pictures
produced.
Cost of Production
The talking picture has swooped down so suddenly that
it caught the industry unprepared ; or, to be exact, it did not
come suddenly, but five of the largest producers, while
Warner Bros, were still struggling to make their talking
pictures go, and long before the production of "The Jazz
Singer,” a picture that marks the rise of the talking pic
ture, came together and agreed not to allow themselves to
be stampeded by this new invention.
It would have been well for the industry had these pro-
ducers, while under a verbal agreement not to be stampeded,
carried on experimental work with a view to preparing
themselves for such an emergency. But they did not. And
now they are paying for their mistake.
Unforunately it is not only they that are paying but the
entire industry. And it will pay more dearly unless some-
thing is done to check the present hysteria. As a result of
it the industry is headed towards bankruptcy. The cost of
producing pictures today is so enormous that it is unlikely
that exhibition can absorb it all. It is nonsense to talk about
the great possibilities of the talking picture. The fact that
Warner Bros, have made a few pictures that are drawing
large crowds does not mean that talking pictures will con-
tinue to draw wherever they are shown when a large num-
ber of theatres install a device, and the newness of talking
pictures wears off. What will happen when they do not
draw in all such theatres one dreads to predict.
At the studios, every one is running around in circles.
They want equipment but they cannot have it, because
every producer wants it at the same time ; and the demand
cannot be supplied at once. Even those that have talking
picture equipment on hand cannot use it for they cannot
get the material to build sound-proof studios with. And
without sound-proof studios the equipment is useless for
high-class work. I have it on good authority that all orders
for sound-proof studio material cannot be filled during
the present selling season. The result will be that the
producers, pressed by the necessity of supplying the great
demand for talking pictures, will adopt make-shift methods,
and the resulting product will naturally be of "make-
shift” kind. The making of talking pictures requires abso-
lute quiet. Any sound created, any noise made during the
taking of the scenes will register on the sound track.
Hence the need of sound-proof material for fitting studios
with before making the pictures.
Even with sound-proof studios the production of talking
pictures requires that the studios be located in big ranches,
away from the activities of the city streets, away from the
noise caused by the passing of trucks, of fire engines, and
of other vehicles that can create heavy rumbling noises.
And few of the studios are located in such ranches.
Production Problems
The production problems have increased manifold be-
cause of talking pictures. To begin with, there are few
sound experts. And what there are, they are in such a
great demand that their salaries are mountainous. All this
adds to the cost of production.
The scenes must be made longer so as to permit liberal
cutting in the editing. The reels themselves, too, must be
made longer ; the producers are now striving towards the
three thousand foot reel. The object is to have as few
"joints” as possible. All this adds to the cost of produc-
tion.
While “shooting” a scene, the arc light may all of a sud-
den and of its own volition start singing. The arc light does
not know the mischief it does when it starts on its singing
rampage ; but every whim of it helps the production cost to
mount, for the scenes must be retaken.
Retaking scenes in talking pictures is not like retaking
scenes in silent pictures ; it is far more expensive in view
of the large technical staff used. All this adds to the cost
of production.
Those of the producers that have their studios close to
the city streets are often compelled to do their work dur-
ing midnight, even though they may have sound-proof
studios. This naturally keeps an entire company idle for a
whole day, and necessitates extra time and often extra
workers. All this adds to the cost of production.
The problem of actors is another, and an expensive one.
A picture may be cast but after starting to “shoot” the
scenes it may be found that the voice of a particular actor
does not register well. In such an event, the picture may be
recast entirely. It may be discovered also that the tone
quality of a particular actor’s voice may be unsatisfactory
to such an extent as to compel the director to recast the
entire picture. All this costs money.
Trouble in the photocells is another big problem; and an
expensive one, for it makes it necessary to retake all scenes.
These are only a few of the technical problems that mak-
ers of talking pictures are confronted with ; there are one
thousand and one others.
Lack of Technicians
Technicians have to be developed in large numbers to sup-
ply the present demand. And even after they are developed
they cannot be considered one hundred per cent proficient
unless they make a study of the psychological effect of
sound on the emotions of the spectator-auditors. This is im-
portant if the minds and hearts are to be reached. Even the
technicians of Warner Bros., who are pioneers in this kind
of work, seem to lack a thorough understanding of it. They
no doubt knovv what sounds register and what do not regis-
ter ; what voices have fine tone qualities and what lack
such qualities ; how to get best sound registration ; but they
( Continued on last page )
138
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Butter and Egg Man” — with Jack
Mulhall and Greta Nissen
(First Nat., Sept. 30; 6,467 ft.; 75 to 92 min.)
Not bad ; in fact, it is a good audience picture
judging by the applause which it received at the
big Hippodrome in New York City. The picture,
adapted from the stage play bearing the same
name, written by George S. Kaufman, has many
amusing situations ; but the most amusing is the
one in the crooked producer's office, where the
hero had gone to invest in a show the money given
him by his fond grandmother. Sam Hardy and
William Demarest re-act the scenes of the play
to impress the hero and their pantomiming is a
scream. When he meets the star (heroine), who
helps to impress him, having fallen in love with
her, he buys a share in it.
The story starts out at a fast speed but slows
up in the middle only to pick up and end briskly
enough. The hero is about to lose everything
when the show is a flop when it opens in the
sticks. Having faith in it, however, he buys the
whole show and reopens in New York where it
becomes the hit of the season. The former part-
ners, anxious to buy it back, offer him twice as
much as he paid for it. And because he has been
informed that the show was stolen from a maga-
zine story, he unloads his play back on the crooks
and they find out that they have been victimized
as they tried to gyp the hero.
Jack Mulhall is quite good as the country boy
who comes to the city imbued with the belief that
he had the making of a Belasco in him because
he had been successful in staging local shows in
his own home town. Lucille Beaumont is sweet
as his trusting grandmother who mortgaged her
hotel to raise funds to satisfy the boy’s desire to
make his fortune
Greta Nissen, as the heroine, has little to do
and is overshadowed by the good work of Ger-
trude Astor in her small part as the former star
and (rather tough) wife of one of the crooked
producers.
The picture was directed by Richard Wallace.
Note : The picture was sold on the 1927-28
contract as a Harry Langdon starring vehicle.
“Virgin Lips” — with John Boles and Olive
Borden
( Columbia , July 25; 6,048 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
Not a bad melodrama. It has several thrills,
and its action holds one’s interest pretty well
throughout. The spectator is held in pretty tight
suspense at times. One of the suspensive situ-
ations is where the hero dares to enter the lair of
the villain, a murderous bandit. By adequate pre-
paration work and by suitable characterization the
spectator is made to feel convinced that the villain
is a murderous man. The result is that the suspense
is tenser. The presence of the heroine in the vil-
lain’s lair, too, helps to heighten the suspense. A
thrill is caused also by the sight of the falling
aeroplane, in which the hero was the aviator.
Tbe action unfolds in a fictitious Central
American republic, and presents the hero as being
engaged by firms that had oil and other mining
interests to help the government capture a notori-
ous bandit. The bandit had a spy in the camp of
the companies. The spy tampers with the hero’s
aeroplane. But when the hero is about to leave
September 1, 1928
with his machine to get information about the vil-
lain the spy is selected to accompany him on the trip.
The aeroplane is wrecked; the hero escapes injury
but the spy is hurt. The hero takes him to the
nearest town, which happens to be the very town
the villain, was about to attack. The villain takes
possession of the town and the hero, in order to
avoid being shot as a spy, discards his aviator’s
suit and puts on civilian clothes. He pretends
that he is a bartender and serves drinks to the
villain and his men. The spy recovers conscious-
ness and reveals the hero’s identity to the villain.
The villain decides to shoot the hero but the hero-
ine, bv pretending to make love to him, succeeds
in postponing the shooting until troops arrive; the
hero had used a ruse to notify his comrades of his
plight. The villain is captured and many of his
men exterminated. Hero and heroine marry.
The plot has been founded on a story by
Charles Beahan ; it has been directed by Elmer
Clifton.
Note: It is a substitution. See analysis in the
issue of August 11.
“Oh Kay” — with Colleen Moore
( First Arat'l., Aug. 26; 6,100 ft.; 70 to 87 min.)
A good comedy. It mixes bootleggers and
lords, but it succeeds in entertaining one. The
story starts in England, where the heroine, dau-
ghter of Lord Rutfield, resisted her uncle’s pres-
sure to marry a lord, a man she detested. In order
to drown her sorrow, she takes her sloop for a
little sailing. A storm arises and she would have
drowned had she not been seen by the crew of a
passing ship. She is taken aboard. The ship
happens to be a rum-runner, and is headed for
America. The ship reaches the promised land
and drops anchor opposite Long Island. The
heroine is helped by one of the crew to land with-
out detection by revenue officers. Accidentally she
finds herself in the home of the hero, who was to
marry a young woman the following day. But
he falls in love with the heroine. He decides to
break his engagement with his fiancee and to
marry the heroine. As soon as they make up
their marriage plans, the heroine discloses her
identity.
There is much comedy all the way through, this
being caused by Miss Moore who is helped by
Mr. Lord Sterling. The scenes in the hero’s
home in America, where the heroine is trying to
dodge a, what she thought was, revenue officer
but in reality a highjacker, are comical in the ex-
treme. The scenes where the heroine imperso-
nates a maid, too, are comical. There are other
comical situations.
Carey Wilson is the scenarist. The picture has
been directed by Mervin LeRoy. Miss Moore does
excellent work. Lawrence Gray is good as the
hero, Ford Sterling is good, as he always is.
Claude Gillingwater, Julanna Johnson, Claude
King, Edgar Norton, Percy Williams and others
are in the cast.
“Romance of a Rogue”
— with H. B. Warner
(Rcgn’l, date not yet set; 6,100 ft.; 70 to8y min.)
A mediocre story, slow in unwinding and with-
out much action, makes this just a fair picture,
though the moral preached throughout, that right
September 1, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
139
always conies out right, may make it satisfy fairly
well in small towns. The story revolves around a
wealthy Englishman who, on the eve of his mar-
riage, is convicted of murder. After serving a
prison term, he seeks to revenge for the wrong-
done to him. He is befriended by an old musician
who takes him to the cabaret, where the hero’s
former sweetheart is a singer.
At first, the spectator’s interest is held, knowing
that the heroine is married to the real murderer
who had become a paralytic and she was support-
ing him. But because the action is not very-
smooth that interest soon wanes until the last
few reels when the heroine is shown at first de-
ciding to leave the cabaret because she could not
stand the presence of her former sweetheart, and
then changing her mind and bringing the hero
home where he meets the villain. The villain con-
fesses that he had committed the murder and
conveniently dies so that heroine and hero might
be united.
H. B. Warner gives a good performance and
his name, too, will help somewhat to carry the pic-
ture. Anita Stewart, as the wife of the murderer,
who never lost her love for the hero, is fair. John
Christopher is the sentimental musician who helps
the hero keep track of the heroine, and Chas.
Gerrard is the villain. The picture was directed
by King Baggot from a story by Ruby M. Ayres.
“The Patriot” — with Emil Jannings
(Paramount, Sept, i; 9,819 ft.; 1 13 to 140 min.)
There can be no other opinion than that “The
Patriot” is a masterpiece from the point of view of
direction and acting; it has been produced by that
master director, Ernst Lubitsch, and its chief part
has been acted by that artist, Emil Jannings. As
Paul the First, Czar of Russia, a madman, Mr. Jan-
nings is superb. It is doubtful, in fact, if he can
show better work in any other picture. But it is
unlikely that “The Patriot” will appeal to the pic-
ture-goers of the rank and file. The theme is un-
pleasant and the characters, with the exception of
Mr. Stone, are not shown doing anything that
would arouse one’s sympathy. Mr. Jannings, as
the mad Czar, is presented as a cruel monarch.
And Mr. Stone brings about his death for the
sake of Russia and the Russian people, who suf-
fered much under his reign. That is about the
substance of the story. The one thing that Mr.
Stone does as the Chamberlain of the Czar is to
induce the man that killed the Czar at his orders
to kill him, too; he had promised the Czar to pro-
tect his life with his own life; and since he had,
for the sake of his country, to cause the Czar’s
death, there was no other course for him, as a real
patriot, than to commit suicide.
Mr. Stone, too, does wonderful work, at times
he steals the picture away from Mr. Jannings.
Miss Vidor is pretty fair as the mistress of Count
Pahlen (Lewis Stone). Neil Hamilton is the
Czarevitch, but he dose not appear in many scenes.
Harry Cording and Vera Veronina appear in the
cast.
The plot has been founded on the German stage
play by Alfred Neuman ; it was adapted to the
screen by Hans Kraly. The action is “raw” in
places.
Note: The synchronization of this picture is
“atrocious.’
“The Sawdust Paradise” — with Esther
Ralston
( Paramount , Sept. 1 ; 5,928 ft.; 69 to 84 min.)
Nothing extraordinary, but it is not bad. It is
a picture that deals with the reformation of the
heroine, a carnival sharp ; she had been paroled
in the custody of a travelling evangelist by the
judge who had sentenced her to ninety days in
jail when she was brought before him on a charge
of crookedness, trumped up by the narrow-
minded country town folk. Her reformation is
effected when she takes a liking to the minister,
because of his sincerity, and helps him put over
the “show” by adopting show methods. The work
gets into her blood and she becomes regenerated.
There are some situations that affect the emo-
tions of sympathy pretty well. But the subject,
as put into a scenario form, does not seem to lend
itself to the making of a great picture. It is hard
to sympathize with crooks ; and that is its chief
drawback. The hero, whom the heroine loves,
does not reform until the end. The heroine, too,
does not arouse much sympathy ; although she is
not actually shown as doing anything wrong, her
characterization being done by subtitles, yet one
cannot feel sympathy for a person who pretends
to be religious to religious people when in reality
she lacks religion.
The plot has been founded on an original story
by John Manker Watters. Esther Ralston does
well in a least sympathetic part. Mr. Reed Howes
is the traveling evangelist. Tom McGuire,
does well as the hero. Hobart Bosworth is good.
George French and Alan Roscoe are in the cast.
“The Night Watch” — with Billie Dove
( First National, Sept. 9; 6,612 ft.; 76 to 94 min.)
The story of “The Night Watch” is pretty
good, but it has been handled by Mr. Korda,
the director, well, with the result that it arouses
and retains the interest of the spectator all the
way through, and holds him in pretty good sus-
pense. The action unfolds chiefly on board a
French cruiser during the World war, and the
meat of the story is the separation of hero and
heroine (husband and wife) as a result of mis-
understanding. Like almost every woman, the
heroine wanted attention; but because her hus-
band could not give it to her on account of the
fact that he was preoccupied by the threat of a
world war, which threat had kept him at his post
day after day and night after night, she allowed
a former sweetheart of hers to make her believe
that her husband did not give her the attention she
deserved. Upon the return of the cruiser, from
an engagement with a German cruiser, during
which he had sunk the German man of war, the
body of one of the petty officers is found. Cir-
cumstantial evidence points to the hero as the
murderer. The hero is court martialed and would
have been convicted and sentenced to be shot had
not the heroine given to the judges information
as to the circumstances under which the murder
had been committed. The hero is declared inno-
cent. Because he admired the heroine for her
willingness to sacrifice her good name to save
him, he takes her in his arms and forgives every-
thing.
The picture has been produced under the able
supervision of Mr. Ned Marin.
140
HARRISON’S REPORTS
do not seem to have grasped their entire subject if one is
to judge them by the way they applied sound in “The
Terror.” They have music play while the characters talk.
Let us see what psychological effect is produced by an
attempt to give music and talk at the same time :
Dr. Thomson, in his book “Brain and Personality,” states
that the brain is divided into many brain centres. Each
brain centre, the author states, performs a separate func-
tion. For instance, the centre of word memory is one, the
centre of figure memory another, the centre of music
memory still another, and so on. This he proves by citing
instances wherein the physical injury of the one centre did
not affect the perfect functioning of the other centres. Dr.
Thomson states also that the one centre cannot overlap any
of the other centres. In other words, while the one centre
is functioning all other centres must lie idle until their
turn comes.
Accordingly, when music is played and the characters
talk, the mind must attend only to the one — either to the
music or to the talk; and as the persons that went to the
performances of that picture went chiefly to hear the char-
acters talk, they would naturally have preferred to have the
music stopped. And as both played, they must have been
disconcerted. The spectator has no way of voicing his pro-
test in case there is something he does not like; few per-
sons will stop at the door to tell his troubles to any one.
His only way out is to keep away from the theatres that
show pictures in a way he does not like. And unless a study
is made as to the psychological effect particular sound ap-
plications have on the minds of the picture-goers, many
of them will stay away from the theatres that show talking
pictures.
Laboratory and Distribution Problems
When we touched the production problems we only
scratched the ground ; the laboratory and the distribution
problems are still greater.
At present the laboratories are jammed hopelessly.
Printing of talking picture subject is extremely difficult.
Where only music is used, there must be duping in order
to superimpose the sound track on the silent picture. You
realize, 1 believe, how difficult that is, and how carefully
the printing must be done. Raw stock of the highest quality
must be used, for a defect on the emultion side will cause
rumpling or ground noises. The laboratories, too, were
caught unprepared. As a result, they lack the necessary
equipment for duping. The cost of sound printing is nat-
urally higher than the cost of the silent prints. I have been
informed reliably that sound prints cannot be made for less
than five cents a foot ; that is, about twice as much as it
costs for silent prints.
But it is in the distribution where the greatest troubles
lie. To begin with, there must be three kinds of prints
made : the silent print, the print with the sound on the
film, and the print that is synchronized with disc records.
And there is where the real troubles begin ; for the multi-
plicity of prints makes mistakes in shipping unavoidable.
Instead of the disc print, the silent print may be shipped
with the disc records ; or the print with the sound recorded
on the film. The wrong discs, too, may be shipped with the
right print. All these either increase the cost of the film to
the exhibitor, or cause a loss to him.
Even in the inspection room there is an immediate in-
crease : one inspector cannot inspect more than two prints
a day to the thirty or forty he could inspect before.
These are only a few of the problems the producer-dis-
tributors are confronted with ; but they are enough to show
what they are up against, and to give you an idea of how
much more will the film, features and acts, cost you if you
should install a talking picture device. It is hardly possible
that the theatres can absorb the present cost.
The cost of talking picture “acts” is another item to be
born in mind. The rentals for such subjects are not definite ;
they vary, the variation depending on location and seating
capacity. Warner Bros, have compelled some of their cus-
tomers to play the Vitaphone shows on percentage and
overage ; and it seems as if all the other talking picture sub-
ject distributors will adopt the same policy.
The foreign situation presents another big problem.
Heretofore the producers figured to cover the cost of pro-
duction from the receipts in the home market and to make
thier profits from the receipts in the foreign market. The
advent of the talking picture has upset this system, for
the reason that, as you well understand, pictures that talk
English are useless in countries where English is not
spoken. The producers will, of course, continue to ship
silent prints, but they will be unable to receive a revenue
from the foreign field in proportion to the cost of film. In
September 1, 1928
other words, if a picture cost, say $200,000 before and the
producer received $50,000 from the foreign field, he re-
ceived 25% of the cost; but when the same picture cost
$400,000 because of the extra cost in producing it with
sound, he will still receive $50,000 ; but this will be only
one-eighth of the cost of the picture — not enough to pay his
expenses for maintaining the foreign offices and to leave a
profit.
The cost in the booth has increased many times ; the
scale of the operators’ wages is “fearful.” I shall soon
be in a position to give you the actual figures as to what
such scale is.
Another point where the cost of operation has increased
is in the express charges ; these double and in some instances
treble. The next issue of “Brevity,” the comic magazine
published by Barrist & Goodwin, at Philadelphia, will well
illustrate this in a cartoon in which there will be shown
a big van arriving at the theatre with wording to the effect
that the Vitaphone show arrived.
I am sure that every exhibitor can now get a concrete
idea as to how much it will cost him to run his theatre if
he were to install a talking picture device. It has been
figured out by some exhibitors in this city that it would
cost them at least one thousand dollars a week additional.
With these figures, every exhibitor can, I believe, deter-
mine whether he can or cannot install a talking picture
instrument profitably.
N on-Synchronous Instruments For
Small Theatres
But these is one class of exhibitors that under no cir-
cumstances can install a machine ; at least not at present.
These are the small-town exhibitors, particularly those
that have a small seating capacity. The cost of fitting a
theatre with an instrument, the cost of maintenance and
the cost of film is so great that no matter what they might
charge for admission ; no mater what they might take in
at the box office, they would never be able to take in money
enough to pay for the cost. These might j ust as well forget
all about talking pictures at present. The best they can do
is to install a non-synchronous instrument and to buy a
sufficient number of records from the Victor Phonograph
Company to enable them to accompany the picture in ac-
cordance with the cue sheets furnished by this company
or to cue the picture themselves. The music such instru-
ments give is far more satisfactory than that of the mu-
sicians these exhibitors employ at present. The music
the best musicians they can hire in such towns cannot be
compared with the music these instruments give. With an
instrument of this kind they will be getting nearly as good
results as they would if they had the original orchestra.
In this way they will make their theatre more attractive to
patrons, for they will not be offending them with music
played by poor musicians, on screechy instruments, or on
instruments out of tune.
There are several kinds of non-synchronous instruments
in the market. It is my intention to examine them all and
to report to you as to their suitability. At present the
non-synchronous insrument that is being manufactured by
the RCA Photophone, Inc., seems to be the best because it
uses the same kind of sound projectors that are furnished
with the "talking” instruments — the paper cone projectors.
The only difference is that they have only four cones in-
stead of sixteen ; but they are enough for small theatres.
These instruments sell, as said last week, for $850. If any
of the other instruments offered can come near to giving as
good tone quality, and if they sell for as reasonable a price,
you will be acquainted with the fact.
{To be continued next week)
ANYOX community league
Anvox, B. C.
August 17, 1928.
Mr. P. S. Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
Dear Mr. Harrison :
Herewith marked check for another year’s subscription
to HARRISON’S REPORTS.
Personally I like your fighting spirit, and it looks as
though you had ‘It” (the capacity for conducting a scrap)
developed to the nth degree. And there is some nourishment
to the grist you grind, too.
Very trulv yours,
F. M. KELLEY,
i Welfare Dept.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1928
No. 36
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments— No 4
In the three articles about talking pictures already
printed, several questions you wanted an answer
for, were answered. You were told, for example,
of the different types of recording and reproducing
sound ; of the most suitable talking picture instru-
ment in the market ; what the problems of the pro-
ducer are ; what the problems of the distributor ;
what the cost of installation, and of others. But the
question whether talking pictures are going to last
or not, which question implies also whether the
silent pictures are to stay or go out of existence, is,
1 am sure, the one you really want answered.
The answers given in the three articles already
printed have been founded on facts. In other
words, it could be proved by facts and figures that
what was stated was correct. But the question
whether talking pictures are here to stay or not
cannot be answered, because there are no facts to
guide us. Talking pictures are a new thing, and one
must be possessed, as said, with occult powers to tell
what is going to happen in the future. The per-
formances of talking pictures so far cannot be taken
as a criterion, for their popularity did not begin with
their appearance, but with the release of “The
Jazz Singer,” which was shown more than a year
after talking pictures were in use. Had they made
a hit from the very beginning, we then could, with
almost certainty, tell that they would be a permanent
form of entertainment without waiting to see how
they would “act” at the box office in the future ; we
could then be brave enough to predict a brilliant
future for them. But now we are forced to wait
to see what is going to happen.
Since we have not, as we have said, facts to guide
us in an effort to tell whether talking pictures are
going to last or not, in discussing this subject I shall
be compelled to express only my personal opin-
ions. It is up to you, then, to study these opinions
and to be guided accordingly. It is your future that
is at stake ; therefore, it should be you that should
decide what to do. All I can do is to try to help
you by giving you my own opinions where facts
are lacking.
* * 4=
As I said in the first article of this series, there
is a group of exhibitors that think that talking pic-
tures are merely a novelty, and they are destined to
pass out of existence as soon as their newness wears
off (to this group belong also some producer-dis-
tributors, actors and directors) ; and a group that
is confident that no exhibitor will be able to survive
unless he installs a talking picture instrument. (We
are not mentioning the multitude that have formed
no opinion on the subject and want to be enlight-
ened.)
Personally I believe that both these groups are
wrong : Talking pictures are a new form of enter-
tainment and they are, in my opinion, here to stay.
But they will not stay in the present form. The pro-
ducers must first learn to apply sound in the most
effective way. At present they are not applying it
in that way. And naturally so, for there are few
sound experts in existence ; and these have not had
time to observe what effect certain sound applica-
tions exert on the person that pays his money at
the box office. All they know at this time is that
the public “buys” this new form of entertainment,
and the producers are trying to supply the demand,
no matter whether they are equipped to make talk-
ing pictures or not.
And there is where the greatest danger lies ; for
it is unlikely that the public will continue to allow
themselves to be “buncoed” by fake talking pictures.
“White Shadows of the South Seas,” for ex-
ample, is being advertised by Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer as “The best sound picture that has ever
been produced.” In one spot, Monte Blue, the hero
of the picture, is made to laugh aloud ; but the
laugh sound was put into the picture when Mr. Blue
was in Europe. In another spot, another character
is made to cry. And the Lord knows where this
character was, for he is a native of the South Seas,
hired on the spot, whereas the picture was fitted
with sound in New York City. There is no place
where the characters talk. And yet Metro-Gold-
wyn-Mayer is telling the public that it is the best
sound picture that has ever been produced.
In the Paramount picture “Warming Up,” in
two or three different spots a sound is heard and
the accident that caused it seen to occur afterwards
— several seconds later. An attempt was made to
make the characters talk, too, here and there, but
the effort is so crude that a child knows that it was
superimposed on the film. And yet Paramount has
advertised it as the first sound picture it had put
out.
In the F. B. O. picture “The Perfect Crime,” in
one or two places the characters cease talking and
their lips keep moving.
Examples such as these and numerous others,
either made or to be made in the near future in an
effort on the part of the producers to supply the
great demand for talking subjects, cannot help hurt-
ing the business ; they are not talking pictures ; they
are fakes, and those that induce the exhibitors to
show them as “talking pictures” are obtaining
money under false pretenses and are compelling the
exhibitor to obtain money under false pretenses,
too.
It is true that “sound pictures” does not mean
“talking pictures,” but there is hardly one out of
( Continued on last page )
142
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Night Bird”— with Reginald Denny
( Univ.-Jewel, Sept. 16; 6,702 ft.; 78 to 95 min.)
Poorl It is neither fish nor fowl. Reginald Deny has
appeared always in farce-comedies, and one would naturally
expect that “The Night Bird,” too, would be a farce-com-
edy. But it is really a drama. There is hardly a comedy
situation all the way through, and the drama is not strong
enough to arouse one’s interest in what is unfolded.
The action presents Mr. Denny, a boxer, with an ambition
to win the heavyweight championship of the world, as being
shy of women. His manager tells him that he will not at-
tain his ambition unless he mingles in New York’s night
life. He forces the poor boxer to attend a dance where he
is kissed and otherwise “maltreated” by a redhead and by a
blonde. He runs away secretly. In the park he meets a little
Italian girl (but big enough to fall in love with later on
and to make her his wife) ; she had run away from her
home because her father had beaten her when she refused
to marry an Italian, choice of her father. She follows the
hero home. The hero, in fact, cannot get rid of her.
Eventually he falls in love with her. The hero’s manager,
not wishing to see the hero entangled in matrimony, tells
the young Italian that she is ruining the hero’s future. As
a result of it the girl goes back to her home, ready for the
punishment her father prepared for her — to marry the man
he had chosen for her. In a match with the heavyweight
champion the hero fights half-heartedly and is about to lose
the fight when an Italian boy rushes to the ring, and, in spite
of the fact that children are not allowed in such places,
tells the hero that his sweetheart, whose whereabouts he had
lost, is being forced to marry a man she despises. The hero
gathers all his energy, beats his opponent, rushes to the
heroine’s home, knocks down everybody and carries away
the girl.
Betsy Lee is the Italian girl; Sam Hardy, the hero’s
manager.
The plot has been founded on a story by Frederick and
Fanny Hatton. The picture was directed by Fred New-
meyer.
“Beautiful But Dumb” — with
Patsy Ruth Miller
( T iff any -S tahl, Aug. 1 ; 6,157 ft.; 71 to 87 min.)
Rather tiresome ; it has been done too often. The story
is weak; it may appeal mostly to women, because of the
clothes worn in the heroine’s transformation from a plain-
looking, masculinely dressed efficient secretary to a beau-
tiful woman, trying to capture her employer, with whom she
has fallen in love. Miss Miller causes a few laughs when
she tries to follow the instructions she has received from a
co-worker, a gold-digger, to win the affections of men.
Gretel Yoltz is not bad as the girl who gets by on her looks
rather than on her ability.
The story revolves around the good but plain looking sec-
retary of a rather good looking boss. In her efforts to win
his love, she vamps him to such an extent that he invites
her to his apartment. There he gets “fresh” with her.
Still in love with him but disgusted, she gives up her job.
But the office can’t run without her. So he asks her to
return to work, saying he would not make love to her any
more. But he finds that he has fallen in love with her and
so they are united.
Charles Byer is satisfactory as the hero. Others in the
cast are George E. Stone, Bill Irving and Shirley Palmer.
The picture was directed by Elmer Clifton from a story by
John Francis Natteford.
“The Water Hole” — with Jack Holt and
Nancy Carroll
( Paramount , Aug. 25 ; 6,319 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
The story of this picture is by the famous author Zane
Grey. The production end of it is very good ; the story is
so-so, and its value will depend chiefly on the popularity of
the author in your locality. The picture will, no doubt,
satisfy, but it will not create a sensation.
The underlying idea is old — the hero undertakes to tame
the heroine, daughter of wealthy parents, and a girl that
had always had things her own way. To do this, the hero,
in agreement with her father, kidnaps her and takes her
to a lonely spot into the desert, and there makes her cook
and do other house work, things she had never done in her
life, because she had always had servants to do the work for
September 8, 1928
her. Her fiance learns from her father that she had been
“abducted” and, hiring a guide, goes in search of them.
He finds them and starts back with the heroine. But the
guide, happening to be a horse thief, steals their horses.
They are thus compelled to tramp back on foot. On the way,
their water gives out and the fiancee is helpless. The hero
does everything he can to help them, but he, too, eventually
comes to the point of succumbing, until they are found by
cowboys wroking for the heroine’s father. But the leader
of them was one of those with whom the heroine had
flirted ; he decides to carry the heroine off. He ties the hands
of the hero, puts a noose around his neck, passes the other
end of the rope over the bough of a tree, and ties it to a
horse, intending to lynch him. But the fiance, who had been
carried by the hero on his back when they found the water
hole in the desert dry and had no water left, having revived
after drinking water the villain’s men had given him, se-
cretly cuts the rope that held the hero’s hands tied. The
hero is thus enabled to subdue the villain. Eventually the
hreoine marries the hero, who had proved the better man of
the two.
Jack Holt comes back into his own in stories that made
him pretty popular ; in fact many exhibitors have come to
think that no Zane Grey story could be produced by Para-
mount without Mr. Holt. Nancy Carroll is the heroine,
and John Boles the fiance. Montague Shaw, Anne Cristie,
and others are in the supporting cast. The story starts in a
big city, and has several beautiful scenes in natural colors,
the intention of the Paramount executives being to fit the
Zane Grey pictures, which heretofore have been purely
Westerns, in a way to make them suitable for first-run
houses. F. Richard Jones directed it well.
“Submarine” — with Jack Holt, Ralph
Graves and Dorothy Revier
( Columbia , Sept. 23; 8,192 ft.; 95 to 117 min.)
If Columbia is going to make pictures like “Submarine,”
the big producers, Fox included, had better look out, for it
has made something that comes up to the standard of pro-
ductions of the biggest of them, probably at much lesser
cost. “Submarine” is not only a great picture; it is dif-
ferent from the regular run. It is a re-enactment of the
tragedy of the sinking of the S4, in which every one of the
crew perished ; only that the crew in the picture does not
perish ; they are saved. The scenes after the submarine had
been struck during the maneuvres and sank, where the
hero and the captain of the submarine are seen trying to dis-
sipate from the minds of the others the fear as to their
probable fate unless the ship were raised are so vivid that
one really feels as if present in a real-life occurrence. The
agony felt by the crew is felt to a certain degree also by the
spectator. The scenes of the rescue efforts, too, are realistic.
Most of these scenes have been photographed with real
ships, and real diving outfits. The decompression tank, in
which the divers are placed after reaching the surface if
the depth to which they reached is great, is there. Earlier in
the picture the spectator is thrilled when the hero is dragged
into the water by the uncoiling rope that was tied to a
bomb, shot at a derelict ; the hero is shown diving and cut-
ting tlie rope on the other side of the hero’s foot, and rescu-
ing the hero just before the bomb exploded. It is a real
thrill.
The picture is full of drama. The scenes that show the
hero finding out that the woman, with whom he had kept
company for a week upon his return to San Diego from
the Orient, was the wife of his chum are tensely dramatic.
The break of their friendship when the hero found his chum
and his wife in an embrace saddens the spectator, but in-
creases the spectator’s admiration for the chum, who lets
the hero think that the fault was his rather than tell him
that it was his wife’s and cause him more pain. The scenes
that show the hero refusing to answer the call of the naval
authorities, as the only diver that could reach the depth the
submarine lay, are not sympathy arousing for the hero ;
they should be cut down to the limit. But whatever bad
effect might be created by his refusal to answer the call
immediately are offset when he, after finding evidence of
his wife’s guilt, rushes to the wharf, enters an aeroplane,
flics to the scene of the disaster, dives and fastens the air
hose to the hull of the submarine, saving the lives of the
crew.
The plot has been founded on a story by Norman
Springer. The picture has been directed masterfully by
Irvin Willat. All the actors do good work, including Clar-
ence Burton and Arthur Rankin, who are in the supporting
cast.
September 8, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
143
“Kit Carson” — with Fred Thomson
( Paramount , July 21, 7,464 ft.; 86 to 106 min.')
This picture has been produced well ; it manages to keep
the interest alive all the way through. But it lacks the last
action of other Thomson pictures, it specializes chiefly on
human interest. Mr. Thomson, as the hero, undertakes to
defend the Indians and to fight a white villain. But his chief
action is a promise he gave to an Indian chief to capture and
deliver to him the white man that had attempted to assault
his young daughter, causing her death; she had jumped off
a high cliff so as to escape from this man. Ihe action that
shows Kit Carson as having been sent to the Indians by
General Freemont is historically correct ; also the fact that
he had succeeded in pacifying them ; but his having rescued
the Indian chief’s daughter from a bear and the girl’s death
in her effort to escape from her attacker is, no doubt,
fiction. There are no fights between white troops and In-
dians, and therefore the picture does not offer the thrills
Indian melodramas usually offer.
The plot has been constructed by Paul Powell, sup-
posedly an authority on Kit Carson, the historical character
of pioneer days. Lloyd Ingram and Alfred Werker have
directed it. Nora Lane, Dorothy Janis, Raoul Paoli, Wil-
liam Cortright, Nelson McDowell, and Raymond Turner
support Mr. Thomson.
“Manhattan Knights” — with Barbara
Bedford and Walter Miller
( Excellent-Regional , Aug. 25 ; 5,904 ft.; 68 to 82 min.)
A pretty fair society melodrama with a mystery twist.
The spectator’s interest is held pretty well throughout as it
has suspense and a few thrills. The scenes in the villain s
rooms where he invites the heroine to make love to her are
thrilling as is the fight between the hero and villain who had
followed her there. The most exciting scenes take place
in the villain’s den where the hero, the girl and her brother
are held captive even after the hero had given the villain
a check for $50,000 in return for their liberty. There is a
fire caused by the throwing of a cigarette into a pile of
rubbish ; it is thrilling.
The story revolves around a gang of gamblers who had
a falling out. One of them is shot by the leader (villain)
who pretends that one of their victims, the young sporty
son of a senator, had committed the crime because he
wanted to get from the murdered man the check which was
forged and which he was holding to blackmail his father
with. The hero, a bored millionaire, out looking for adven-
ture, flirts with a beautiful girl whom he follows to the den
of the gamblers. Each falls in love with the other. The
hero, determining to find out why such a well-bred girl
was traveling in such company, invites her to his home in
an effort to learn her identity. She is invited by the vil-
lain in his home. While she is locked in another room she
overhears the conversation that took place between tire
gamblers fighting over money and learns that the villain
had committed the murder. The hero accidentally picks up
his wallet that contained the forged check, which the villain
had stolen from the murdered man. This leads the heroine
to follow him back to his home where she recovers the
check and tells him that she is trying to rescue her brother,
who was held by the villain in a den. They are rescued in
time by the fire department which was summoned by the
organ grinder whose clever monkey caught the hero’s note
which he threw down from the window. Before the villain
could make his escape, he is captured by the police. Hero
and heroine are united.
The picture is based on a story by Adeline Leitzbach and
was directed by Burton King. Miss Bedford is a charming
heroine and Mr. Miller is a likable hero. Crawford Kent
is a good villain. Others in the cast are Ray Hallor as the
young brother, Leo White as the organ-grinder, and Eddie
Goland.
“The Cardboard Lover” — with
Marion Davies
(Metro-Goldivyn-Mayer, Aug. 25 ; 7,108 ft. ; 82 to 113 min.)
While the story is not very strong, the picture sends the
audiences home laughing. This is due to Miss Davies’ slap-
stick antics in her efforts to prevent the hero from being
lost to the vamp whose conduct she imitates. The story
revolves around a romantic college girl, who makes a trip
to Europe and tries to obtain the signatures of prominent
people for her autograph album. But when she falls in love
with the hero, a tennis champion, who resists her efforts
to make him sign his name, she makes up her mind that she
wants him and goes to extreme means to get him. He is m-
tatuated with a Madamoiselle Simone, who is a lady of easy
virtue, and when he discovers in her rooms another lover
he resolves to give her up. But this he finds difficult to do
until he is persuaded by the heroine to keep her around to
prevent him from going to his lady love, in payment for the
gambling debt which she unsuspectingly acquired when she
chased the hero into the Casino where he was playing.
The scenes in the garden, where she impersonates a bell-
boy, are very funny. So are the scenes where she falls into
the lake after telling the vamp to fall into it. Later, when
she goes to the hero’s rooms to continue her job, and he
cannot “shake her off,” considerable comedy is caused.
The scene where she impersonates the vamp to see if the
hero was cured of his infatuation for her is so well done
that the audience might easily be led to think that Miss
Goudal had taken the part herself. The scenes where she
returns to the hero’s house, donning his pajamas and
busily brushing her teeth when the vamp calls on the hero
are so well done that the vamp was lead to believe that the
heroine was really living with the hero and so she left him
in disgust.
Hero and heroine are united after she pretended to be
seriously injured, when he hurled her to the floor in his
anxiety to catch the vamp when she left, because he found
that he really was in love with the heroine.
The picture is adapted from the stage play of the same
name by Jacques Duval. Miss Davies is an excellent com-
edienne and mimic. Nils Asther is pretty good as the hero
who tried to believe in the woman with whom he had
fallen madly in love. Jetta Goudal is an interesting vamp.
Others in the cast are Andres de Segurola, as the other
lover of the vamp. Tenen Holtz and Pepi Lederer.
TALKING PICTURES AND
INSTRUMENTS
( Continued from Other Side)
ducers to make good quality features of this kind
than it is to produce silent features ; and unless
talking pictures of good quality are shown, the pub-
lic will keep away from them.
And what reason have we to think that the aver-
age quality of the talking pictures of feature length
will be much higher than the quality of stage pro-
ductions ? The good stage productions that are
produced every year may be counted on the fingers
of both hands. And the talking picture dramas re-
quire the same care as do the stage productions.
(To be continued in a forthcoming issue)
WORLD WIDE PICTURES, Inc.
729 Seventh Avenue
New York City ; -
August 16, 1928.
Mr. Pete Harrison,
New York City.
Dear Pete :
Letters to the editor are usually so much applesauce and
I very seldom waste that dignitary’s time and my own in
writing to them, but the article in the issue of August 18
on “Talking Pictures and Instruments” is so excellent that
I cannot refrain from expressing my appreciation.
Of all the columns that I have ever read on the subject
nothing has given me one-tenth real information and under-
standing on the subject as has your article. I shall certainly
look forward to the succeeding issues on the same subject.
Very truly yours,
C. L. YEARSLEY.
CENTRAL PARK THEATRE
Buffalo, N. Y.
Mr. P. S. Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
Gentlemen:
We are receiving your paper at our Genesee Theatre,
1600 Genesee Street, and we are very, very satisfied with
the information that you give us. Your paper is price-
less!
Yours very truly,
C. BASIL.
144
HARRISON’S REPORTS
every hundred of the picture-goers that will take
tliis expression to mean other than pictures in which
the characters talk.
This condition must be altered, regardless of the
situation that confronts the producer-distributors.
No matter how great is the demand, they should
treat the public fairly ; they should not attempt to
take their money by misrepresentation. If they
should continue to do so, the public is bound to
revolt. And when it does, this new form of enter-
tainment will suffer.
* * *
Not only must the producers stop faking; they
must, as said last week, also study the psychological
effect of particular sound applications. There are
uses of sound that produce a desirable effect ; on
the other hand, there are uses that disgust people.
When “Tenderloin” was first shown, people
laughed aloud, deridingly, in one of the situations.
Warner Bros, had to cut this dialogue out. Dia-
logue writers must be developed. A writer may be
able to write excellent dialogues for silent pictures
and yet not be a successful writer of dialogues in
talking pictures.
As to sound effects, it is probable that in come-
dies such effects may enhance the laugh-provoking
properties of the picture. It is also possible that a
similar effect may be gained in the melodrama. On
the other hand, the attempt to reproduce every
sound may prove fatal. The reproduction of the
yell of mobs, the sound of horses’ hoofs, of crying
or of laughing, in dramatic productions seem to
produce an undesirable effect. In the old days thea-
tres that tried to imitate these sounds while the pic-
ture was shown were thought of as “dumps.” What
has happened to change that feeling today ?
* * *
The first showings of talking pictures in New
York City did not prove very much of a success,
even though they were a novelty. The Vitaphone
shows consisted of “acts,” singing mostly, by high-
grade singers or vaudeville artists ; and of a feature,
synchronized with music. No characters talked. For
a year after the opening of talking pictures in this
city, many installations were made throughout the
country. The results were not uniform; in some
spots they drew big crowds ; in some the results
were indifferent ; while in others it hurt the busi-
ness to such an extent that several of these ex-
hibitors were compelled to throw the instruments
out. I have had exhibitors either write to me or
call on me to get an opinion as to how they could
get rid of their instruments or how they could get
a reduction in the weekly engineering services as
well as in the price of the “acts.” The Vitaphone
stock took a decided tumble, and kept declining
until “The Jazz Singer” was shown in this city;
then everything changed : wherever the picture was
shown, with talk, it made a great success (but not
without the talk). Every producer-distributor’s
face showed a deep worry. This worry became
deeper as they kept receiving the information that
the profits of Warner Bros, kept piling up, and
that this picture, which it will eventually take in
several million dollars, saved that company from
possible bankruptcy. The result was that every one
of them jumped on the band wagon ; they rushed to
sign up with Western Electric for a license to pro-
duce “talking pictures” under its patents, on terms
that have virtually placed the entire industry in the
clutches of one company (the terms under which
September 8, 1928
they obtained such a license will be discussed in a
forthcoming article).
What made ‘‘The Jazz Singer” a success? It
was certainly not the ‘‘acts,” tor Vitaphone acts
were shown, for example, with “The Better ’Ole” ;
but that did not make “The Better ’Ole” a success
as a talking picture. It was the talk that A1 Jolson
made here and there, and his singing of his
“Mammy” song, chiefly the singing of “Mammy.”
It was so successfully done that people were
thrilled. The sight of Mr. Jolson singing to his
mother, sitting in the orchestra, stirred the spec-
tator’s emotions as they were stirred by few pic-
tures ; it brought tears to the eyes of many specta-
tors. The scenes that showed Mr. Jolson singing
Kol Nidre while his father, a cantor, lay in bed at
the point of death, too, moved people, Jews and
Gentiles alike.
So it was not really the “talk” that made talking
pictures popular but the good quality of a talking
picture. The lesson “The Jazz Singer” lias taught
us, then, is that “talking pictures” will make a suc-
cess— will become a permanent institution, if they
have the quality.
At present no one knows what turn the public
mind will take in reference to talking pictures. Just
now they draw ; the great advertising that has
been given to them in newspaper and periodical
write-ups is helping bring every picture-goer out ;
and as there are but a few theatres fitted with talk-
ing picture instruments, the “showing” such pic-
tures make is great. In the Bronx, this city, for
example, there are only two theatres so fitted. Why
shouldn’t they draw ? Bronx has more than a mil-
lion population. But what will happen when every
theatre installs such an instrument there ? The same
holds true of Brooklyn, where there are over two
million people, and two or three talking picture
theatres to take care of them. Will these theatres
draw the same crowds when every one of the nearly
250 theatres install an instrument and show talk-
ing pictures ?
Even if talking pictures should increase the pic-
ture theatre attendance, the industry cannot stand
the cost of production in accordance with the pace
set just now ; it isn't in the “cards.” So a readjust-
ment will have to be made ; unless it is made, few of
the producers will be able to show a profit this year ;
on the contrary, the losses will be great.
It is doubtful if exhibition can absorb as many
“talking picture” features as the producers have set
for production, even if the industry had reached
the saturation point of instrument installation. It
is probable that, after the thirst of the public for
talking pictures has been appeased, matters will
settle down to this : there will probably be a certain
number of theatres that will specialize in talking
pictures, and the others will continue their regular
grind of silent pictures, the small theatres improv-
ing their music by non-synchronous instruments.
It is also possible that the taste of the public will
show a trend towards short subjects, comedies as
well as dramas. In such an event, the demand for
talking pictures of feature length, in which the
characters will talk all the way through, may be
limited to a certain number a year, of the highest
quality. An attempt on the part of exhibitors to
feed the picture-going public talking pictures as a
regular diet may prove a failure, for the reason that
it will be many times more difficult for the pro-
(Continued Inside )
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the aet of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mesico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, rf It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1928
No. 37
“Protection,” Non-Theatricals and the Brookhart Bill
A recent announcement in the trade press stated that the
arbitration troubles between Motion Picture Theatre Own-
ers of the Northwest and the Film Club of the Minneapolis
zone have been settled, representatives of the exhibitors'
organization resuming their places on the board of arbi-
tration.
The trouble arose when the exhibitors’ organization
issued an ultimatum to the exchanges demanding that they
refrain from selling film to non-theatrical institutions, in-
forming them that the exhibitor members will refuse to
arbitrate the cases of exchanges that would disobey it.
United Artists ignored the ultimatum, and the exhibitors
refused to arbitrate United Artists’ cases.
There was an immediate break between the exhibitors
and the exchangemen.
For a while matters stood still, neither side being willing
to give way. But the exchanges, seeing thousands of their
dollars tied up by the arbitration strike, made a frantic
appeal to their Home Office (the Hays organization). As a
result of this appeal, Charlie Pettijohn, Mr. Hays’s right
hand, and Mr. Gabriel Hess, Mr. Hays’s left hand, threat-
ened to rule the exhibitors out — to declare them arbitration
outlaws.
The exhibitors did not budge.
Messrs. Pettijohn and Hess then ruled them out, and
suggested to the exchanges to make an appeal to the Cham-
ber of Commerce of Minneapolis for a new set of ex-
hibitor arbitrators, to be selected from non-members of
M. P. T. O.
The Chamber of Commerce refused to be embroiled in
the controversy.
Finally the exchanges succeeded in some way in having
exhibitor-arbitrators appointed.
The organization threatened that, if these exhibitors func-
tioned, it would resort to injunction proceedings.
I don’t know the terms of the settlement. It is not the
important thing ; what I want to call your attention to is
the fact that the Hays organization, in order to induce
some of you to fight the Brookhart Bill, told you impres-
sively that the bill would open the doors for non-theatrical
competition. Many of you took the word of the Hays men
and fought that bill (which is not yet dead but only retard-
ed, the adjournment of Congress making action impossible),
because you really believed that it was harmful to your
interests. Mr. Hays did all this ostensibly because, as his
lieutenants stated, he wanted to save you from non-theatri-
cal competition. And yet when an organization of your
kind demands that the producers cease from renting films
to such non-theatrical places as are in direct competition
with you, Mr. Hays rules your arbitrators out and appoints
“scab" arbitrators so as to force you to accept a situation
metrically opposed to your own !
What a farce ! What a pity that there should be ex-
hibitors so short-sighted as to swallow all the “bunk” that
is passed out by an organization whose interests are dia-
metrically opposed to your interests !
Will this incident be a lesson to those of you that were
led honestly to believe that the Brookhart bill was harmful
to your interests? The actions of the producer-distributors
in reference to non-theatricals since their statement that
the Brookhart Bill would open the door to non-theatrical
competition has belied their professions. There have been
very few instances where the exchanges refused to sell to
non-theatrical places that are in competition with regular
theatres. And in these, the action was taken not as a
result of orders from the Home Offices but as a result of
the belief of sincere exchangemen that it was wrong to
ruin the business of the established theatres. It was the
honesty of these men, the fearlessness of them, that
prompted such action, for as far as my investigations show
the producers and distributors, as a class, favor the growth
of non-theatrical places. Don't allow any one to make
you believe they do not; they feel that they can create
thousands of such places to the few thousands of theatres
now in existence and to the few thousands more that may
be added in time, and that the revenue from such places
will eventually be far greater than the revenue from the
theatres.
The Brookhart Bill is your only salvation.
Besides this abuse, the Brookhart Bill will correct also
another abuse — that of unjust and unreasonable protec-
tion. I have received many heart-rending appeals lately
from exhibitors asking my help in solving this problem for
them ; they have been shut out of film for long periods of
time because the circuit theatres wanted to shut the film
out of them. I told them that I could not help them in that
there was no law to prevent a film distributor from giving
an exhibitor in a certain zone a year’s (or more) protec-
tion over his competitors, even though these might be situ-
ated forty miles away. The Balaban and Katz interests in
Illinois actually succeeded in getting a year’s protection in
some towns, as I have been informed by exhibitors. This
organization is so “hoggish” in the matter of protection
that it has printed a twenty-three page protection pro-
vision of its own, and forces the exchanges to sign it under
penalty of refusing to buy any of their pictures.
The Brookhart Bill is the only effective remedy. And
it is just the time when you can help Senator Brookhart
put it over. Election time is on. The politicians would
want your vote. Procure a copy of the bill from Senator
Brookhart and ask these politicians where they stand.
Throw the power of your screen back of him who will give
a solemn written pledge that he will vote for the Brookhart
Bill, no matter whether he is a Republican, a Democrat, a
Socialist or a Prohibitionist. It is the chance of your life-
time to do something for yourself. Don’t throw it away !
MAKE YOUR INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTS
ONE!
When pictures of different grades are bought from one
film concern, it is customary to put the pictures of each
grade on a separate contract.
In accordance with the terms of the contract, each appli-
cation of such group is considered a unit. In other words,
the producer-distributor may approve one, two or three
of the contracts and reject the rest, and he would be
within his rights.
In ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, however, the
exhibitor, when he buys the different grades of a producer-
distributor’s products, buys them all or none, and means
to have them accepted, or rejected, as a group. In other
words, he does not want the producer-distributor to
accept half of the contracts and to reject the other half.
Several cases have been brought to the attention of this
office in which a distributor approved the contracts for
the features and rejected the contracts for the specials.
The exhibitor naturally became indignant, and rightly so.
But technically the producer-distributor is right and
the exhibitor wrong, even though the exhibitor is right
morally. But it is not the moral rights that seem to govern
this industry.
To avoid misunderstandings in such cases, an exhibitor
should number such contracts from one to the exact num-
ber. and put in the. following provision on all contracts:
“This contract is part of a group of contracts, five in
all (if 5 is the number of the individual contracts), and
it is agreed by both parties that they must be either ap-
proved or rejected as a whole.”
It takes but a slight effort to insert such a provision in
the contracts either by pencil or by typewriter. But it
saves much trouble afterwards.
146
“Power” — with William Boyd, Allan Hale
and Jacqueline Logan
( Pathe , Sept. 23; 6,092 ft.; 70 to 87 min.)
It is apparent that Pathe tried to duplicate that suc-
cessful picture, “The Skyscraper,” in which the same pair
of man stars appeared ; but its efforts seem to have proved
unsuccessful, for, with the exception of two or three short
spots, the picture is uninteresting. It lacks the suspens-
ive qualities of “The Skyscraper,” its comedy, and its
love interest. In addition, it is too sexy — the two heroes
are presented as lady killers, fighting (friendly) between
themselves when the one steals the "girl” of the other. In
places the implication is too strong, and the picture be-
comes unsuitable for the family circle. The spot where
the film holds one’s interest the most is where one of the
friends (Allan Hale) slips and is seen hanging in midair,
the end of his trousers having caught in the hook of the
chain of the winch used for lifting things for the construc-
tion of a dam. The other interesting part of the film is the
scenes showing the huge dam. Most of the action revolves
around the efforts of one friend to steal the “dame” of
the other friend. The girl in the case is a crook, and she
had befriended them for the purpose of “digging” into
their pockets. By promising each that she would marry
him, she succeeds in cleaning up their bank accounts.
There is practically no heroine in the story, for Miss
Logan is given a villainous part ; it is she who is the
crook, and the closing of the story shows her on board a
train with her confederate, a man, who helped her rob the
two heroes, going away with their money in her pocket. The
story is, in fact, demoralizing, for the thieves are not
shown punished. In this way crookedness is rewarded
instead of being punished.
The story was written by Tay Garnett. The picture
was directed by Howard Higgin. Jerry Drew, Joan Ben-
net, Carol Lombard and Pauline Curley are in the cast.
William Boyd and Allan Hale make a good pair, but they
were wasted on an unsympathetic and demoralizing story.
“Celebrity” — with Robert Armstrong,
Clyde Cook, and Lina Basquette
(Pathe, Oct. 7; 6,145 ft.; 71 to 87 min.)
It is manifest that “Celebrity” was written chiefly to
ridicule Gene Tunney, for its chief character, a puglist,
has Shakesperean aspirations. The plot has been founded
on the stage play of the same name, which ran at the
Lyceum last year only for two weeks, having failed to
draw. And the picture is no better than the play. It is
an uninteresting story, and in bad taste ; ridiculing a per-
son that is loved by the people, as Gene Tunney is, is al-
ways in poor taste; it is a personal affront, and those that
respect the person that is ridiculed no doubt resent it. The
hero of the picture is an illiterate person. His manager
sees an opportunity to make him a drawing card and puts
out stories that he is studying Shakespeare. His manager
hires a “mother” and a “sister” for him; they are just as
illiterate and ill-mannered as the hero himself. The hero
falls in love with a girl (not the “daughter” of the family).
He makes an attempt to write poetry and makes a mess of
it. A fight is arranged with a supposed world champion.
The manager of his opponent, in order to break the morale
of the hero, has a man of his steal the hero’s “poetry” and
has it published in the newspapers on the day of the fight.
A copy of the paper is purposely given the hero. The
trick works ; the hero, thinking that the heroine and his
manager gave out a copy of his poetry for the purpose of
humiliating him, feels humiliated and angered; he avoids
the one and upbraids the other. During the fight the hero
is incensed at the presence of his manager. The rival finds
it easy to give the demoralized hero hard blows. The hero
is knocked down several times but the gong always saves
him. Once, however, the rival is so careless that he
leaves himself unprotected. The hero grasps the oppor-
tunity to give him a hard blow and to knock him out. In
the dressing room the hero knocks his manager down then
regrets it, particularly when he is convinced that his friend
manager had not double-crossed him. The manager tells
him that the heroine is in the auditorium, waiting for him.
He rushes there and they embrace.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by William
Keele. It was directed by Tay Garnett.
September 15, 1928
“Waterfront” — with Dorothy Mackaill
and Jack Mulhall
(First National, Sept. 16; 5,976 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)..
A nice little comedy, with action fast enough to hold the
interest pretty alive all the way through. The comedy
is caused chiefly by the good acting of this pair of fine
comedians. The action gathers speed when the hero at-
tempts to avoid the heroine’s father, who does not want
him around his daughter. The story takes place on and
near the waterfront and on board a tug, of which the
heroine’s father is the captain. Hero and heroine become
acquainted when the heroine’s father, forgetting himself
when in sight of his home, nearly rams a tramp steamer.
The hero and his pal, an oiler and an assistant oiler, re-
spectively, on the tramp steamer, “razz” the captain for
his supposed ignorance of his work, but the hero is struck
by the beauty of the heroine. He follows her and decides
to call on her, but the father discovers him and throws
him into the water. The hero, however, is persistent, his
persistency being caused also by the fact that the heroine
appeared to like him. The father, in order to “save” his
daughter from the impudent sailor, tells the heroine that
they will move to the country, to some farm. The heroine
doesn’t want to go on a farm. When he overhears the
hero proposing to the heroine marriage and a home in the
country on the farm, the father changes his opinion of the
hero. But so does also the heroine ; she did not want to
leave the city. Hero and father conspire and have the
heroine shanghaied so as to cure her of her desire to go to
sea. The trick succeeds ; the heroine decides to follow the
hero to the country and to live on a farm.
The plot has been founded on a story by Will Chattell
and Gertrude Orr. The picture has been directed by
William A. Seiter, and supervised by Ned Marin, that live
wire young producer. James Bradbury, Sr., Knute Erick-
son, Ben Hendricks, Jr., William Norton Bailey, and Pat
Harmon are in the supporting cast.
“The Air Circus” — with Arthur Lake,
David Rollins, Louise Dresser, Sue
Carol, and Charles Delaney
(Fox, Sept. 30; 7,177 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
If the talk were left out from the few scenes where the
players are made to talk, The Air Circus” would not be
a bad picture, for its players are youthful and pleasant, its
human interest is tender, it is thrilling, and the action
keeps the spectator comfortably interested in what is un-
folded. The youthfulness of the characters imparts to the
picture a cheerfulness that no other feature could have
imparted. The talk between mother and son (Louise
Dresser and David Rollins) in the airfield where the
mother went after a premonition that something had hap-
pened to her boy has made people at the Gaiety, where the
picture is playing, laugh deridingly ; it is too much “sob
stuff” with the talk, and has a deterrent effect. The
background of the story is an aviation school, and the
action shows in a precise manner what a young man must
go through with to become a full-fledged aviator. The ac-
tion is realistic in the extreme. The scenes where the young
chum of the hero is shown crashing on the ground in his
first attempt to fly alone and losing his nerve are so real-
istic that one feels as if present in a real accident. The
scenes that show the young man, who had a yellow streak
on his back, entering an aeroplane and flying to warn the
hero and his sweetheart (Arthur Lake and Sue Carol) of
the fact that their landing gear had been stripped off while
taking off are thrilling in the extreme. His desire to
save the lives of his friends, which cures him of his fear,
touches the spectator.
The plot has been founded on a story by Graham Raker
and Andrew Bennison. It was directed by Howard Hawks
well. Arthur Lake, Sue Carol, David Rollins, Louise
Dresser and every one in the cast does good work. Heinie
Conklin contributes some comedy. There is, in fact, con-
siderable comedy provoked by the good acting of the prin-
cipals. Louise Dresser furnishes most of the human
interest. The love affair between Arthur Lake and Sue
Carol is charming; it is not free of clouds. And this is
what makes it more interesting, because of its fidelity to
life.
While a good picture, it is not a $2 or even a $1.50
picture ; regular prices should be charged for it.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
HARRISON’S REPORTS
147
September 15, 1928
“State Street Sadie”
( Warner Bros., Aug. 25 ; Silent 6,313 ; Sync. 7,169 ft.)
Richard Watts, eminent critic of the New York Tri-
bune, called this picture “Thate Thtreet Thadie.” And
that is exactly what it is, for the Vitaphone (phonograph)
characters cannot pronounce the letter “s”. Every time
they attempt to pronounce it they make it sound as a pro-
tracted “th” hard, or “f’ . So with the “sh” ; only that it
is dragged longer. As to the talk itself, this occurs in
only a few situations. And it is bad to see the characters
start talking when they acted silently before, or stop
talking suddenly. The change from the one to the other
gives the spectator a shock. It destroys the illusion for
several seconds, making the spectator realize that the
world he was in was only a make-believe. This is fatal,
for unless a picture creates a perfect illusion it cannot be
said that it interests the spectator.
As to the story itself, it is mediocre. It is about a twin
brother who comes back to the United States from South
America with plenty of “dough” and finds his brother
dead (suicide by gas). A note told him that he was a
bank teller, that a big amount of money had been taken
from his cage at the bank, but that the "boss”, (leader of
the thieves) was so powerful that he could not hope to
make his innocence believed. So he ended it all. The
brother (hero) induces the police authorities to let him
impersonate his brother, whose exact image he was, so as
to break up the gang and to get the necessary evidence
to arrest the murderer. The hero happens to meet the
heroine, daughter of a murdered policeman, and falls in
love with her. The heroine at first took him for her
father’s murderer. But when he tells her who he really is,
she joins him in his efforts to catch the murderer. The
heroine poses as an underworld girl, and the hero as his
dead brother. Eventually the hero succeeds in reaching
the leader of the crooks. The crook becomes aware that
the hero was not the hero’s brother and is about to shoot
him when the hero turns the tables on him. The lives of
the hero and heroine are put in danger when the hero’s
identity becomes known to the crook leader, but the heroine
succeeds in notifying the police authorities, who reach the
battle scene in time to round up the crooks.
The voice of William Russell does not register well.
The voices of others, too, fail to register well. Only the
voices of George Stone and of Conrad Nagel are good.
Myrna Loy’s is so-so. The pistol shots do not register
well ; they sound like puffs. The action holds one in sus-
pense in some places. On the whole the picture is only
fair. And the public has not gone wild over it if one is
to judge by the crowds that are attracted at the Strand;
they are not great. The picture is now in its second week,
and the crowds are very slim.
The silent version should not deserve a better classifi-
cation than a fairly program picture.
“Midnight Life” — with Francis X. Bushman
( Gotham-Reg ., Aug. 15; 6,200 ft., 12 to 88 min. )
Only fair. It is a gangster melodrama with some sus-
pense and a few mild thrills.
The story revolves around a lieutenant detective (hero)
who is determined to get the man higher up when his pal
is killed. Through his gang, wholesale silk robberies are
committed and policemen "bumped” off whenever they
were about to “get him.” The villain, a henchman of a
crook, who poses as a wealthy man about town, invites
a cabaret dancer into his office and forgets that she is
there when the gang meet and kill the hero’s pal. The
hero, sensing the girl’s knowledge of the crime, protects
her from the villain when he is about to attempt to get rid
of her, too, because of her knowledge, and in return she
tells him how the murder took place. Instead of going
into the office himself after making an appointment with
the gang, the hero sends in the real crook ; he was look-
ing for the villain that had been killed in the girl’s apart-
ment by the hero, and he gets the “works.”
The suspense is caused by the hero’s taking his life into
his hands in his efforts to avenge his pal’s death. The
thrilling scenes occur in the office of the villain who ran a
cabaret on the side, when the gang “bumped off” anyone
who interfered with their plans, by inviting the victim into
the office which was put in darkness so that the victim
never knew who shot him. Francis Bushman is good as
the toothpick chewing goodhearted detective-lieutenant.
Gertrude Olmstead is a charming cabaret dancer very
much in love with her dancing partner, Eddie Buzzell,
who is fair enough. Others in the cast are Monte Carter
as the henchman and Cosmo Bellew as the wealthy crook
and villain. The picture is based on Reginald Wright
Kaufman’s novel “The Spider’s Web,” and was directed
by Scott Dunlap.
A double bill program picture.
“Sweet Sixteen” — with Helen Foster and
Gertrude Olmstead
( Rayart , Aug. 15; 5,991 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
Not so bad. The story, a conventional one about
modern youth, holds one’s interest pretty well ; it conveys
a lesson to wealthy parents, particularly to fathers, that
they should not leave their growing children too much to
their own devices lest they get into trouble. Helen Fos-
ter is a likable youngster as the sixteen year old dau-
ghter of a banker who was tired of being left alone and
treated like a baby. Gertrude Olmstead is good as the
elder sister (heroine), who objected to her sister’s
butting into her affairs but who sacrifices her happiness
to save her from undesirable notoriety through her madcap
adventures. Lydia Yeomans Titus adds a comedy touch
as “granny” and William H. Tooker is fair as the negli-
gent father who loses his wealth but wins the affections
of his child.
The story revolves around the younger daughter of a
wealthy father who is romantic and falls in love with a
man of questionable character (villain). He takes her to
cabarets, teaches her to drink and takes her to his apart-
ment, promising marriage but backing out when the girl
suggests it. The heroine learns that her sister is in the
cabaret with this bounder. The place is raided. To pre-
vent her sister from being arrested, she pretends to have
gone there with the villain. Her fiance misconstrues her
motives and begs her to explain but because she wanted
to protect her sister, she refuses and breaks her engage-
ment. His faith in her, however, soon brings him back to
her and they learn that the young sister had gone to the
villain’s apartment. They also learn that their father had
lost his money. When they get to the villain’s house, they
find him and the father who had gone to get his daughter in
a fight. The hero and the grandmother beat him up and all
ends well.
The picture was directed by Scott Dunlap from the
Photoplay Magazine story by Phyllis Duganne. Others in
the cast are Harry Allen and Reginald Sheffield. Gladden
James, as the villain, is good.
A NEW REGIONAL
The first editorial in the new regional publication, “The
New York State Exhibitor,” is entitled “Barrist and
Goodwin Present.”
It is hardly necessary for me to tell you who Barrist
and Goodwin are ; their names have been mentioned in
these pages so often that I am sure every subscriber and
reader of Harrison’s Reports knows the pair by this time.
But lest there is even a single subscriber or reader of this
paper that does not know who they are, I ask their per-
mission to say that they publish “The Exhibitor,” a re-
gional in Philadelphia, “The National Exhibitor,” a re-
gional in Washington, D. C., and “Brevity,” the well-
known comic paper, the gem of the motion picture in-
dustry, which, too, is published in Philadelphia.
Mr. Goodwin is the directing business genius, and Mr.
Barrist the directing editorial genius. Dave Barrist’s
pen is fearless ; he prints the truth, regardless of the con-
sequences to the pocketbook of the firm. I have known
this by personal observation. And that is why they com-
mand the respect of the entire industry.
Dave Barrist and Charlie Goodwin are now honoring
the New York zone; they have just put out the first issue
of “The New York State Exhibitor.” It is rich in mat-
ter, and artistic in composition.
I was going to wish the new publication success, as is
customary. But after a second thought, I changed my
mind, for I fee! that wishes in a way convey some doubt
as to whether the “wished” thing is going to make a suc-
cess or not. In the case of Dave Barrist’s and Charlie
Goodwin’s “The New York State Exhibitor,” I haven’t
the least doubt ; I know it will be a success.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
148
NO ARTICLE ON TALKING PICTURES
THIS WEEK
In order for me to get an opportunity to dispose of some
other matters that have accumulated, as well as to get the
necessary time to collect more material on the subject, I
am postponing the fifth article on talking pictures and in-
struments. I may be able to have another one ready by
next week. In the meantime I may say that the first four
articles have created a deeper impression than anything
that has ever been written concerning the moving picture
industry.
The New York World reproduced the first article in two
installments in two Sunday issues. The Irish World has
reproduced that article, too. The editor of the American
Railway Express Journal has requested an entire series
sent him.
Mr. Merritt Crawford, well known in the industry as a
writer, having been connected with many of the trade jour-
nals, wrote me as follows :
“Congratulations (if belated) on your fine series on
‘Sound Pictures.’ They are quite the best, most informative,
and most intelligent articles that have yet appeared in any
of the trade papers (or elsewhere) on this most compli-
cated invention.
“Your labors in collecting this material and arranging it,
obviously must have been very considerable, and they cer-
tainly were painstaking, and you deserve the thanks of the
whole industry.
“Probably you will get no recognition for your efforts
to clarify the problems which confront all branches of the
film business, but this will serve at least to record the ap-
preciation of one of your friends.”
Mr. Leonard Hall, Assistant to the Publisher of the
Photoplay Magazine, writes:
“Just a note of appreciation for your invaluable series on
sound, the fourth installment of which appears in your
issue of September 8th.
“Reading it I am struck with the worth of these pieces
of reference. I let the first three of the stories get mislaid
and so lost. I wonder if you could possible have some one
dig up the first three sound articles and have them sent to
me, in order that we may keep them for future use! Mr.
Quirk and I would appreciate it greatly.”
Zit's Theatrical Newspaper wrote as follows in the issue
of September 8th :
“According to Pete Harrison’s ‘Reports,’ some of the
talk about building sound studios on the coast is the sheerest
bunk. Pete is no alarmist, and his present series of ar-
ticles on sound pictures is some of the best stuff yet writ-
ten about the talkers. We don’t believe that Pete wrote
it himself because he has not used the word ‘suspensive,
(N. B. I thank Mr. Sergeant for the compliment), but
whether Pete wrote it or got it, it is sane, intelligent and
very clearly authoritative.
“And Pete says that some of the studios will not be built
because the sound-proofing material cannot be contracted
for in time for this season.
“It’s easier to build sound-proof studios on paper and in
the papers than on the lots, and there is such a lot of tall
lying going on that you don’t believe anything the press
agent sends out. On the other hand, Pete never has gone
in for sensationalism, and when he says a thing it is gen-
erally on information. . . .”
Mr. David Barrist, the popular editor and publisher of
The Exhibitor, of Philadelphia, and of that comical paper,
Brevity, wrote partly as follows in the September 1 issue
of The Exhibitor, under the heading, “The Craze for
Sound” :
“. . . In all this hurly-burly of excitement there is no
voice to lead the exhibitors out of the wilderness of doubt.
Cool-headed judgment is almost entirely lacking. Opinion
dictated by self-interest only can be heard. The producer
who is fortunate enough to be prepared with a number of
completed sound pictures, is loud in his prediction of the
future of this new entertainment, while the manufacturer
who has been caught napping and finds himself without any
talkies to compete against the rival companion, is equally
emphatic in his opinion that the talkies are but a passing
novelty.
“The nearest approach to some constructive analysis of
the situation is a series of articles appearing in Harrison’s
Reports, under the general title of ‘Facts About Talking
Pictures and Instruments,’ the first two of which appeared
under date lines of August 18 and 25, respectively. These
September 15, 1928
articles are both clear and comprehensive and cover the
sound picture from every angle. While they do not at-
tempt to hazard a guess as to the future of the talkies, the
articles at least furnish the exhibitor with a clear under-
standing of the different devices on the market, their rela-
tive faults and merits, cost of installation, supply of pic-
ture service and such other information as to give the
theatre owner the knowledge he needs to help him decide
the question of whether or not to install sound.
“More than that at present nobody can safely predict.”
* * *
It is my intention to collect and print every bit of infor-
mation about talking pictures in existence so that an ex-
hibitor may not be compelled to be writing letters here
and there to get it.
The article about the non-synchronous instruments, par-
ticularly about the cost of records, should prove of great
interest to every small exhibitor, no matter whether he is
in a small town or in the neighborhood of a large city. I
have part of the information on hand already.
If any exhibitor has any information on the subject that
would prove of benefit to other exhibitors, let him send
it in. t hose who have had experience in talking pictures
are in a position, I am sure, to help other exhibitors.
Articles from them will be welcomed.
Since my announcement that I would review non-syn-
chronous instruments with a view to advising you, I re-
ceived letters from several makers of such instruments
asking me to include them in such a review.
I shall be glad to describe in Harrison’s Reports the non-
synchronous instruments of every concern, if I can hear
the instrument play and have an opportunity to examine it
under actual conditions ; otherwise I will not review them,
for under no condition will I recommend the subscribers of
Harrison’s Reports to buy something I have not exam-
ined personally. Each of such concerns should install an
instrument in this city so that I might hear it. And then
I shall review it in these pages only if the manufacturing
concern is a reputable one, able to fulfill its obligations
toward such theatre owners as may decide to buy its in-
strument. The present demand for synchronous as well as
non-synchronous instruments will naturally give rise to
many fly-by-night concerns, and Harrison’s Reports will
do all there is in its power to protect you from such
concerns.
RETURN OF PRINTS
There have been reported to this office lately several
cases in which a print was lost or destroyed in transit from
the exhibitor’s theatre to the exchange, and the exchanges
demanded of the exhibitors the full value of the print in
accordance with the terms of the contract. In some in-
stances the exchanges attempted to collect from the ex-
hibitors on the ground that the prints were not insured by
them when they were shipped to the exchange.
The last two lines of the Twelfth Clause of the Standard
Exhibition contract read as follows :
“It is agreed that the delivery of a positive print prop-
erly directed and packed in the container furnished by the
Distributor therefor, to a carrier designated or used by the
Distributor and proper receipt therefor obtained by the
exhibitor, shall constitute the return of such positive print
by the exhibitor.”
Notice that nowhere does this clause state that the ex-
hibitor must insure the print ; the responsibility while the
print is in transit from the theatre to the exchange is the
distributor’s ; therefore the exhibitor is not obligated to
insure it.
But the contract demands that the exhibitor obtain
“proper receipt” from the carrier, and as no receipt is
issued when the print is shipped uninsured by parcel post,
the exhibitor is responsible for the price of the print, at
least technically. If he should be able to obtain a receipt
of shipment, in the form of a statement or of an affidavit,
from the postmaster, thus proving that he shipped it, then
he complies, in my opinion, with the requirements of the
contract ; in case he can not, he will have no way out but
pay for the print.
In my opinion, the exhibitor can be protected by a receipt
and still save the cost of the high insurance in this way:
let him insure the film for the minimum insurance fee,
which by parcel post is five cents.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act ef March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions .* • • • 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing- Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1,1919
Tel. Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1928
No. 38
A JUSTIFIED COMPLAINT FROM THE COAST
Los Angeles, Cal., September 11, 1928.
Mr. P. S. Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
My dear Pete :
As usually, when you hear from me I am all wound up
and want to ask a bunch of questions about something I
have on my chest. Now that you know the reason for
this letter, here I go!
Here on the Coast (Los Angeles, San Bernardino,
Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties, most par-
ticularly in the Los Angeles county), there is a menace
that needs immediate attention. I am referring to the
so-called "Previews.”
In order that you may understand fully what a pre-
view is, let me try to explain: When a picture is fin-
ished, it is taken to a theatre and shown to an audi-
ence; the producer, star, director and cast attending.
This is done five or six times before the picture is
shipped to New York.
The people have fallen for this Preview stuff and
all that is necessary now is for a theatre to advertise
a Preview and the natives flock to it, leaving the other
theatres in the immediate neighborhood with empty
seats for that evening.
In the early days, a picture w"as put on “cold,”
without any advertising; it was shown to whatever
number of persons happened to be in the house. But
now it is different; a Preview is advertised in the pa-
pers extensively, by newspaper ads, handbills, and so
forth, and often a searchlight is put on the roof to
attract the attention of the passersby as well as of the
residents nearby. The title of the picture is not given,
but the name of the company that produced it is.
The word “Preview” is now a bigger natural than
ninety per cent, of the pictures produced and the at-
tendance is usually on a par with "Big Parade,”
“Wings,” and other such pictures. In other words,
it is capacity house for the performance.
The Previews are put on in addition to the regular
show, consisting of the regular feature, with their
Fanchon & Marco, or “Paul Whiteman and His
Band,” as you would call it in New York, taking the
people in the theatre around seven o’clock and letting
them out around ten thirty to twelve midnight. You
can see for yourself what effect this has on the pic-
ture-going public. It is like eating half a gallon of
ice cream at one sitting. They fill up and won’t go
to other performances until now it is getting so that
they come out only when there is a Preview on.
And this is not all: in addition to these Previews
there are others; many exchanges rent pictures for
Previews just as soon as the picture is received by
them, and many of the large exchanges permit West
Coast Theatre Circuits to take out a picture and show
it in a “Preview,” until now one must, in order to do
anything like a reasonable business, have a studio
Preview, or an exchange Preview, which is certainly
a misrepresentation.
Paramount and Metro-Goldwyn, who force us to
accept in our contracts a rubber-stamped provision
forbidding us from double-featuring their pictures,
permit West Coast to run Previews with their pic-
tures, and also rent their pictures to be Previewed
when another feature picture is shown at the same
time. This is certainly establishing two policies, the
worse of the two to be applied on the small exhibitor.
The Preview habit has assumed such proportions
that it has reached even San Diego, 135 miles away
from the studios. It has now spread to the down-
town (first-run) houses in Los Angeles, and even in
Vaudeville houses, as you will see from the enclosed
clippings. Think of it! A Pantages Vaudeville house,
showing their entire line of vaudeville acts with Tom
Mix in “Cheyenne” as a studio Preview!
I have talked with a number of exchange managers
protesting against this condition, but they answer
that they have no control over it because the Pre-
views are put on by the studios.
Now, here’s my contention in the matter:
(1) A Preview is a “run” and comes under the
terms of our contract if wTe have bought such a pic-
ture. That is, if the first-run house has the picture
bought and I have it bought second-run, when such
picture is shown at a first-run house as a Preview,
irrespective of whether it is a Studio or an Exchange
Preview, 1 am entitled to the picture on my clearance
(protection), and I should not be compelled to wait
until the picture was shipped to New York and re-
shipped to the local exchange, to be shown in Los
Angeles on its release date. If I don’t get it as I
claim, then I am getting the picture third-run. Am I
right?
(.2) If a picture is Previewed in my town and later
that same house shows it again in a regular run, when
I go to buy it afterwards I am not buying a second-
run picture but a third-run. Am I right?
A member of the Film Board of Trade asserted to
me that a Studio Preview is not a run. I replied
thus: Suppose I am in a small town and A showed
in a Preview the picture that I bought, regardless
who Previewed it, -where do I come in afterwards
when almost every one in the towrn has seen it? He
came back by saying that I have to pay for the picture
no matter whether I played it or not. How about
that for logic?
There are some houses that preview five or six
nights a week and they Preview with such pictures as
"Beau Geste,” “Ladies of the Mob,” and others; in
fact, with all, superfeatures as well as the little ones
—it makes no difference. That is where the Key
house gets the break over the subsequent runs. If
a subsequent run should happen to get a Preview
now and then, the first-run houses see to it that it
does not occur again if the picture happened to be one
they had on their contract.
(3) Now, here is the vital question, Pete! If an
exhibitor wanted to stop this abuse, w7hom should he
apply to? Where can he go to have a definite ruling
as to whether a Preview is a run or not? Is it a mat-
ter for the arbitration board? I personally do not
believe it is until its status is established. Then an
exhibitor can prove that his contract is violated by a
Preview. The Film Board representative I talked to
asserted that the motor car manufacturers try out
an automobile before I get it. That’s true, but they
don t give it to my neighbor to run around and get
value out of it before they deliver it to me.
I thank yrou, Pete, to take this matter up with your
attorney and let me know what he says.
In closing I may say that I am not opposed to the
studios Previewing their pictures if they wall only7
take the darn things out where they will not conflict
with other theatres.
Very sincerely yours,
* * *
The answer : Previews were conceived by Mr.
D. W. Griffith. His intention was to see not how
much the picture would draw but what would be the
( Continued, on last page )
150 , i HARRISON’S REPORTS September 22, 1928
- i\.V ,v“ ' - 1 ""
“The Red Mark” — with a Special Cast
( Pathc , Aug. 26; 7,937 ft.; 92 to 113 min.)
Excellently produced, but too gruesome. The ac-
tion unfolds in a supposed French penal colony and
there is nothing pleasant either in the action or in the
background. The doings of the villain are more
prominent than the doings of the hero or of the young
heroine. For instance, he is presented as a cruel man,
a person who stretches the point considerably to
bring about an execution so that he might rob the
executed person of whatever valuables he might have
hidden either on his person or in his cell. The char-
acters are either convicts or children of convicts. The
hero is presented as a convict, sent to the Island for
having been found guilty of picking pockets. He
falls in love with the young heroine, born on the
island. The executioner (villain) wants the heroine
as a wife and implies to the hero that unless he keeps
away from her he might never leave the island, al-
though he was notified that he was free to leave in a
week. The hero murders the executioner’s represen-
tative, and is sentenced to be executed on the guillotine
when the executioner discovers on his neck a red
mark, which makes him realize that the young man
is his son, whom he had been seeking for years. He
stops the execution. The hero follows the heroine,
who had been taken to France by the nuns. They
marry.
The plot has been founded on the story by John
Russell. The picture has been directed by James
Cruze. Gaston Glass is the pickpocket hero; Nena
Quertano, the young heroine; Gustave Von Seyffertitz
the executioner. Rose Dione, Eugene Pallette and
others are in the supporting cast. All do good work.
The picture is too strong to entertain the average
picture-goer. It is no doubt more suitable for little
theatres, where “odd” kind of pictures are shown.
I iO
“The Circus Kid” — with Frankie Darro
(F B 0, Oct. 7; 6,085 ft.; 70 to 87 min.)
“The Circus Kid” is supposed to belong to the
group of six specials that have been sold this season.
From the point of view of quality, however, it is not
even a Gold Bond. I doubt if many of you can show
it even as a program attraction, unless your custom
consists chiefly of children. The first mistake was
made by FBO in taking Frankie Darro from the
program pictures and putting him in specials. Master
Darro is a fine little actor, well enough; but experience
has taught us that children do not draw in big pic-
tures. Even the pictures of Jackie Coogan have lost
ground.
The second mistake FBO made was to give him
a weak story. They tried to strengthen it with a
circus — with lions and other animals, but without
success.
The story has little Darro as an orphan, who runs
away from the orphanage and accidently finds him-
self in a cage where a ferocious ape was kept. Instead
of harmingfhim, the ape befriends the little hero. This
leads the little hero to an opportunity to become a
member of an act in the circus.
There is a lion tamer in the story (Joe E. Brown),
who is in love with a young girl (heroine), but who
keeps his love secret. Fie takes to drink. While in an
intoxicated condition he is attacked by a lion and is
so frightened that he loses his nerve and can no longer
enter a lion’s cage again.
The closing scenes offer some excitement. A lion
breaks out of his cage when the tent was full of
people and the lion tamer risks his life by grabbing
the lion and struggling with it until the guards arrive
and shoot it. But the lion tamer, too, loses his life.
The plot has been founded on a story by James
Ashmore Creelman. The picture has been directed by
George B. Seitz. There is nothing the matter with
the direction; simply the story is not strong. Helene
Costello is the heroine. Sam Nelson, Lionel Belmore
and others are in the supporting cast.
“The Divine Sinner” — with Vera Reynolds
Rayart, July; 5,683 ft.; 66 to 81 min. )
A mythical kingdom story in which the heroine does
nothing to win the spectator’s interest. She is the
daughter of a war-torn family of the Austrian nobil-
ity, who goes to Paris with the determination to make
money enough to replenish her family’s fortunes and
to try to restore her youngest brother’s sight, which
he lost in the war. At first she is unable to get em-
ployment because of the advances made to her by
those who wished to employ her. But her talent as
a designer procures her a good position with an emi-
nent dressmaker. But he, too, makes insulting pro-
posals. In dispair she is about to return home de-
feated when a fellow-countryman, discovering her
ability to copy signatures, offers her the chance to
live in splendor merely by forging checks, particu-
larly by forging the signature of the dissolute Prince
Miguel. She is caught by the police and is given the
option of serving a sentence on Devil’s Island or be-
coming the charmer of this same Miguel, to prevent
him from returning to his own country. She at first
refuses but when her blind brother is brought to her,
she decides to accept the proposition. In two weeks
she falls madly in love with the man whom she had
denounced as a despoiler of women. His father dies,
and he is told that he is the new king. She at first
persuades him to go back. But he follows her to the
border. She finds that she loves him too much. He
gives up his crowm and they live together.
Miss Renyolds is a charming heroine. Ernest Hil-
liard is fair enough as the woman-pursuing prince.
Flarry Northrup is the Ambassador and Nigel De
Brulier is the Chief of Police, who both persuade the
heroine to take the job of ensnaring the prince. The
picture was directed by Scott Pembroke from a story
by Robert Anthony Dillon.
“Shadows in the Night” — with Lawrence
Gray and Louise Lorraine
( Mctro-Goldwyn , Oct. 26; 5,448 ft.; 63 to 77 min.)
For an intelligent person to enjoy this picture he
must assume that detectives and police officers in
general are stupid, and that newspaper reporters, who
undertake detective work for the purpose of getting a
story, are not very intelligent. Otherwise one could
not explain the conduct of the characters of this
melodrama. The hero of this picture lacks reasoning
powers to such a degree that he thinks that the crooks
he is after will not become suspicious when he tells
them that he has just come out of jail even though
he has a fine breed of a police dog with him and has
his hair combed smooth. And as if by a miracle, the
crooks, who are supposed to be tough, very tough
persons, do not suspect him.
There is a girl in the case, too; it comes out in the
action that she had been forced by the arch-crook to
do his bidding ever since he had framed her father and
sent him up the river. Of course, she hadn’t intelli-
gence enough to run away from the crooks and tell
the police authorities that she had been used as a
decoy to trap policemen so that the crook leader and
his gang might exterminate them. Nor are the police-
men on the beat supposed, according to this picture,
to possess any intelligence; a sergeant, who knows
that the crooks are after him, enters the lair of the
crooks, confronts the villain, and orders him to put
forward his hands so that he might put his handcuffs
on them. All the while the officer had his hand
away from his hip, whereas the villain had it in his
coat pocket, holding a pistol. The officer walks right
up to the villain. And what happens is what would
have happened in life under similar circumstances;
he drops dead, with a bullet in his heart. In a situa-
tion that follows the killing of this policeman, the
hero, who had obtained a position in the villain’s
saloon by pretending to be a jailbird, with a gun in
his hand, pointed at the villain, walks right up to him
when at the same time he was putting the gangsters
behind his unprotected back. To accomplish all these
offenses to the commonest logic requires, you must
admit, directorial and other producing ability of the
highest order.
The picture is an illogical melodrama. But because
individual situations are thrilling and suspensive, and
because the hero takes chances with his life to save
the heroine, picture-goers of the rank and file will
like it to the point of cheering it. Flash, the police
dog, possesses intelligence to an uncommon degree.
And this will help the picture to go over with such
picture-goers.
The plot has been founded on a story by Ted Shane.
The picture was directed by D. Ross Lederman.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
151
September 22, 1928
“A Gram of Dust'5 — with Ricardo Cortez
and Claire Windsor
(Tiff any -Stahl, July 10; 6,192 ft.; 71 to 87 min.)
Not a bad program picture for smaller houses, ihe
story, adapted from the David Graham Phillips novel,
revolves around a well-to-do engineer (hero), who is
engaged to the heroine, a society girl. Me becomes
inlaiuated with a common, vulgar, stupid typist, whom
he cnanced to engage to work for him one evening to
catch up with his work. He gives up his position in
the world, causes his office to be ruined, elopes with
her to Havana, and wrecks himself by becoming a
hard drinker. Of course his love for her was not
very lasting, and, having tolerated her as long as he
could, he returns to New York, only to discover what
havoc he had wrought. He becomes a tramp, haying
sunk pretty low in the world, when the heroine s
chauffeur spots him in the street and tells the heroine
about it. She makes the hero talk to her and after
telling him that she would wait for him till he made
good again, he gets the chance to prove his worth.
Ricardo Cortez is a very good hero. Miss Windsor
is see nvery little in the picture, but she is charming.
Alma Bennett who has lots of "it’' is very good. The
picture, wdiile rather sexy, is never offensive. It was
directed by George Archainbaud.
“The Albany Night Boat” — with
Olive Borden
( Tiffany-Stahl , July 20; 5,748 ft.; 66 to 82 min.)
Not a bad program picture of the neighborhood
calibre. It has a few thrills and some suspense.
The opening scenes are thrilling in that the hero
and his buddy, while operating their searchlight on
the Albany Night Boat, spot a girl leaping from a
yacht away from a man who was trying to make love
to her. 'the hero rescues her but his pal (villain),
pretending to have saved the heroine, invites her out.
Not liking him, but appreciative of his having saved
her life, she goes with him. When he moves to her
boarding house, the hero going along, too, she learns
that it was the hero who had rescued her and imme-
diately falls in love with him. They go to Coney
Island and the hero, taking her home, proposes mar-
riage to her. Not losing any time, they get married
the next day. They like a nice bungalow but cannot
afford to rent it. The villain offers to pay half the
rent. The heroine does not want him but the hero,
not noting how his pal wanted the heroine, accepts
the offer and for a while things go smoothly enough.
But the villain, pretending to be ill, goes home one
night and attempts to attack the heroine. The hero,
as was his custom, flashes the light on his home and
sees his wife running away from his pal. He jumps
overboard and swims to the house in time to rescue
his wife. His eyes opened, he chases his pal out.
The scenes of the rescue are thrilling. The rides
down in Coney Island were done very well indeed.
The suspense is caused by the heroine’s knowledge
of the pal’s evil intentions, knowing that he would
some day overstep the bounds of decency, and the
hero’s unconsciousness of his friend’s treachery. Olive
Borden gives a very good performance. Duke Martin
is a good villain. Ralph Emerson is a likable hero.
The picture was directed by A1 Raboch from a story
by Wellyn Totman.
LET MR. HAYS ANSWER THESE
QUESTIONS
( Copied from ‘ The Exhibitor,” of Philadelphia)
The Copyright Protection Bureau
There is something distinctly unsavory about per-
mitting an exhibitor to continue a practice of hold-
outs, with a full knowledge of such practice, in order
to penalize him more heavily at some future time.
Common sense would dictate that when an exchange
has knowledge of contract violations, yet permits them
to continue, it is acquiescing in the practice and, by its
silence, is lending weight to the theatre owner’s argu-
ment that he has a verbal agreement covering such
hold-overs.
For the chronic contract breaker there is no sym-
pathy and every decent exhibitor will co-operate in
any move aimed at his cure or extinction. But the
methods and practices which the Copyright Protection
Bureau are employing to correct this evil are open to
the strongest kind ot criticism. This detective body
has set up an inquisition as cruel and as vicious as
anything the industry has ever knov/n.
U nder the banner of a righteous cause this inquisito-
rial group has been “inviting” exhibitors detected in
holding over shows to settle the matter secretly to
avoid the notoriety of having the offense aired before
the Arbitration Board. The club which is being em-
ployed to influence such settlement is the Federal
Copyright Lav/, which imposes a penalty of $250 for
each violation, plus a year in the Federal hoosegow if
additional suasion is needed.
No attempt is made to “fit the punishment to the
ciime.” No distinction is made between the habitual
violator and the exhibitor whose past record is clean.
Nor is there any pretense of squaring the damages
asked with the amount of the damage done. As a
result we find a poor little Italian “exhibitor,” caught
holding over at the cost a couple of hundred dollars
in film, hailed before the gentlemen of the Coypright
Protection Bureau and informed with all due solemn-
ity that he has offended Uncle Sam and the only way
that this offense can be wiped out is by payment to
the Coypright Protection Bureau of $2,800! (Prob-
ably more than his theatre is worth.) When the
exhibitor with tears in his eyes protested his inability
to pay, the amount was pared down until it reached
$400.
The activities of these sleuths appear to be directed
chiefly against the small exhibitor. These theatre men,
v/ho are holding on to their little businesses by the
skin of their teeth, are charged, not with bicycling or
playing a picture which they have not paid for, but
with holding over for an extra day film which has
been played and paid for only for use on the one or
two days. In many cases the earnings of these shoot-
ing galleries are so small that the owners find it neces-
sary to engage in some side employment to eke out a
livelihood. It would appear that what these exhibitors
really need is the sympathy of the exchange men and
a readjustment of their film rentals. These are no
subjects from which to exact a pound of flesh.
Whether the hold-out of a show comes within the
offenses covered by the Copyright Law has never, to
the best of our knowledge, been judicially determined.
It seems strange, therefore, to find exhibitors who
have suffered so much by the arbitrary interpretation
of this statute in connection with the music tax, lend-
ing their support, as arbitrators, to a further use of
this club against fellow-exhibitors in the instance
where it was never intended — namely, the hold-over
of film.
The industry today is on a cleaner and more ethical
basis than ever before in its history, and credit for
this is due not the Copyright Protection Bureau, but
to the splendid system of arbitration which has been
developed. Left to themselves, the exhibitors and ex-
change men are fully capable of scotching any little
garter snake that shows its head among the picnic
dishes without the aid of this mighty crew of hunts-
men. Any attempt to set up an extra-legal body to
prejudge cases before they are heard by the Joint
Board of Arbitration is a direct slap at arbitration.
And while on the subject there are several questions
which many exhibitors would like answered:
1. Who, what and why is the Copyright
Protection Bureau and why are its activities
shrouded in mystery? It is possible to have
secrecy without mystery.
2. Who gets the fat fees and penalties that
are collected by them in settlements “out of
court?”
3. Why, when an exhibitor is detected in
the practice of holding over film in violation
of his contract, is this practice permitted by
the exchange to continue until such a time as
the Copyright Protection Bureau gets ready
to take action?
4.. How is it possible for film regularly to be played
an extra day or two without the salesmen who cover
the territory having knowledge of such hold-out, and
if they have such knov/ledge and permit the practice
to continue, who is to blame?
DAVID BARRIST.
( Editor’s Note: The Copyright Protection Bureau has
its headquarters in ihe office of Motion Picture Pro-
ducers and Distributors, of ivhich organization Mr. Hays
is President.)
152
September 22, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
reaction of the public to it. He would place a num-
ber of persons in different parts of the house to make
notes of whatever they overheard the spectators say.
The picture was never advertised. And it would be
shown at a theatre that would not conflict with other
theatres.
The present Preview policy is a degeneration of
the Griffith idea.
Since pictures are now previewed not to find out
what the public thinks of the picture so as to give the
producer an opportunity to correct defects but to see
how much the picture will draw, a Preview is a
“run,” particularly when it is shown in competitive
theatres. Therefore, an exhibitor who shows the pic-
ture after the first-run house has shown it a second
time is not receiving it second-run but third-run. The
logic of the exchangeman who uses the argument of
motor cars is unsound; it is prompted by the knowl-
edge that the exhibitor is helpless to change things.
When a picture is so previewed, the surrounding ter-
ritory theatres as well as the second-run exhibitor
should be entitled to the picture immediately — in ac-
cordance with the terms of the protection stipulated
in the contract.
The fact that West Coast theatres are showing Pre-
views five or six times a week is the best proof that
a Preview is a "run.” It is a profit-making enterprise
and not a test.
But how is this condition to be changed? If one
should take this complaint to Mr. Hays, he would
most likely say that it is outside his province by rea-
son of the fact that his contract forbids him from
meddling with the purely business affairs of the mem-
bers of his organization. I may be mistaken, but
such is my opinion. But in order to make sure, take it
up with him!
In case Mr. Hays should refuse to intervene for the
reasons just stated, then there is just one other way:
let the exhibitor-arbitrators of the Los Angeles Arbi-
tration Board refuse to arbitrate cases of producer-
distributors who allow their pictures previewed in other
than non-competitive theatres. That will perhaps cure
the evil.
In reference to the stamped provision in the Para-
mount and Metro-Goldwyn contracts forbidding an
exhibitor from double-featuring their pictures, let me
inform every exhibitor that the Metro-Goldwyn and
Paramount Home Offices do not enforce this ruling
on themselves; the Loew circuit shows their pictures
on a double feature bill. The New York Theatre, the
Circle Theatre, the 86th Street, all New York Loew
houses, show double features. And they do not hesi-
tate to put their own pictures on such double bills.
Nor are Paramount insisting that Loew refrain from
showing their pictures on a double bill.
There is just one way out for exhibitors who want
to show Paramount and Metro-Goldwyn pictures on a
double feature bill: Let them go ahead and show
them. When these exchanges drag them before the
arbitration board, let them inform the exhibitor arbi-
trators that inasmuch as this provision .has not been
passed by the contract committee the violation is.
not arbitrable. You know that, according to an
agreement between exhibitors and producers, every-
thing that goes into the contract must be passed by
both the producer and the exhibitor committees. And
this provision has no_b to the best of my knowledge,
beeji pass.ed by the exhibitor committee.
THE ORGANIZATION SPIRIT
Mr. Charles R. Metzger, President of Associated
Theatre Owners of Indiana, and a professor of Law, in
a personal letter to the writer says among other things:
“We have gone a long way in our state organization
and as you know we have a splendid and enthusiastic
membership. We have kept our bills paid and our
office is going satisfactorily on a very limited income.
“I mentioned enthusiastic members and I meant it to
this extent, that our exhibitors believe in us; they be-
lieve that we are running the organization fair and
square for their best interests and they realize that
people come here for an annual meeting. They are so
satisfied with the way things are going that their atti-
tude is, ‘Let well enough alone, but don’t make a trip
for an annual meeting.’
“You know the whole story of exhibitors in matters
of this sort better than I can tell you. We feel happy
to have the financial and loyal support of our members
but we are most eager to have them all present at a
big meeting at which time we could get acquainted,
learn some of the recent developments in this business
and meet the officers of the Association who have been
working so hard in their behalf for the past year and
a half.”
* * *
No part of Mr. Metzger’s letter was meant to be
published, but I take the responsibility of publishing
some of it, daring his wrath. He has been the best
example of an exhibitor leader, and I felt that the
exhibitors of the United States ought to know some-
thing about him when he will not let any one tell it.
Mr. Metzger is one of highest class gentlemen that
have ever associated themselves with the motion pic-
ture business and other state organizations should
take a lesson from the exhibitors of Indiana.
THE CASE OF CHAPLIN’S “THE
CIRCUS”
When you buy a picture you naturally expect to
receive it and to play it during the year that you buy
it in. You know how business is that year, and you
are in a position to tell what that particular picture
would do approximately at your box office. A year
later business conditions may be such that you cannot
afford to play the same picture at the price you agreed
to pay.
When you contracted for Chaplin’s “The Circus,”
business conditions were good; and if Mr. Chaplin
had produced and delivered the picture at that time,
there is no question in my mind that every one of
you would have made money.
But Mr. Chaplin did not make the picture when he
promised to make it, or at least when the United
Artists salesmen told you he would make it.
Of course, the contract specifies that when a producer
fails, for causes enumerated in the contract, to pro-
duce a picture, or is delayed in the production of it,
for causes beyond his control, he is blameless. And
United Artists were entitled to be held blameless if the
delay had been caused by causes beyond Mr. Chap-
lin’s control.
But such was not the case; domestic troubles were
the cause. And such a cause is not, and should not
be, excused by the contract. Under tfie circumstances,
the exhibitor-arbitrators should render a favorable
award for the exhibitor that wants his “The Circus”
contract canceled.
MOVIETONE NEWS SOLD FOR
FIVE YEARS
William Fox will not rent the Movietone News for
less than five years.
From the point of view of a producer, Fox is right;
he has spent millions of dollars in experimental work
and it is not right that some other talking news con-
cern should step in after a while and reap the benefit.
From the point of view of the exhibitor, the matter
differs; while Fox has spent millions of dollars in
pioneering work, it would be foolish for an exhibitor
to tie himself down for five years, paying big rental,
when no one knows what turn the news end of talk-
ing pictures will take. At present, noise with the
scenes is a novelty and takes well. But nobody knows
whether the public will want to hear deafening noises
all the time. If they should happen to show a dislike
for such noises, then the exhibitor will find himself
tied with a contract he cannot get rid of.
Perhaps a fair and equitable way would be for the
exhibitor to be bound for five years only if he should
continue showing newsweeklies of this kind. If he
should find that they have lost their vogue and should
decide to drop them all, to be bound only for one
year. In this manner the distributor would be pro-
tected and the exhibitor would not be sent to the
poor house.
Even then, there is unwisdom in the act, for an
exhibitor will thus shut himself out of progress; if
another method of recording sound should be invent-
ed, far more advanced than the present method, such
exhibitor would continue to show a newsweekly with
a sound recorded by the old method. Yet it would
be much more preferable.
Exhibitors should think many times before tying
themselves down for five years with any kind of talk-
ing pictures, released by any distributor.
Ejntered as Becond-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Bates:
United States.. $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exoiusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 1928
No. 39
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments — No. 5
When radio was first invented, people would sit with
childish delight hours at a time with microphones in
their ears trying to catch some sound. They were thrilled
when they would hear a musical sound or a voice now and
then, no matter how distorted it was. The slighest sound
was enough to send a childish thrill into their hearts.
As time went on and transmission and reception were
improved, these same people became exacting. Jumbled
sounds would no longer thrill them ; they wanted undis-
torted sound, until now they will not sit by a radio set
unless the tonal quality is good and the entertainment
first class. But even then, they get tired of radio after
the first two or three weeks, during which time they stay
till the small hours of the morning tuning in. Only ex-
traordinary features will, as a rule, draw them near a
radio set.
Let us not go outside this industry to draw comparisons :
When motion pictures first came into being, any motion
on the screen would thrill the spectators. As time went
on the tastes of those attending pictures became cultivated
until now the picture-goers know a good picture from a
bad picture, just as well as a highly trained critic. They
can no longer be pleased with pictures that pleased them a
few years ago.
What has happened in the silent motion pictures and
in radio will, no doubt, happen in talking pictures. Right
now anything will please those that go to see and hear
them. But it will not be long before they will become
exacting. And woe be to that producer who will attempt
to give them “anything.”
As said in these columns before, no matter how crude
most of the so-called talking pictures are, the public is
attracted by them. And so long as the public buys this
kind of entertainment the exhibitor finds himself in
need of installing a talking picture equipment.
At present, however, it is difficult for him to make an
immediate installation, for the demand is so much
greater than the supply that the manufacturers of these
instruments cannot make them fast enough. The lack of
trained mechanics that make the delicate parts makes it
impossible for the manufacturers of the standard instru-
ments to speed up production.
Western Electric cannot make installations for new
customers until next summer. The RCA Photophone
Inc., will not be able to make deliveries in quantities be-
fore the first of the year; they may deliver one or two
hundred instruments before that day. There are some
good instruments in the market of independent manu-
facture ; but the usefulness of these is limited because of
the fact that an exhibitor will not be able to run over
such instruments pictures made under a Western Electric
license. And it will be some time before the indepen-
dents will be in a position to supply the exhibitors talk-
ing pictures and acts in quantity to satisfy their needs.
Under the circumstances, an exhibitor has no other
way out than to install a non-synchronous device.
Non-Synchronous Instruments
There are, at present, three Non-synchronous Instru-
ments that can be supplied to the exhibitor at once or
within a reasonable length of time from the day he puts
in an order. The Western Electric, the RCA Photophone,
and the Platter Phototone. There are many others, but
adhering to my first determination not to mention any
instruments unless I hear and examine them and the
manufacturers of them furnish me with bank and other
references as an assurance that they will be able to per-
form their obligations to the exhibitor and that they
will furnish him with service after the sale is made, I
am not mentioning them. There are bound to be fly-by-
night concerns as a result of the great demand for this
kind of instruments and it is my intention to do all there
is in my power to protect the subscribers of this paper
from any possibility of buying an instrument from one
of such concerns and losing his money.
Western Electric Instrument
The prices for the Western Electric instrument for the
different classes of theatres were given in the issue of
August 25. These are as follows :
For theatres of less than 1000 seats $3,500
For theatres from 1000 to 1750 seats $7,500
For theatres having over 1750 seats $12,000
Those of exhibitors that have a Vitaphone or a Vila-
phone-Movietone installation, the price is $500, no matter
what is their seating capacity.
When an exhibitor buys this non-synchronous instru-
ment first and afterwards has a Western Electric talking
picture instrument installed, a credit for all the amount
less $500 is given him, such credit being applied on the
purchase price of the talking picture instrument. This
brings the price of the non-synchronous instrument down
to $500.
The method of sound reproduction and projection in the
Western Electric non-synchronous instrument is the same
as that used in this company’s talking picture instrument,
of both disc and film types. The diaphragm, and the horn,
described in the issue of August 18, are used.
RCA Photophone
The price of the non-synchronous RCA Photophone de-
vice was given in the issue of September 1 as $850. An
official of this company, however, called my attention to
the fact that this price was only approximate; the final
price, he said, will not be determined until the first order
is completed and its manufacturing cost determined.
This will be in December.
This instrument is fitted with the cone system of sound
reproduction and projection; it was described in detail
in the issue of August 18. Those who contemplate buying
a non-synchronous instrument should study that article so
that they may know what type of sound projection is
the best.
The Platter Phototone
The Phototone, which is manufactured and sold by
the Platter Cabinet Company, of North Vernon, Indiana,
sells for $500. I have had letters from many of those
exhibitors that use this instrument stating that they get
excellent results out of it. The New York office of this
company gave a demonstration to me and I can say
that I found the statements of these exhibitors ac-
curate. The tone quality is excellent, and the help the
exhibitors get in regards to how to accompany the pic-
tures with record music is very good. The only thing
that I noticed is a hum, caused by the transformer. This
hum is noticeable only when the music is soft; it disap-
pears when the music attains a volume of any consid-
erable strength.
The terms under which this instrument is sold are as
follows : 20% down, and the balance either in six or
twelve months. If six month terms are asked, the interest
( Continued on last page )
154
HARRISON’S REPORTS
September 29, 1928
“The River Pirate” — with Victor McLaglen
(Fox; Aug. 26; 6,937 it.; 80 to 99 min.)
While this is a good program picture insofar as
directing and acting go, having plentiful thrills, sus-
pense and an interesting love story, yet the theme is
unpleasant in that it glorifies robbery, making the
chief character, played by Victor McLaglen, a sailor
and a crook, almost heroic. And his pal, played by
Nick Stuart, is made to become a crook.
The story revolves around an ex-sailor, serving a
jail sentence for waterfront robberies, who takes a
liking to a youth who was also sent to jail because
he had smashed the store window of his former em-
ployer when he refused to give him his pay and they
had a terrific fight. The heroine tries to keep him
from going to jail. However, she had faith in him
and believed in his honesty. After the sailor helped
his pal to escape the youth helps him with his thefts,
being grateful to him, but he decides to quit so that
he might marry his sweetheart. A squealer notifies
the “cops” that a robbery was to be committed by
the sailor and when the girl’s father, who is a water-
front detective, captures him, and discovers the youth
there, he is about to arrest him, too, when the sailor
convinces him that he had come only to warn him
and not to help him rob.
The marriage of the young folk and the release of
the hero on parole are announced by a person who
talks via Movietone.
Among the many thrilling scenes the most spec-
tacular was the chase between the police boat and the
sailor’s. Thrilling, too, is the scene in the heroine’s
apartment when her father is called to the phone by
crooks who were to shoot him but whose life was
saved when he stooped to pet his little kitten. The
spectator might think that the detective would have
done everything in his power to separate his daugh-
ter from the young crook when he sees them to-
gether in the street but instead he merely suggests
that she give him up and later permits her to marry
him.
Victor McLaglen is good as the hardboiled tobacco-
chewing waterfront pirate and Nick Stuart is equally
good as the rather frightened boy. Lois Moran is a
charming heroine and Donald Crisp is a fair detective.
Earle Fox, another confederate of the pirate, gives a
good performance in his small role as squealer. The
picture is based on the novel by Charles Francis Coe,
and it was directedly skillfully by William K. Howard.
“Docks of New York” — with George
Bancroft
( Paramount , Sept. 29; 7,200 ft.; 83 to 100 min.)
Very well acted, indeed; Mr. Bancroft makes a
true sailor, a fireman in a merchant ship, the kind
that one may meet in the docks of New York or of
any other port city, any day. The lack of character
in such a man, from our point of view, is portrayed
by Mr. Bancroft with realism.
But the story is unpleasant; and so is the back-
ground— it is too sordid. The filth and misery of men
and women frequenting saloons near the docks, their
depravity, is the outstanding feature.
Mr. Bancroft is presented as a fireman (hero) on
a merchant ship, who goes ashore as soon as the ship
docks to have a good time for a night. He rescues
a girl (heroine) from the water, where she had
jumped in a determination to commit suicide. He
helps some women to nurse her back to life and to
health. This eventually leads to marriage. But the
hero tells her the following morning that he would
leave her, to follow his trade, as he had -always done.
The heroine is unhappy but she does not put anything
in his way, grateful for having made her his wife
legally. The villain, superior officer in the ship where
the hero worked, enters the room of the heroine with
evil intentions. The villain’s wife, whom he had mis-
treated, shoots and kills him. The heroine is arrested
on suspicion. The hero, seeing the turmoil, returns
and finds his wife arrested. He tells the officers that
she could not have committed the murder. The
murderess enters and acknowledges the murder. The
heroine is thus freed. Later, while the hero is on
board the ship, the heroine is arrested because stolen
dresses were found in her room. The hero, for the
first time feeling love for a woman, jumps from the
ship and swims ashore. He finds the heroine at the
police court, just as the judge had pronounced sen-
tence on her. He tells the judge that she was inno-
cent, and that he alone was guilty. The heroine is
freed; the hero is sent to jail for sixty days. He asks
the heroine to wait for him until he serves his sen-
tence, implying that he would never again abandon
her. She gladly gives him her promise.
The picture has been directed by Joseph von Stern-
berg so skillfully that one is absorbed by what is un-
folded and made to feel as if seeing a story of human
beings. Mr. Bancroft does as good work as he has
done always. Betty Compson is good as the heroine.
Clyde Cook, Baclanova, Mitchell Lewis, Gustav von
Seyflertitz and others are in the cast.
Hardly suitable for the family circle.
“Excess Baggage” — with William Haines
(Metro-Gold.-Mayer ; Sept. 8; 7,182 ft.; 83 to 102 min.)
A good program picture. It has considerable heart
interest and ends with a big thrill.
The story revolves around a vaudeville team, hero
and heroine, married and very much in love with each
other. The heroine is only a pretty picture in her
husband’s act and considers herself excess baggage.
When she is given the chance to star in motion pic-
tures, her husband sacrifices his happiness for her
and lives on her bounty until he can no longer stand
the strain. Fie stages a comeback when he learns
that his wife is contemplating a divorce and he be-
lieves she is in love with the motion picture star who
had given her her opportunity to become a star.
The big thrill in the end is due to the fact that the
spectator knows that the hero intended to let himself
slip and be killed while sliding down backwards on
the wire from the rear of the theatre to the stage,
because he is so nervous and afraid. But as he is
about to give up in despair, his wife appears on the
stage, and shouting words of encouragement, he
makes the slide and lands safely in her arms.
William Haines is considerably restrained, though
some of his familiar tricks are displayed in the first
few reels. But he goes through the picture with a
warm sincerity. Josephine Dunn is beautiful but not
very emotional. Ricardo Cortez is good in his minor
role of screen star who is very much in love with
the heroine whom he wished to marry. Others in
the cast are Neely Edwards, Kathleen Clifford and
Greta Granstedt; they add considerable comedy as
troupers and pals of the hero. The picture was di-
rected by James Cruze from the stage play by John
McGowan.
It should please all classes of audiences.
“Man Made Woman” — with Leatrice Joy
and H. B. Warner
( Pathe ; Sept. 9; 5,762 ft.; 66 to 82 min.)
Despite the artistic directing of Paul Stein and the
good acting of Miss Joy and Mr. Warner, this is only
an ordinary program picture. The story is too trite to
hold the spectator’s interest to any great extent. It
will appeal no doubt to women because of the mag-
nificent clothes worn by the star.
The story revolves around the lively wife of a staid
wealthy man in a small town who objects to his
wife’s gay parties. And because she cannot stand his
tyranny in this respect any longer, she runs away
from him and takes the position of companion to a
seemingly well-to-do young woman. But the hero-
ine learns that this woman is the mistress of the man
who had really been the cause of her leaving home,
as it was his parties that her husband objected to so
much. The mistress becomes jealous of the heroine,
who is offered the apartment by this same lover if
she would consent to become his mistress. He learns,
however, that she still loves her handsome young
husband very much and so they plan to arrange for
her to go home to him without her losing her inde-
pendence. At first her husband refuses to take her
back but when the roue offers to pay for the divorce,
the husband realizes that he really loves his wife
and so he forgives her.
The magazine story by Ernest Pascal was more
piquant than is the finished picture. John Boles is
very good to look at but he is colorless.
September 29, 1928
HARRISON'S REPORTS
“The Cameraman” — with Buster Keaton
(M eiro-Goldwyn, Sept. 15; 6,995 ft.; 81 to 99 min.)
The comedy situations in this picture are old stuff
and silly, but they make the spectators laugh just the
same. It is, in fact, the best comedy Buster Keaton
has presented to the public for a long time. At first
one does not think that the picture wiil amount to
anything; Mr. Keaton attempts to burlesque the
news cameramen. But as the picture unfolds, the
laughs start, until about the middle of the picture it
becomes thick with them. Mr. Keaton again is pre-
sented as a simple-minded person, who does wrong
whatever he undertakes to do. Blunder follows blun-
der in his efforts to make a name as a cameraman.
The camera tripods are always in his way, ready to
trip him, just as a banana peel had tripped him in the
opening, while he was out with the heroine. Towards
the end, accidentally and unconsciously he takes a
photographic record of a villainous act, which makes
him the hero of the hour in the eyes of ever}- news-
weekly employer and employe.
The story is by Clyde Bruckman. Edward Sedg-
wick directed it. Marceline Day is the heroine. Har-
old Goodwin, Sidney Bracy and Harry Gribbon are
in the cast.
“The Whip” — with Dorothy Makaill and
Ralph Forbes
( First National, Oct. 7 ; 6,058 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
Just fair. It is a race-track story; only that the
intrigue takes place among members of English no-
bility as well as “unnobility,” instead of taking place
somewhere in America, among ordinary mortals. The
so-called “punch” was supposed to be delivered in
the scenes where the hero, a young nobleman, saved
the valuable race horse, which had been stolen by
the villain's tools, from the speeding train before the
crash occurred. The villain all the while was thinking
that the horse had perished in the wreck but is sur-
prised to see him "much alive” at the track, winning
the race. Another thrill was supposed to be offered
in the scenes where the hero exposes the villain, who
had an eye on the heroine and her millions. But both
these situations are mild. The version of this melo-
drama that was produced several years ago was much
more thrilling than the present version.
Besides Dorothy Mackaill and Ralph Forbes, there
are in the cast Lowell Sherman, the villain; Anna Q.
Nilsson, the villainess; Albert Gran, the villain's “an-
gel’'; Marc McDermott, the heroine’s father; Lou
Payne and Arthur Clayton.
“Beggars of Life” — with Wallace Beery,
Richard Arlen and Louise Brooks
( Paramount , Sept. 22; 7,504 ft.; 87 to 107 min.)
Few pictures can boast of greater realism than can
“Beggars of Lite.” It depicts the lives and conduct
of hoboes in such a way that one feels as if seeing
real hoboes and feeling their pulse. The picture is
interesting, in places sympathy arousing, and in one
or two situations thrilling. The thrills are caused by
the uncoupling of the caboose of a freight train and by
the placing of the lives of the principal characters in
jeopardy. The scene of the hobo-hero’s putting fire
to the caboose and to the lumber laden car that was
close to the caboose so as to make the detectives that
had been following the heroine to arrest her think
that she had perished in the fire is thrilling, too. Mr.
Beery holds the centre of the stage; he takes the part
of a swaggering leader of hoboes, a bully, who event-
ually saves the heroine not only from the hands of
the other hoboes, but also from those of the pursuing
authorities. She had murdered a man when he at-
tempted to assault her, and was fleeing from justice.
She is shown as having met a young hobo (Richard
Arlen) in a hay stack, and as having been befriended
by him. She is in men’s clothes. In their wandering,
they come upon the camp of hoboes and try to get
some food. One of the tough hoboes recognizes her
as being a woman and attempts to get familiar with
her. The hobo leader stops him and all the others
from molesting the heroine and her companion, not
from any sense of morality, but because he wanted
her for himself.
155
The story ends with the hobo-leader performing an
act of self-sacrifice so as to help the heroine and her
sweetheart escape into Canada; his heart had been
touched by the sight of the young man pleading for
the young heroine when the hobo leader, after a ses-
sion of the kangaroo court, the leader acting as a
presiding judge, had found the young man "guilty”
and had condemned him to be thrown off the train.
The plot has been founded on the book by Jim
Tully. It was directed by William Wellman.
It is a man’s picture.
“Show Girl” — with Alice White
(First National, Sept. 23 ; 6,053 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
A fairly good program picture. The story is not
very strong, but good acting on the part of Miss
White and on that of Leo Delaney, the hero of the
piece, as well as on the part of the other players in
the cast, help it considerably. It is the first time Miss
White has been starred, but she shows ability.
The story revolves around a girl of poor parents
who through her nerve breaks into the stage. Her
dancing ability enables her to force herself on some
theatrical producers. The “angel,” backer of the
shows, becomes infatuated with her. But her dancing
partner, who is madly in love with her, stabs the
"angel." The heroine is frightened and thinks that
the scandal would ruin her. But the hero, a young
reporter that loved her, sees the opportunity for
great publicity. And he takes advantage of it. The
heroine is thus front-paged, and her drawing powers
increase. The dancing partner abducts the heroine.
The hero accidentally saves her from his clutches.
Seeing an opportunity for more publicity, he induces
the heroine to hide. He then gives his newspaper a
sensational story about her disappearance.
The story ends with the marriage of hero and
heroine, but not until after the “angel” had found
out that the heroine wasn’t “that kind of girl.”
There is a great deal of mild comedy all the way
through, caused mostly by Miss White. Leo Delaney
is good as the reporter. Donald Reed, Lee Moran,
Richard Tucker (the “angel,”) Gwen Lee, Kate Price
and others are in the cast. The plot has been founded
on the novel by J. P. McEvoy. It was directed by
Alfred Santell.
“Captain Swagger” — with Rod La Rocque
(Pathe, Oct. 14; 6,312 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
The moral this picture conveys is peculiar; it glori-
fies crime. In the opening scenes, the hero is shown
attached to the Lafayette Escadrille as an American
aviator, one whom everybody admired for courage.
In one of the battles he downs a German ace but
saves him from his flaming aeroplane. When the
German patrol is coming their way, the German ace,
in gratitude for the fact that the hero had saved his
life, allows the hero to escape. The hero, who is shown
as being a kind of good-natured braggart and a “lady
killer,” returns after the war and, because he continues
spending his money lavishly, goes broke. He then
decides to hold up, and does hold up, some one.
Towards the close of the story he is shown helping
a crook to escape, because this crook happened to be
none other than the German ace. He is thus shown
doing a thing that is against our moral conceptions
and standards. It is vicious.
Another detrimental feature in the picture is the
taking of a German ace and making a crook out of
him. The picture may be barred in Germany if it goes
in its present shape, and exhibitors who cater to
German-descent Americans in this country may re-
ceive protests.
The plot has been founded on an original story by
Leonard Praskins. It was directed by Edward H.
Griffith. Sue Carol is the heroine. Richard Tucker
is the wealthy man. Victor Potel is the hero’s butler.
Besides glorifying crime and insulting the German
nation, “Captain Swagger” is pretty immoral; it is
not fit for the family circle.
“Mother Knows Best” is one of the best mother-
daughter stories that have ever been produced. Its
appeal to the emotions is very strong. Full review
next week.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
September 29, 1928
156
charged is 6% ; if twelve month terms are asked, then the
interest amounts as follows : for the first six months, 6%
for the next two months the 7th and the 8th, 7% ; for the
next two months (the 9th and the 10th), 8% ; and for the
last two months (the 11th and the 12th), 10%.
Records
Western Electric has made an arrangement with the
Victor Phonograph Company to get together a library
of records and to cue the pictures for all those that use
its instruments. The Victor Phonograph Company used
its studio facilities and got together a library consisting
of three hundred records, which are excellent in qual-
ity, and are adapted to the needs of the exhibitors better
than the commercial records. An exhibitor does not
have to hunt through the record in order to put the
needle on the part that contains the music needed; the
important part of the music is recorded in the begin-
ning. The long experience of this company in record-
ing enables its technical experts to get the right
results.
The Victor Phonograph Company does not sell this
library; it only leases it, on a yearly rental basis, a
proportionate sum being paid weekly. The prices it
charges for the different classes of theatres are as follows :
For theatres of 800 seats or less $1,200
For theatres 800 to 1,500 seats $1,600
For theatres 1,500 seats and over $2,000
When any of the records are scratched or worn to the
point where they no longer give good results, they are re-
placed without any additional cost to the exhibitor. When
any new music comes out, the Victor Company makes
records and sends them to the exhibitor free of charge. A
cue sheet, prepared by an expert musician of theirs, is
sent to the exhibitor weekly without any extra charge to
him. This company cues all the feature pictures that are
produced. I understand, in fact, that, in order to accom-
modate their subscribers, they have cued even old
pictures.
The Victor Phonograph Company makes its records
under a license from the Western Electric and the terms
of the agreement prevents it from leasing this library to
the users of any other instrument except the Western
Electric. In other words if your instrument is not a
Western Electric, the Victor Phonograph Company will
not lease you their library. But you can go to any phono-
graph store and buy any kind of commerical Victor rec-
ords and play them on any kind of instrument.
Exhibitors that pay music tax to the Society of Com-
posers, Authors and Publishers will not be charged an
additional tax when they lease the Victor “Pict-Ur-
Music,” as this library is called; the Victor Phonograph
Company is paying royalty to the Society, thus protecting
its subscribers.
The Victor Phonograph Company co-operates with its
subscribers at all times with a view to helping them get
the best results possible.
While the yearly charge may seem big, it is said that
the cost of making these records is very big. To begin
with, there is the seat tax, paid to the Music Society.
Following this there are the salaries of the musicians,
which automatically double when the services of these
musicians are used for the purpose of recording. The
cueing expense, too, is great.
The address of this company is Camden, N. J.
* * *
The RCA Photophone, Inc., is preparing to adopt the
Victor Library record system. I understand that it has
requested the Brunswick Company, which is making rec-
ords under the RCA license, to figure on putting out a
library of 200 or 300 records, and to fix a reasonable
yearly rental price for it. I also understand that it is
working on a system whereby the so-called music tax may
be absorbed by either Brunswick or RCA Photophone, so
that the exhibitor may not have to pay it himself. The
details will be known very shortly.
* * *
The Platter Cabinet Company furnishes aids whereby
an exhibitor is enabled to accompany his pictures with
proper music. It also announces that in a few weeks it
will have records made specially for the Phototone ; they
will be sold only to the users of the Phototone. They
will be sold to such exhibitors at the special price of 45
cents. It will have also some records enabling an ex-
hibitor to reproduce the various moods, as well as such
sound effects as wind; thunder, crash, locomotive, whis-
tling, siren, bell, airplane, automobile horn, chimes, gal-
loping, calliope and others. These, too, will be furnished
only to the users of the Phototone. Proper instructions,
furnished with these records, will enable an exhibitor to
use them effectively. The price of these records will be
slightly higher than the price of the regular records.
* * *
The motion picture business is no longer what it used
to be ; it has taken a sudden turn, and unless an exhibitor
moves with the times he will not be able to survive. The
motion picture going public demands the new form of
entertainment and if an exhibitor cannot supply it to them
he must give them the next best thing — better music. And
the non-synchronous instruments give such music. The
music that is produced by records, either disc or film,
cannot, of course, be compared with the natural thing ; but
it is far better than the music produced by poor musicians,
and on instruments that are out of tune most of the time.
And ninety-nine per cent of the small theatres have poor
musicians, either because they cannot obtain good ones or
because they cannot stand the price they demand. So these
exhibitors had better think seriously of installing a non-
synchronous instrument, the best that can be bought, at
the most reasonable price.
Next week: the 6th article on talking pictures and in-
struments. (Article No. 4 was printed in the issue of
September 8).
THE SOUND CLAUSE IN THE
CONTRACTS
Some exhibitors have written to this office expressing
the fear that the sound clause, which reads, ‘No license
of sound records or right to use sound in connection with
any of the photoplays hereby licensed is granted hereunder
. . .,” stamped on some contracts, meant that an exhibitor
was forbidden to use even records to accompany such
picture with.
In order to clear the matter I wrote a letter to Mr.
Hays asking him to give me an interpretation of that
clause. Mr. Hays has sent me the following memorandum,
which was sent him by Mr. Hess, to whom he referred
my letter :
‘‘Referring to inquiry of Mr. P. S. Harrison of Sep-
tember 17 :
“Shortly after the current standard of exhibition con-
tract came into circulation, the demand for pictures syn-
chronized with sound crystalized. One or twro companies
immediately stamped on their forms of contract or had
imprinted thereon the clause quoted by Mr. Harrison.
Recently, however, forms of contract were adopted by
First National, Fox, Metro, Paramount, Pathe, United
Artists and Universal for use in licensing sound pictures,
and none of them contains the clause quoted by Mr.
Harrison.
“When attention was first called to the clause quoted
by Mr. Harrison, we took the position that it could be
construed to mean exactly what Mr. Harrison states many
exhibitors believe it means. However, the companies
first and briefly using the clause mentioned advised that
such clause was intended only to exclude any claim to
sound pictures when and if synchronized with a sound ;
that it was not intended by the use of the clause to pre-
vent the exhibitor from using sound in connection with
any photoplays contracted for, as Mr. Harrison points
out.”
AGAIN ABOUT THE RETURN
OF PRINTS
Mr. H. W. Lamour, of National Theatre, Graham,
Texas, writes:
“In your September 15 issue under the heading RE-
TURN OF PRINTS you regret that no receipt is given
when a parcel post package is mailed uninsured.
“Why not use the one cent receipt, as per sample in-
closed? I have been using them for years. The green
tags are filled out as shown, stamped and attached to
each package. The postmaster signs the receipt upon
receiving the package and returns it to the sender after
cancelling the stamp. The cancelled stamp shows at the
exact hour the package is received by the post office.”
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s
Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States., §10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1928
No. 40
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments--No. 6
On September 15, I received the following telegram from
the La Porte Theatre Company, of La Porte, Indiana :
"Western Electric claims synchronized film from biggest
majority of producers cannot be used over any other make
of sound equipment than theirs because of patents. Musical
Devices Corporation, Chicago manufacturers of Drama-
phone, and the R. C. A. Photophone, Inc., claim otherwise.
Wire advice collect as to whether Western Electric claim
is correct.”
The subject of interchangeability has been bothering the
minds of almost every exhibitor in the United States-
There have been many conflicting opinions. In dealing
with this question in the second article about talking pic-
tures, which I printed in the issue of August 25, I pointed
out the statement by Mr. David Sarnoff, vice-president of
the Radio Corporation of America and president of the
RCA Photophone, Inc., in which he said that he saw no
reason why sound films recorded by the Photophone process
could not be played on Movietone, or a film recorded
by the Movietone process on a Photophone; and that
the Photophone Company would not object to the inter-
changing of films. Since this statement was not contra-
dicted by Western Electric, the opinion was formed that
the latter Company would not object to the interchanging
of films. The belief that a man occupying such a position
as Mr. Sarnoff occupies would not have made such a state-
ment unless he were sure of his ground led everyone in
the industry to believe that this matter had been definitely
settled.
When I received the aforementioned telegram, how-
ever, I felt that there was needed some more definite
proof that an exhibitor could play a "Photophone” film
on a Western Electric equipment and a “Western Electric”
film on a Photophone equipment. So I called up Sam
Morris, of \\ arner Bros., and put the following question to
him :
“Suppose an exhibitor owns a Photophone machine and
wanted your Vitaphone subjects, would you rent them
to him ?”
He answered that inasmuch as their license agreement
with \\ estern Electric forbade them from leasing films
to exhibitors that own an instrument other than Western
Electric, they could not rent such exhibitor their films
without violating their agreement.
I wrote to Mr. J. E. Otterson, president of Electric
Research Products, Inc., on September 20, and asked him
the following questions :
"Can an exhibitor that has a Western Electric talking
picture instrument play film that was made under a license
from the RCA Photophone, Inc.?
“Can an exhibitor that has an RCA Photophone, Inc.,
talking picture instrument play film made under a license
by Western Electric?”
Mr. Otterson has replied as follows :
"The suggestions contained in your letter of September
20 do not permit of a categorical answer. As a practical
matter I have no doubt they will answer themselves in due
course when a sufficient number of productions or installa-
tions other than our own have been made to permit of the
examination necessary to determine the facts.
“Meanwhile, you can appreciate that it would be prema-
ture and ill-advised for us to make any comment.”
I sent a copy of the telegram from La Porte, Indiana,
to Mr. E. E. Bucher, vice-president of RCA Photophone,
Inc., with a request to make a definite statement on the
same questions that I put to Mr. Otterson. Mr. Bucher
replied as follows :
I have your telegram of September 14. We cannot
speak for Dramaphone, but the equipment of RCA Photo-
phone, Inc., is licensed under the patents of Western Elec-
tric Company in the talking movie field, and we know of
no patent restriction that would prevent the playing of
films made by Western Electric process on our equipment.
“We are also aware of no other restriction that would
prevent the playing of our films on Movietone machines
or Movietone films on Photophone machines.”
Since the RCA Photophone is manufactured under a
license by Western Electric, any exhibitor that has a
Photophone can playr a film made under a license by’
Western Electric.
The question now, however, is how can the exhibitor that
has a Photophone lease Vitaphone or Movietone films, or
films made by the other producers that are licensed by Wes-
tern Electric. Warner Brothers and no doubt the other pro-
ducers are willing to let such exhibitor have their films
but they say that their contract forbids them from doing
so. Under the circumstances there is only one way out :
the case should be taken to the courts so that it might be
determined whether the refusal of Western Electric to
permit its licenses from leasing films to holders of other
than Western Electric talking picture machines is or is
not a conspiracy in restraint of trade.
That some producer will take this case to the courts
cannot be doubted. Imagine what the loss of a producer
would be from a single picture if there should happen to
be one thousand instruments of other brands installed and
the producer-distributor could not rent it to these ex-
hibitors. It would, no doubt, amount to hundreds of thou-
sands of dollars for that particular picture alone. The
five producer-distributors that are producing under a license
of the Western Electric patents (Paramount, First Na-
tional. Metr.o-Goldwyn, Universal, and Warner Bros.),
including Columbia, the latest addition, should give this
matter serious thought. It would be a calamity if the
industry should allow itself to be placed under the domina-
tion of one firm. Its progress would surely be arrested,
and it would be crippled financially. Millions of dollars
would be lost yearly from unplayed pictures from theatres
that would be willing to play them but would not be per-
mitted to do so because of the restrictions placed on the
producers by Western Electric.
ABOUT THE CANCELLATION PRO-
VISION IN THE NEWS WEEKLIES’
CONTRACTS
I understand that some distributors of newsweeklies
insert in their contracts a provision to the effect that
unless an exhibitor gives a notice of cancellation a
certain number of days before the expiration of the
contract, such contract becomes automatically binding
for another year. Some distributors require thirty
days, some sixty.
Cases have come to the notice of this paper where
the exhibitor overlooked sending his cancellation on
the day he was supposed to have sent it and sent a day
or so later, and the distributor refused to accept it.
Technically, the distributor is right; the contract
specifies that the exhibitor must give the notice of
cancellation a certain number of days before the con-
tract expires and when he fails to do so he fails to
comply with the provisions of the contract.
But is the distributor right morally? The exhibitor,
any exhibitor, is liable to forget and does forget when
the day is up for him to send his notice of cancellation.
The provision in the contract should have placed the
burden on the distributor, because the distributor has
all the facilities by which he could remember that the
time is up for the exhibitor to tell him whether he
wants to continue receiving the news for another year
or not. The exhibitor hasn’t such facilities. The dis-
( Continued on last page )
158
HARRISON’S REPORTS
'‘Plastered in Paris” — with Sammy Cohen
and Jack Pennick
{Fox, Sept. 23; 5,641 ft.; 65 to 84 min.)
A poor picture despite the hard work of Sammy Cohen
to make it entertaining. There are a few scenes that cause
mild giggles, but the story, if any, is too weak. At times
the situations are even vulgar. The story revolves around
a soldier who had been gassed in the war. He had become
a kleptomaniac and when the American Legion visits Paris
ten years later he and his buddy (Jack Pennick) return to
Paris, both looking for a girl they knew. His pal also
wanted to have his buddy cured by a well-known specialist.
The crook-pal takes pictures out of one person’s pocket and
puts them in someone else’s. This causes them to be shang-
haied when they get mixed up in a fight in a cafe and they
are taken to the Sahara where they get into more trouble.
The scenes in the harem where the commander’s daughter
is taken after she had been kidnapped is the suggestively
vulgar one in that the two soldiers, disguised as women,
endeavor to charm the Rajah in his bedroom. The scene
in the jail and their subsequent escape and rescuing of the
girl are not bad situations. Jack Pennick is a colorless
half of this team. The picture was directed by Ben Stoloff
from a continuity by Lon Breslow and Harry Sweet.
“Baby Cyclone” — with Lew Cody and
Aileen Pringle
( Metro-Goldwyn , Nov. 3; 5,350 ft.; 62 to 76 min.)
What do you think the Baby Cyclone is? A peekinese
pup. The entire action revolves around this pup ; it is sup-
posed to be so destructive that whoever becomes its master
tries to get rid of it at once. But it always comes back, like
a bad coin. The story is silly, so silly, in fact, that many
persons may get angry at the thought that the exhibitor be-
lieved it would entertain them. The scenes that show the
hero in evening dress, with a high hat, washing the dog
with soap and water in the coal cellar, and later chasing it
through the coal, make the unthinking laugh, but these
scenes are bound to disgust the thinking.
The story revolves around a hero who receives a peek-
inese as a present. The pup upsets the inkstand and the
flower vases, and the hero incensed; he is glad to give it
away to a young woman working in a building across the
alley. The young woman’s husband is angry when he sees a
dog in the house and takes it out to get rid of it. The heroine,
fiancee of the hero, meets this man and when she admires
the pup, expressing a desire to own it, he hands her the
pup. When the hero calls on her he naturally is chagrined
to see the pup, which he had got rid of, owned by his sweet-
heart. Misunderstandings are caused between the married
couple as well as between the hero and the heroine, but
these are eventually patched up.
The plot has been founded on the stage play by George
M. Cohan. The picture was directed by Eddie Sutherland.
Robert Armstrong, Gwen Lee, and others are in the sup-
porting cast.
Put it on a bill on a rainy night.
“Son of the Golden West” — with Tom Mix
(F B O, Oct. 1 ; 6,037 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
If Tom Mix (or F B O, whoever is responsible for this
picture), cannot make better pictures than “Son of the
Golden West,” he had better give up producing to save
himself from killing his reputation, and the exhibitors from
being called down by their customers. It is not even a good
program picture; it is the kind that any exhibitor can ob-
tain from small independents at anywhere from five to
seven and one-half dollars for the engagement. The pic-
ture is supposed to unfold in the Pony Express days, the
purpose being to give Tom Mix an opportunity to do good
riding and the picture to offer excitement as a result of
fights with Indians. But it is a tame affair at its best.
The main action revolves around the efforts of the
pioneers to get a telegraph line laid out, and of the vil-
lains to prevent them from doing so, because they feared
that an end would be put to their grafting game. Of
course, the hero thwarts their plans and helps the pioneers
get their telegraph.
Some riding is done by Tom Mix, who takes the part of
the Pony Express Rider ; he is seen riding fast and chang-
ing horses at relay stations.
The story was written by George W. Pyper. It was
directed by Eugene Forde. Sharon Lynn is the heroine.
Lee Shumway is the villain. Fritzi Ridgeway, Tom Ling-
ham and others are in the cast.
October 6, 1928
“The Fleet’s In” — with Clara Bow
{Paramount, Sept. 15; 6,918 ft.; 80 to 98 min.)
Well produced, and Miss Bow’s acting is very good.
She is an alluring dance hall hostess, over whom every
sailor from the U. S. fleet that sees her “falls” for her.
Every one vies with all others as to who will make
her the best present. The action is true to life, and the
atmosphere adds to its realism. It unfolds in a San
Francisco dance hall, where the heroine is a hostess,
and at a time when the fleet is supposed to have gone
there, and the sailors were given leave of absence to go
ashore and have a good time. While the part by nature
is not saintly, the heroine is presented as being a good
girl, and one that had been shocked when the hero,
who she thought was different, made an insinuating
proposal. He had taken her as being no different from
the other girl hostesses, and when she scorned him he
thought that she was “putting on” virtue. There are
some tears in the eyes of the hero when he discovers that
the heroine was different from the other girls, many of
whom he had met in the different ports the fleet visited,
just as there were in the eyes of the heroine, when she
discovered that the hero was no different from the other
men, and that he, too, would take advantage of a girl
if such girl would permit it. There is pathos in the
scenes where the hero is shown placing his head against
the heroine’s breast penitent. The scenes in the court
room where the heroine, to save the hero from a thirty-
day jail sentence and a consequent court martial, tells
the judge that the sailors, who had been arrested and
charged for battery, were innocent, and that she was
a bad woman, do not ring true. Besides, one hates to
see a girl placed in a position where she has to tell such
a story. One feels as if some other method should
have been adopted to bring reconciliation between the
hero and the heroine.
The plot has been founded on a story by Monte Brice
and Walter Ruben. It was directed by Malcolm St.
Clair. James Hall is the sailor hero.
It is chiefly a man’s picture. Not over-suitable for
small towns.
“Forbidden Love“ — with Lila Damita
{Pathe, Oct. 28; 5,937 ft.; 69 to 84 min.)
Whoever of the Pathe forces selected this British pic-
ture for release in the American market ought to have his
head examined. In looking at it, one is reminded of the
American pictures that wTere made ten years ago. There
is no subtlety in the action ; one can tell every twist of the
action before taking place. It is the kind of story treat-
ment that was abandoned by American producers years
ago.
There is a situation that will offend, yes might even in-
sult, American picture-goers ; it is where the princess
(heroine) allows the hero, a novelist, to enter her palace;
it is shown that she allowed him to enter her bedroom, and
when the prince, whom she was to marry, appears on the
scene with a courtier, the hero commits suicide. The hero-
ine then implies to the prince that the man that had shot
himself was the man she loved. It seems as if he had
committed suicide to save the heroine from disgrace ; he
did not have a way of escaping without being seen. What-
ever explanation one may give to the incident, he cannot
escape the conclusion that the princess and the hero had
illicit relations.
It is a fictitious kingdom story, and deals mainly with the
unrealized love of a princess ; she loved a commoner, but
after the death of the king she had been called to reign,
being the only heir, and could not, for that reason, carry out
her promise to marry the hero.
The plot has been founded on the play by Noel Coward.
It has been produced in Great Britain. The cast is all-
British.
Note:
England has produced quite a few good pictures. But
this is the worst one she has produced ; it is an example of
what pictures should not be. American audiences will laugh
it off the screen. If Pathe should insist that those ex-
hibitors that have contracted for it must play it, there will
be an uproar such as has not been heard before ; for the
American exhibitors cannot allow themselves to be made
the victims of some policy of Pathe, by which they are
trying to please Great Britain so that its product may find
room in this country.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
159
October 6, 1928
“Win That Girl” — with David Rollins and
Sue Carol
{Fox, Sept. 16; 5,337 ft.; 62 to 76 min.)
If Fox were to take this picture out in the offing, tie
a rock around its neck, and sink it in deep waters, he
would do the most charitable act he has done in his life.
For those of exhibitors that have a talking picture equip-
ment, it is "putrid”; for those that haven’t, it is just as
bad. The studios tried to put some life into it by sound
effects; but they have made things worse. To begin
with, yells of crowds do not add dramatic values where
none exist. Following this, in one or two spots the
sound is heard first and the accident happens afterwards.
The only thing that Fox may claim for it is, its syn-
chronization with music ; but the picture is not worth
running for the purpose of letting the picture-goers hear
canned music.
The first two reels are used up in an effect to show
that two families, from the grandfather down, who
had attended certain universities, hated each other and
each father was trying to rear a son that would be the
superior of the other in athletics. The remainder of the
picture is consumed in showing the grandsons in college,
with the one that takes the part of the hero, the weakest
one of the two, trying to win a football game. But each
year something happens to him that prevents him from
using his famous drop-kick to send the ball to the goal.
In the last year of his college career, he is seized with
hay fever and is unable to take part in the game, until
the last few minutes, when the coach finds it necessary
to call upon him to help win the game. He takes part and,
strange to say, wins it.
There is, of course, a love affair ; but it is very mild.
The plot has been founded on an original story, “Father
and Son,” by James Hopper. It has been directed by
David Butler. Tom Elliott, Roscoe Karns, Olin Francis
and others are in the cast.
“Danger Street” — with Martha Sleeper and
Warner Baxter
{F.B.O., Aug. 26; 5,621 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
Just another gang-war melodrama with the usual
gun play between two gangs.
The story revolves around a well-to-do young man
who was jilted on the day of his wedding. While
driving around disconsolately in a taxi-cab a bullet
goes through the window of the cab and he decides
to make his home in the tough neighborhood so that
he might have a little excitement and perhaps be
killed. Accordingly he buys the haberdashery shop
of a neutral storekeeper. In the restaurant hang-out
of one gang, he meets the heroine, the good looking
cashier, who, too, liked the hero. But the leader of
the gang considers her his property even though she
herself had no use for him. And when he learns that
the hero was going to marry the heroine, he decides
to give him “the works.” The heroine, after learning
from the hero that he had married her because he
wanted to forget his first love, returns to the restaur-
ant disillusioned and heartbroken. The hero follows
her and just as he is about to be killed by the leader
of the gang, she runs in front of the hero and is shot,
though not fatally. She later learns that the hero
really loves her.
The war between the two gangs is rather ludicrous
in that they fight over each other’s skirts, one leader
not permitting the men of the other gang to buy the
same kind as he bought. The picture was directed
by Ralph Ince from a magazine story by Harold
McGrath.
“Mother Knows Best” — with Barry Norton,
Louise Dresser and Madge Bellamy
(Fox, rel. date not set yet; 10,100 ft.)
A powerful story of mother-selfishness and mother-love.
It is so well directed and so superbly acted by the three
principals, Louise Dresser, Barry Norton and Madge Bel-
lamy, and the story is so true to life, that one feels as if
seeing a real life occurrence. The closing scenes, which
show the young heroine dying from a broken heart as a
result of her mother’s continual refusal to let her marry the
young man she loved are so pathetic that it is doubtful if
there will be a dry eye in any audience. The height of
emotional appeal is reached when the mother is shown
realizing how selfish she had been towards her daughter
and what an injustice she had done to her, not to permit
her to marry the man she loved, and receives the young
hero with open arms, sending him into the room where her
daughter lay dying. Tenderly pathetic are also the scenes
where the heroine is shown regaining her will to live as a
result of the return of the hero. All the way through Miss
Dresser is superb as the selfish mother, and Miss Bellamy
as the daughter who had sacrificed her own happiness for
the happiness of her mother. Barry Norton is an excel-
lent choice for the part of the young composer, who loved
the heroine with all his heart. He is young, handsome,
and a good actor. He has a future before him. He is the
young man that took the part of “mother’s boy” in “What
Price Glory,” and so acquitted himself in the scene that
showed him enter the dugout and utter the unforgetable
words : “Captain, stop that blood !”
There are two or three situations where the players use
their voices. In one of the situations the audience laughed
at the talk, because of the fact that the synchronization is
not so good. But where the synchronization is perfect the
effect is pretty good. Whether, however, the talk helps the
picture very much or not, it is a question. The novelty of
it may help the picture to draw. Two years from now the
same amount, and kind, of talk may not mean anything to
the box office.
The plot has been founded on Edna Ferber’s story. It
has been directed by John Blystone. Albert Gran, Lucien
Littlefield, and others are in the supporting cast. .
“The Singing Fool” — with A1 Jolson
( Warner Bros. — Vitaphone)
One of the most powerful pictures that has ever been
produced. It is a father-love story, in which talk and
singing is used in half of the picture with telling effect.
Full review next week.
SECURE AN INITIALED AND DATED
WORK SHEET
At the Trade Practice Conference last year a resolution
was adopted against substitutions. This resolution was
incorporated in the tenth clause of the reformed contract ;
it reads as follows :
"The exhibitor shall not be required to accept for any
photoplay described in the Schedule as the photoplay of a
star, or of a director, or based upon a specified story,
book or play, or by any indentifying description, any
other photoplay of a different star or different director, or
based upon a different story, book or play, or not corres-
ponding to such identifying description, as the case may
be. Nothing herein contained shall limit the right of the
distributor to change the title of any of such photoplays,
or, as respects any photoplay based upon any story, book
or play, prevent the making of any alteration, changes in
or adaptation thereof.”
So that there may not be any misunderstanding as to
what you are contracting for, I would suggest that you
request of the salesman to put on a Work Sheet the date
on which you are contracting for a group of particular
pictures, and his initials. In this way you will be able
to prove before the board of arbitration, if necessity
should ever arise, what you contracted for1 originally.
Although the right of a buyer to reject an article if it
does not come up to the specifications at the time the
sale was made is conceded by law, abuses have been prac-
ticed by arbitration boards, foisting upon exhibitors en-
tirely different pictures from those they had bought. In
some instances the conduct of the arbitrators, exhibitors
as well as distributors, was unexplainable; the evidence
submitted by the exhibitors was undisputed, and yet un-
favorable awards to the exhibitors were rendered.
Prevent a repetition of this scandal this year by de-
manding that a dated and initialed Work Sheet be left
with you.
A CORRECTION
In the letter from the California exhibitor, which was
printed in the issue of September 22, there were two
typographical errors, which I desire to correct so that the
meaning of the exhibitor may be conveyed correctly.
The ninth paragraph should read : “ . . . West Coast
to run Previews with their pictures and also permit their
(Paramount and Metro-Goldwyn) pictures to be Pre-
viewed when another feature is shown at the same time.”
The tenth paragraph should read : “Think of it 1 A
Pantages Vaudeville house, showing their entire line of
vaudeville acts with Tom Mix in ‘Cheyenne’ and a studio
preview.”
160
October 6, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
tributor, therefore, is taking unfair advantage of a
situation that is all in his favor.
The right thing would be for the distributor to ask
the exhibitor whether he wants the news contract ex-
tended for another year or not. And Harrison’s Re-
ports will fight for such a change in the provision of
the newsweekly contracts if there should ever be
another meeting of exhibitors and distributors for the
reformation of the contract. Until such time, this
paper would urge its subscribers, in case they intend
to cancel a particular newsweekly, to send in their
cencelation notice, by registered mail, at once, in-
forming the distributor to accept such notice as if it
were sent on the day the contract calls for. In this
way they will not be apt to forget to sent the notice
on the day they are supposed to send it, for a notice
sent ahead has the same force and effect as a notice
sent on the day the contract stipulates.
BUY PICTURES FOR NINE MONTHS
ONLY
There is a buyers’ strike on, but not in the form that
it was on last year. Last year thousands of you re-
frained from buying film in order to bring the prices
down to a point where you could make some profit
for yourselves. This year’s buyers’ strike has been
brought about by another cause — the talking pictures.
The producers became hysterical about talking pic-
tures and plunged into the production of this kind of
pictures. You naturally became alarmed, first, be-
cause you felt, and rightly so, that they would devote
ninety per cent, of their time and energy to making
talking pictures, for the reason that such pictures will
bring them more revenue; and, secondly, because you
did not know whether the silent picture would con-
tinue to draw or not.
Some of you will, no doubt, continue waiting for
developments. On the other hand, some of you will
want to buy product now to take care of your needs.
To those of you who contemplate buying at once I
would suggest to buy, not for twelve months, but
enough to last you until next June, the end of May.
You may find it necessary to shut down during the
summer months next year. If such should ever be
the case, you would not find yourself with pictures on
your hands you would not know what to do with. It
may be still wiser for you to buy enough pictures to
last you two or three months, and to buy more as
you need them. You cannot tell what trend events
will take. It is possible that the talking picture craze
will die down, if not out; it is possible again that it
will submerge the silent picture, although personally I
don’t think it will. In any event, why take chances
when you can avoid it? Why load yourself with pic-
tures you would not know what to do with in case
the talking pictures took hold of the public imagina-
tion permanently when you can avoid it?
As a matter of good policy, no exhibitor should
ever buy pictures for twelve months. A nine-months’
supply should be the most he should buy. The mar-
ket drops during the summer months in the selling
end of both pictures and admissions. If you should
leave the summer time open, you would be able to
buy your pictures in accordance with what you might
possibly take in at that time.
Make your plans now!
A SLIGHT SLIP UP
In the issue of September 15 I printed an article under
the heading, “Make Your Individual Contracts One,” ad-
vising you to see to it that you make each contract of a
group of contracts you sign with a company at the same
time part of the others by writing on each contract an
appropriate wording, which was given in that article. Mr.
H. A. Cole, President of M. P. T. O. of Texas, after
reading that article, called my attention to the third
paragraph of the 22nd clause of the reformed Standard
Exhibition Contract, which makes my suggestion unnec-
essary in that this paragraph provides for such a thing.
It reads as follows:
“This application and any application for other photo-
plays of the Distributor executed by the Exhibitor at the
same time shall, for the purpose of this Article only, be
deemed one application unless an agreement to the con-
trary contained in the Schedule is specifically signed by the
Exhibitor.”
In other words, when you sign a group of applications
at the same time from one company, all such contracts
must be either approved or rejected as a group; the com-
pany cannot approve some and reject the others.
I am glad, after all, that this error occurred. In this
manner the attention of every one will be called to
it to their benefit, for even exchangemen were un-
familiar with this provision, if one is to judge by the
fact that some of them in several instances rejected
some of the contracts of a group and approved the
others. In one instance I was able to have the home
office release the exhibitor from the contracts that were
approved. If the exhibitor had known of it he would
not have to write to this office for help ; he would have
rejected them outright.
There is, however, one point that this paragraph does
not make clear ; it is this : Suppose a distributor ap-
proves some of the contracts of a group and rejects the
others ; can the exhibitor consider the entire group ap-
proved, demanding the delivery of the pictures in the re-
jected applications? Since Mr. Cole served as a substi-
tute on the contract committee in Chicago, if I am not
mistaken, I hope he will enlighten us. In case neither he
nor any other exhibitor leader can clear up the point, then
it will be necessary for this paper to take that matter up
directly with Mr. Hays.
CITY OF ATLANTA
Carnegie Library
August 25, 1928.
Harrison’s Reports:
I find in looking over my files that I am short the
“Reports of January 21st and June 28th. I will be greatly
obliged if you will send me these copies. I find the “Re-
ports” invaluable in my work, and find also that friends
like them very much and when borrowing them from my
office they sometimes forget that they are kept in the files
as valuable references. Hence the missing copies.
Thank you very much for your trouble in sending the
missing copies.
Very truly yours,
Mrs. Alonzo Richardson,
Secretary to the Board, of Review.
(Editor’s Note: I have heard of film salesmen borrow-
ing copies from the exhibitors and not returning them but
not of persons that are not connected with the motion picture
industry. If you should ever feel that a particular issue
would interest some one to such an extent as to make him a
friend of this paper or a subscriber, send him your copy
and write to this office for a duplicate copy ; I keep enough
copies of each issue on hand to take care of all such needs.)
ABOUT THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTION
BUREAU
In the issue of September 22, I printed an article by
David Barrist, which appeared in “The Exhibitor,” about
The Copyright Protection Bureau, a medium through
which the Hays organization detect bicyclers and forces
them to make a settlement.
Mr. Gabriel Hess, attorney for the Hays organization,
made a reply to Mr. Barrist and sent a copy to this paper
for publication.
Lack of space makes it impossible for me to print it
this week but I intend to do so next week.
A DREAM THAT HAS COME TRUE
The closing of the deal whereby Warner Bros, takes over
the Stanley circuit consisting of over two hundred and fifty
theatres is the most romantic, the most sensational incident
that has happened in the motion picture industry, in its
entire history. It isn't a year when things looked pretty
blue for Warner Bros. Today it is the leading company
in the industry.
No one should begrudge the Warner boys their success.
And I am sure that no one begrudges them, for despite
their unprecedented success they have remained what they
used to be— plain, outspoken, democratic. They have not
lost their good nature. Success has not gone into their
heads.
Others in this industry have made a success, but the
success of these brothers is different ; they stuck to it
under the most adverse conditions — conditions that would
have taken the heart out of the strongest. And they are
now enjoying the fruits of their labor. They deserve every
bit of it.
There is just one thing that would, I am sure, have
made their happiness complete : Sam, the brother that has
left them. He did not live long enough to see their dreams
come true.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the a«t of March 2, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States... $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRIS ON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
( Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1928
No. 41
Again About the Copyright Protection Bureau
As I announced last week, I am reproducing herewidi
Mr. Hess’ answers to the questions made by Mr. David
Barrist. editor of the Philadelphia "Exhibitor,” regarding
the Copyright Protection Bureau in an article that he pub-
lished in the "Exhibitor,” which I reproduced in the issue
of HARRISON'S REPORTS recently. Mr. Hess made
his answer in the form of a letter, a copy of which he sent to
this paper for publication.
Lack of space prevents me from printing the entire letter.
But it there is anything in the omitted part that Mr. Hess
thinks essential to making his position clear, I shall be
glad to publish it in a subsequent issue if he will so say.
Mr. Barrist: “Who, what and why is the Copyright Pro-
tection Bureau and why are its activities shrouded in mys-
tery ? Is it possible to have secrecy without mystery ?”
Mr. Hess: “The Copyright Protection Bureau is a bu-
reau organized and maintained by national and regional
distributors of motion pictures to secure evidence of the
unauthorized uses of their motion pictures in violation of
their copyrights. The Copyright Law of the United States
gives to these distributors the sole and exclusive right to
exhibit and license the exhibition of their pictures and a
violation of this right entitles the distributor to an injunc-
tion restraining infringement and to damages for such in-
fringement.
“It is evident that since the copyright proprietor of a
motion picture has the exclusive right of exhibition, the
exhibition of a motion picture at a theatre or on a day for
which no license was granted is an infringement of such
right. Indeed, the statute makes this infringement a crim-
inal as well as civil offense.
“It was so held by the United States District Court in
Montana in the case of United States vs. Carl Anderson,
Marius Anderson and R. D. McDaniels, three exhibitors
who were indicted on such grounds, pleaded guilty of the
offense and were fined under the Criminal Law.”
* * *
Mr. Barrist : “Who gets the fat fees and penalties that
are collected by them in settlements ‘out of court’ ?”
Air. Hess: "Moneys paid in settlement of claims or in
satisfaction of awards obtained for improper use of film
are, of course, received by the distributors whose rights
have been violated and by no one else.”
* * *
Mr. Barrist : “Why, when an exhibitor is detected in the
practice of holding over a film in violation of his contract,
is this practice permitted by the exchange to continue until
such time as the Copyright Protection Bureau gets ready to
take action?”
Mr. Hess : “The exchanges do not indulge in the practice
of permitting exhibitors to improperly exhibit film in
order to penalize them more heavily at some future time.
“It is difficult to detect cheating. When the first evidence
of it is obtained, it is necessary to institute an investigation
in order to be certain that a serious charge will not be made
against an honest exhibitor on mere suspicion. Only such
time, elapses before the exhibitor is notified of the charges
as is absolutely necessary to determine their accuracy. The
fact that in many instances, now uncovered, the exhibitor
has bicycled regularly for a number of years, thus depriv-
ing the distributors of large amounts of income, proves that
the distributors are often unaware of these practices and
are not merely waiting to permit claims to mount up.”
* * *
Mr. Barrist : “How is it possible for film to be played
regularly an extra day or two without the salesmen who
cover the territory' having knowledge of such hold-out,
and if they have such knowledge and permit the practice to
continue, who is to blame ?”
Mr. Hess : “Experience has shown that salesmen cannot
by mere occasional visits to the territory detect improper
use of film. On the day on which the salesman visits the
theatre, the exhibitor may be violating the contract of an-
other distributor and the salesman would be in no position
to know there was a violation. Even if his own company’s
product were being exhibited, it would require concen-
trated attention upon the playing policy and the number of
days the picture had played and an examination of the
clauses in the contracts therefor to detect a violation.
“It is rare for salesmen, intent upon other business, to
uncover that which experts, specially' trained for such pur-
poses, find it difficult to do. It is fair, however, to assume
the inference intended by' your question. Suppose that a
salesman intentionally overlooked or, indeed, conspired
with an exhibitor to cheat the distributor. Would this ex-
cuse the offense? If an exhibitor, after many months of
search, caught a thief who had been taking ten per cent of
his daily receipts from the box office, would it be a good
answer for the thief, to sav that the exhibitor’s own cashier
had seen his or approved of his taking the money?
“The distributors would welcome information concern-
ing their disloyal employees, if any. Our industry has no
place for dishonest agents, no matter on which side they may
be.”
* * *
Mr. Hess is right; bicycling is criminal, and it was so
determined by the United States District Court in Mon-
tana, as Mr. Hess cites. But Mr. Barrist’s question did
not refer to bicycling ; it referred to holding a film over for
extra time without the permission of the distributor. This
phase of contract breach has not yet been brought before
the courts so that it might be determined whether it is or
it is not criminal under the Copyright Law. Yet we are not
going to split hairs ; the act is unlawful and no decent
exhibitor or any other person should condone the act.
It is true that a holdover is half of the time resorted to by
the exhibitors with the consent of the salesmen. Mr. Hess
must, indeed, be familiar with the pressure exerted by the
Home Offices on the branch managers, and in turn by the
branch managers, on the salesmen. The salesman knows
that his job depends on the number of contracts he brings
in. To bring in contracts, some will resort to anything —
cheat, lie, even forge exhibitor signatures. I have on my files
cases of such forgery. Often a salesman will plead with
the exhibitor for his business, using the fact that he has a
wife and children to support, and that they would be thrown
in the street if he went back empty-handed. If the ex-
hibitor should not weaken after these pleas, then the sales-
man makes the further offer that the exhibitor use the film
an extra day or so. If the exhibitor should accept the pro-
posal and is not caught, all well and good ; if he is caught,
then he pays the penalty, for the salesman as a rule denies
that he had ever given any such permission to the exhibitor.
And the exhibitor has no way to prove otherwise.
However, the fact that a salesman gave the exhibitor per-
mission to use the film a day or so extra without an addi-
tional charge does not make the bargain legal ; the ex-
hibitor knows that the contract specifies that no verbal
promises can be taken into consideration ; he knows that
a salesman has no right to give his employer’s film away.
So when he accepts such a proposal he knows that he makes
a dishonest deal. What he should do is to insist that the
salesman put everything into the contract, so as to save
himself unpleasant consequences, even of being branded
as a crook, should he be caught and the film salesman deny
the oral agreement. And any exhibitor that will, in the
future, accept oral promises will deserve no sympathy or
pity. Things have been explained to him clearly; he has
been told that using a copyrighted article without authority
is a criminal act. regardless of the surrounding circum-
( Continued on last page )
162
HARRISON’S REPORTS
October 13, 1928
“The Singing Fool” — with A1 Jolson
(IVamer-Vitaphone ; 9,552 ft.; silent, 111 to 136 min.)
After seeing and hearing “The Singing Fool,” I could
not help becoming convinced that talking pictures are
here to stay. They fill a definite need in the show
world. This subject, however, will be discussed in an-
other of the forthcoming articles on talking pictures
and instruments. What we are concerned about just
now is the quality of the picture.
Well, I doubt if a picture has been made to this day
that has brought more tears to the eyes than brings
“The Singing Fool.” And after all, the entertaining
value of a picture is measured chiefly by the tears it
can bring, in spite of the fact that many consider let-
ting one's emotions have full play as betraying bad
manners and faulty bringing up. The greater the ap-
peal to the emotions the greater the pleasure the picture
audiences receive.
The emotion-stirring situations are numerous. But
the most effective of them all are those that show Mr.
Jolson and little Dave Lee together. (Master Lee
takes the part of the hero’s child. He is given an op-
portunity to talk now and then. His talk is charming
to the extreme.) And among these the one that shows
David Lee die and the father broken up as the result
will rock the soul of anybody, particularly of fathers
and mothers. The scenes at the theatre where the hero
goes on with the show even though his heart was break-
ing will impress themselves in the mind of any one so
deeply that one will remember them for years to come.
The story revolves around a hero, working in a
cabaret as a waiter, who eventually rises to great fame
as a singer and a ballad writer. Just as he was about
to rise, the girl he loved, but who really did not love
him, sensing his promising future, accepts his marriage
proposal. They marry and have a child. The hero lives
and breathes solely for his wife, but she runs around with
other men, until eventually she, after getting tired of
him, goes to Paris and obtains a divorce. She takes
their child with her. The hero is broken up. He quits
his job and goes from bad to worse, until accidentally
an old friend meets him and invites him in the cabaret
to dinner. ‘ A cigarette girl, who really loved him
secretly, encourages him; she puts new life into him
and with her cheery way he comes back to himself.
His ex-wife returns from Paris. Word is sent to him
that his child is seriously ill. He rushes to the hos-
pital. The child regains consciousness at the presence
of his father and talks to him while he is held in his
father’s lap. Apparently he goes to sleep and the
father puts him in his bed, telling the doctor that he
will return after the show. But no sooner he exits
than his ex-wife screams. He returns, and learns that
his child is dead. Broken up he returns to the theatre.
The stage manager is told of the hero’s loss, but, al-
though he feels sorry for him, he insists that the show
must go on. The hero goes on, but collapses at the
end of the show. The cigarette girl ministers to him.
They eventually marry.
Mr. Jolson is superb, not only as a singer, but also as
an actor. He sings several songs But “Sonny Boy”
is the one that makes the muscles of one’s throat con-
tract the most. Josephine Dunn is the heartless wife.
Betty Bronson is the cigarette girl. Reed Howes, Ed-
ward Martindel, Arthur Housman, Robert Emmett
O’Connor and many others are in the cast.
The story was written by Leslie S. Barrows. It was
directed with great skill by Lloyd Bacon.
“The Singing Fool,” which is 50 per cent, talk, will
be to talking pictures what “The Birth of a Nation”
has been to silent pictures. It is the greatest picture that
has ever been made.
“The Mating Call” — with Thomas Meighan
( Paramount , July 21 ; 6,325 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
This picture is controvertial in nature. It deals with
the activities of the Ku Klux Klan, showing the hero being
threatened by them and later taken forcibly away, tried
by their court, found guilty and sentenced to receive
a flogging. Just after the flogging had started, how-
ever, it was found that the hero had been innocent of
any wrong-doing, and that the suicide of the girl had
been caused by a hypocritical leader of the Ku Klux
Klan.
Aside from the fact that it is controvertial in nature,
it is also considerably sexy, in that it shows the hero-
ine, a married woman, trying to ensnare the hero, inti-
mating that she would be willing to have illicit relations
with him. It shows also a young woman, having illicit
relations with a leader of the Ku Klux Klan, commit-
ting suicide as a result.
Of course, the name “Ku Klux Klan” is not men-
tioned, but no one can fail to know that it is this order
that the picture meant.
Rex Beach is credited with the story. But as Mr.
Beach is not the kind of author to write such stories,
it is plainly evident that some one in the producing
company’s scenario department took Mr. Beach’s story
and twisted it beyond recognition.
Air. James Cruze has directed it Evelyn Brent is
the vampire-heroine. In one situation the spectator is
informed that the marriage of Evelyn Brent to Thomas
Meighan was annulled while Thomas Meighan was
fighting in the trenches in France, because the girl was
not of age. Whoever cast Miss Brent in such a role
deserves flogging. Renee Adoree is the girl the hero
marries just to escape from the woman he had been
married to but whose father had the marriage annulled;
Allan Roscoe is the villainous leader of the “Order,”
as the picture calls it; Gardner James, Helen Foster,
Cyril Chadwick, Will R. Walling and others are in the
supporting cast.
If you are in a Ku Klux Klan territory you should
first find out whether you should show it or not. If
you cannot show it, resort to arbitration proceedings
to be released from the obligation of playing it.
“Four Devils” — with a Star Cast
(Fox Sufcrspecial ; rel. date not set yet; 11,700 ft.)
It is hard to tell yet what success “Four Devils” will
have at the box office, but as an entertainment it doesn’t
seem to “click”; while it is spectacular and has been
produced by director Murneau with great skill, it does
not reach the heart. Now and then it seemed as if the
action of the characters would move one, but what one
got out of it is shifting in one’s seat, hoping and pray-
ing that the show would be over at the earliest possible mo-
ment. And when the show was over one felt great
relief.
It is difficult to say why the lack of sympathetic appeal.
It is possible that it is the failure of the author to show
the hero doing something to show his gratefulness to-
wards his benefactor, who had picked up him as well as
three other youngsters (the two of them girls), and
run away from the cruel circus owner and had reared
them with the love, care and sacrifice of a real father.
It is true that a subtitle reveals the fact that the “Four
Devils” had made it possible for their foster father to
retire from the ring and to live in ease, being supported
by them: but still one’s heart is not reached by that act.
Flad the fact been shown by action instead of being
told, matters might have been different. Perhaps it is
due to the failure to arouse great sympathy for the hero
in the beginning that makes one feel dislike for him
when he falls in the net of the vampire, breaking the
heart of the heroine (Janet Gaynor), whom he loved
and had promised to marry. There may be other de-
fects in the construction of the plot that hurt. It is also
possible that these defects are not the cause. But what-
ever it is, the fact is that the picture does not move one
or entertain one. Here and there it holds one in sus-
pense. The scenes, for example, that show the hero
performing his death-defying act when he was in no
condition to undertake it make one hold his breath.
The heroine’s fall, too, takes one’s breath away. And
yet this fall looks fictitious; one does not readily accept
that the heroine could have fallen from such a height
as she had fallen and be able to embrace the hero im-
mediately afterwards.
The plot has been founded on the novel by Berthold
Viertel. It is somewhat a copy of “Variety.” At least
one is reminded of it. Janet Gaynor, Charles Morton.
Nancy Drexel, Barry Norton, Mary Duncan, Farrell
Macdonald and others are in the cast. The action un-
folds chiefly in a circus, and deals with the infatuation
of a young performer with a divorced woman, who had
set out to capture him because she had become madly
infatuated with him. The hero “falls” for her charms,
and neglects the heroine But eventually he comes to
realize what a mistake he had made ; he casts away the
vampire and returns to his loved ones.
October 13, 1928
163
HARRISON'S REPORTS
“Singapore Mutiny” — with Ralph Ince,
iustelle Taylor and Gardner James
( FBO , Oct. 7; 5,812 ft.; 67 to 83 min. )
This picture will interest people, thrill them, and stir
their emotions, because the story is good. In addition
to this, it will interest also because it shows genuine
action, unfolding in the stokehold of a ship. The chok-
ing temperature in the stokehold, the burning heat
from the clinkers which are taken out of the boilers by
the firemen in cleaning the grate bars; the unquenchable
thirst of the firemen while on duty; the perspiration
that flows down their body in streams — all these are
presented in the picture as they are in life. Persons
that have been in a stokehold will appreciate the real-
ism of the action; those that have never been in such a
place will become intensely interested because they
will see things that they have not seen before.
Aside from the fact that the picture is realistic, the
story itself is full of action, heart interest and thrills.
The heart interest comes from the fact that the hero, a
steamship fireman, so strong that he dominates every
one in the stokehold, is shown by a weakling that
strength is not the whole thing in life, and that a little
kindness now and then can bring better results. The
lesson this young weakling had taught the hero is so
strong that when occasion requires it he, the strong
man, commits suicide so as to make it possible for the
weakling to live.
Additional heart interest is caused by the love affair
of the heroine with the young weakling. The heroine
had been a bad woman ; she is shown traveling to South
America. On the boat she meets the young weakling,
a young man going to warmer climates for his health,
as a stowaway, and takes a sympathetic interest in
him. Her kindness towards him makes the weakling
think that she is an angel. When the boiler explodes,
the weakling instead of rushing into the life boat, re-
mains behind and saves the hero, who had been locked
into the prison room for insubordination. The two save
the heroine, too, who had accidentally locked herself
in her room. They lower a life boat and row away.
For days and days they sail with no rescue vessel in
sight. Their water runs out. The hero, instead of
drinking his portion, secretly put it in a bottle. When
the heroine tells the hero that the young man was dying
for lack of water, he takes out the bottle and hands it
to her. He then drops into the ocean and disappears,
he, a strong man, sacrificing himself so that the weak
man might live. The heroine and the young weakling
are eventually rescued by a passing steamer. They
marry when they reach civilization.
The plot has been founded on the story by Norman
Springer. Ralph Ince directed it creditably. Mr. Ince
takes also the part of the hero. Estelle Taylor is very
good as the heroine, and Gardner James as the weak-
ling. James Mason, Martha Mattox andothers are in
the cast.
“Our Dancing Daughters” — with Joan
Crawford and an All-star Cast
( Metro-Gold ., Sept. 8; 7,652 ft.; 88 to 109 min.)
This picture seems to be a sample of how much a
producer can show a woman’s legs and how far he can
allow her to flirt with men before bringing the cen-
sor’s wrath upon him. It certainly is bold in places.
It seems, in fact, that the picture’s chief asset is bold-
ness. And it is a peculiar boldness because he has the
heroine act in a way that no decent girl would have
acted in public and then has her be surprised that the
hero had misunderstood her and turned against her.
If the producer, or the author, or whoever is responsible
for the part given to Miss Crawford, had any idea of
putting any brains into the head of the heroine, whom
Miss Crawford impersonates, such a heroine ought to
know that her conduct would not have attracted a de-
cent young man, as the hero is represented to be. Her
surprise and her tears, therefore, do not ring as true as
they would, with all her supposed sincerity, if she had
been a little bit more modest. The picture has merit in
some situations, and lacks merit in others. But there
is one thing one must admit, that it has been produced
most lavishly. The sets that represent the club to
which all the young society men and girls are supposed
to belong is the biggest, most impressive that have
ever been shown in pictures. Everything, in fact, has
been reproduced on a large scale, and are most lavish.
Josephine Lovett is the author. Harry Beaumont has
directed it, and he has made a good job of it John
Mack Brown plays opposite Miss Crawford. Dorothy
Sebastian, Anita Page, Kathlyn Williams, Nils Aster,
Edward Nugent, Dorothy Cummings, Huntly Gordon,
Evelyn Hall and Sam de Grass are in the cast.
“The Toilers” — with Jobyna Ralston and
Douglas Fairbanks. Jr.
( Tiffany-Stali I, Sept. 1; 7,256 ft.; silent, 84 to 103 min.)
This is another picture that, like “The Singapore
Mutiny,” contains elements that make it interesting in
addition to the interest that the story itself arouses; it
shows a damp fire in a coal mine. This fire is so well
done that one feels as if seeing a real fire. The fire
blast that creeps through the tunnels; the efforts of the
entombed miners to barricade themselves, backing up
the wood partitions with rocks and coal and everything
that can be secured to stop the progress of the fire; the
retreat of the miners further in to build another bar-
ricade when the one they had already put up had caught
fire; the efforts of the miners outside to drill through
so that the entombed men might get fresh air and their
lives be spared — all these and other details are done
with extreme realism. The situations that show the
mothers, fathers, husbands, sons and other relatives
outside the mines waiting with anxiety for word of
the rescue of their loved ones are pathetic in the ex-
treme. The scenes that show the distracted heroine
waiting for word of the hero, whom she loved ; the ones
that show her rushing and embracing him when he was
brought to the surface, too, are pathetic. The scenes
of the entombed miners, who are shown in danger of
asphyxiation, remind one of the similar scenes in Co-
lumbia’s “Submarine.”
Ufflike other coal mining pictures, this one does not
deal with strikes and dissatisfaction of the workers; it
is a simple and human love affair between an orphan
girl and a young man.
The plot has been founded on a story by L. G.
Rigby. It has been directed by Reginald Barker with
great skill. Harvey Clark and Wade Boteler are the
two friends of the hero; they act well.
Note: This is the first Tiffany-Stahl picture to be
synchronized with music. The synchronization has
been made with the RCA system, and is very good;
it has been done intelligently.
STATEMENT OF THE OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, CIR-
CULATION, ETC., REQUIRED BY THE ACT OF CON-
GRESS OF AUGUST 24, 1912, OF HARRISON'S REPORTS,
published Weekly, at New York, N. Y., for October 1, 1928.
County of New York.
State of New York.
Before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State and County
aforesaid, personally appeared P. S. Harrison, who, having been
duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the
Editor and Publisher of the HARRISON’S REPORTS and that
the following is, to the best of his knowledge and belief, a true
statement of the ownership, management, etc., of the aforesaid
publication for the date shown in the above caption, requred by
the Act of August 24. 1912, embodied in section 443, Postal Laws
and Regulations, to wit:
1. That the names and addresses of the publisher, editor,
managing editor, and business manager, are:
Name of Publisher, P. S. Harrison, 1440 Broadway, New York,
^N. Y.
Name of Editor, P. S. Harrison, 1440 Broadway, New York,
N. Y.
Managing Editor, None.
Business Manager, None.
2. That the owners are: P. S. Harrison, 1440 Broadway,
New York, N. Y.
3. That the known bondholders, mortgagees, and other secu-
rity holders owning or holding 1 per cent, or more or total
amount of bonds, mortgages, or other securities are: None.
4. That the two paragraphs next above, giving the names of
the owners, stockholders, and security holders, if any, contain
not only the list of stockholders as they appear upon the books
of the company but also, in cases where the stockholder or se-
curity holder appears upon the books of the company as trustees
or in any other fiduciary relation, the name of the person or
corporation for whom such trustee is acting, is given; also that
the said two paragraphs contain statements embracing affiant’s
full knowledge and belief as to the circumstances and conditions
Under which stockholders and security holders who do not ap-
pear upon the books of the company as trustees, hold stock and
securities in a capacity other than that of bona fide owners, and
this affiant has not reason to believe that any person, asso-
ciation, or corporation, has any interest direct or indirect in the
said stock, bonds, or other securities than as so stated by him.
(Signed) P. S. HARRISON,
(Owner).
Sworn to and subscribed before me the 28th day of September.
1928.
MARY D. ROMANY.
(My commission expires March 30, 1930.
October 13, 1928
164
HARRISON’S REPORTS
stances. At the Trade Practice Conference, last year, bi-
cycling was declared an unfair trade practice. In fact, at
one time it looked as if the Conference was called for no
other purpose than to condemn bicycling. So if an ex-
hibitor will in the future use a film without a bona fide
authorization; if he will, despite all warnings, accept a
salesman's oral offer and fail to include such offer, every
promise, in the contract, then he will have no one to blame
but himself should he be caught so using the film.
* * *
Now that we all agree that bicycling is a criminal act and
that holding over a film without authorization from the ex-
change is, if not criminal (having not yet been so declared
by the courts), at least unlawful, let us ask Mr. Hess to
look into his lawbooks to find out under what classifica-
tion comes the act of treating with an exhibitor that has
committed such an act. His Copyright Bureau investiga-
tors caught in the Philadelphia zone a poor Italian, a man
who is running a “shooting gallery,” bicycling film. They
hauled him before their august body and, after presenting
him with evidence of his guilt, asked him for a $1,200 settle-
ment. The poor Italian nearly fainted ; he had never seen
that much money together in his life. The investigators, or
detectives, eventually agreed to accept $400. I should like to
ask Mr. Hess if compromising with a man that has com-
mitted such an act is or is not worse than bicycling itself.
The Copyright Bureau, Mr. Hess, informs us has been
founded for the purpose of stamping out this evil. Is that a
way to stamp it out ? Is it not really encouraging the evil ?
Why are the arbitration boards ? Are the producers-dis-
tributors not bound, legally and morally, to bring every dis-
pute before the arbitration boards ? And when they do not
bring such cases before these boards, are they not showing
lack of faith towards instruments which they themselves
have created, and which are virtually in their hands by the
very nature of their constitution? And if the exhibitor com-
mitted a crime, have the producers the right to compromise
him when their object is to stamp the crime out?
Mr. Barrist made a definite accusation; he accused the
detectives of purposely delaying the bringing of the violators
to light so as to get bigger fines out of them by presenting
evidence of accumulated violations. Air. Hess denies it.
But let me tell you that Mr. Hess does not speak from per-
sonal knowledge. When the Barrist article first appeared,
he naturally had to write to his investigators asking them
whether the accusations were true or not. They must have
denied them. And Mr. Hess had to frame his answers in
accordance with their statements. One thing that would
either prove or disprove these accusations better, I believe,
than any statements either from Mr. Hess or from these
detectives, would be the revealing of the information
whether they work on a stated salary or on commission.
If on commission, we can well understand why the delays.
But whether they work on commission or a salary, the fact
remains that the Copyright Protection Bureau is applying
the rack and thumbscrew methods, not on the big exhibitors,
but on small exhibitors, men who have their theatres in
small coal mining towns, struggling to make an existence.
Let Mr. Hess take a trip to Philadelphia and investigate
the conditions himself instead of having to depend on
second-hand information, coming from persons that may
have a reason to conceal the truth. Then he will be speak-
ing from knowledge.
* * *
There is one thing that this paper cannot understand.
Why the secrecy that has surrounded this Bureau since it
was founded? We know that whatever the producer-dis-
tributors do they put it in the trade papers. Even when a
producer coughs the fact is heralded in the trade press.
And yet the formation of this Bureau has been held a state
secret. Why? What makes the producers afraid to say to
the exhibitors that they have founded a Bureau to watch
those that use film without authority ? The quickest way to
stop an evil is to give it wide publicity. Why not apply this
theory on the movements of this Bureau? If they do not
make its movements clear, if they do not tell us whether
these detectives work on a straight salary or on a com-
mission, then it is up to us to request either Senator Walsh
or any other congressman for an investigation. An ex-
amination of the books of this Bureau would perhaps dis-
close much that is being kept secret now.
Bicycing is not being resorted to as much now as it was
in the past. A few more cases may have been reported
this year than were last year, but these have, no doubt, been
caused by the deplorable business conditions that have pre-
vailed since last December. But the methods Air. Hess has
adopted to stamp this evil out is not the right kind. Treat-
ing with a bicycler will not discourage from bicycling those
that are inclined to resort to such a practice. Finding out
the cause is what will cure it. Leaving those that are crim-
inally inclined — and of these one will find as great or as
small a percentage in this business as one will in every other
business — those that bicycle film do not do so because they
want to but because they have to ; because of their inability
to meet their bills and find themselves before the necessity
of shutting down and losing every dollar they have in-
vested. If Air. Hess, instead of wasting all this money for
the establishing and maintaining of a detective agency, of a
spy system, should engage a number of experts to call on
these exhibitors with a view to diagnosing their ailments
and finding out the cure for their poor business and helping
them to put their theatres on a paying basis, he would be
rendering a greater service, not only to the exhibitors, but
also to those who pay his salary. Such a method would be
truly constructive, as it would make the exhibitors happier
and bring his employers more revenue. It seems, however,
as if the aim of Mr. Hess is to punish and not to help ; to
bring more trouble on Air. Hays and on the entire industry,
instead of good will.
If he really wants to set up some kind of Bureau, why not
establish a bureau for the detection of such members of the
Hays organization as put into pictures books Mr. Hays
bans? He would at least be rendering a great service to
Air. Alilliken, who goes before the W. C. T. U.’s, the better
film associations, the women’s clubs, the ministerial and
other associations and tells them in grave tone how many
books Mr. Hays has banned, when some producer decides
to put one of the banned books into pictures before Air. Mil-
liken leaves the rostrum. In this way he would render to
his employers much greater service, for, with the intercom-
municating system that has been adopted by these associa-
tions and all those others that operate on the basis of bring-
ing about an improvement in the moral quality of motion
pictures, more harm is done by the putting of a banned book
or play into pictures than by all the bicycling that may be
done in a year.
Here is a field for the capabilities of Air. Hess !
HOLD OFF BUYING A TALKING PIC-
TURE OR A NON-SYNCHRONOUS
INSTRUMENT
Before you sign a contract for a talking picture instrument
or a non-synchronous instrument, wait for the article on
the subject that will appear either next week or in the issue
of the week after next. I am gathering technical informa-
tion of such nature that will definitely determine what make
of instrument now offered will give better tone quality.
BETTER BUSINESS METHODS
The notice the Paramount-Famous-Lasky Corporation
has sent to its customers informing them that it will not
produce “Glorifying the American Girl” is accurate. It is
not an effort on the part of Paramount to release itself
from the obligation of delivering this picture so that it
might make it later on and exact bigger rentals from
them, as I have been informed reliably.
The step the Paramount organization has taken is noth-
ing but fair. As a rule the exhibitor buys an entire year’s
supply of pictures. So when a particular producer finds it
impossible to make one or more pictures from the group
and fails to notify the exhibitors to that effect, it puts them
in an embarrassing position. By notifying them in advance
that it will not make a certain picture or a number of pic-
tures, it gives them an opportunity to fill in their dates with
other pictures.
All other producer-distributors should follow the example
of Paramount. It is the fair way.
SUBSCRIPTION ORDER BY CABLE
TELEGRAM
The following cable telegram was received by this office
from London, England :
“We require two copies your Reports starting last
August 18th and continuing for one year. Mail Reports
to date with account. Will remit by return mail.
“Gainsborough Pictures.”
When people go to the trouble of sending cable telegrams
from a foreign land for the series of articles on talking
pictures and instruments, it is a proof that these articles
really filled a great need.
Proof that this series of articles has benefitted the entire
industry comes to this office every day in the form of letters
as well as in the form of oral comment.
The series will be continued until the subject is covered
thoroughly.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1,1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1928
No. 42
The Mysterious Meeting of the Contract Committee
The Contract Committee, consisting of producer-
distributors and exhibitors, met and, according to
an announcement in the trade press, ratified the
contract.
The resolution, after giving several “whereases,”
states : “NOW, THEREFORE, The members of
the Contract Committee hereby agree that the con-
tract, as agreed upon at Chicago on February 21,
1928, be and the same hereby is finally agreed upon
as the Standard Exhibition Contract of the motion
picture industry, without reservations or excep-
tions of any kind or character, the Contract Com-
mittee, however, continuing to act in accordance
with the Resolution of the Trade Practice Confer-
ence which appointed the Committee.”
The news that the Contract Committee met and
approved the contract as it now stands naturally
came as a surprise to the exhibitors, for no inkling
had been given that such a meeting was contem-
plated. The only news we had was to the effect that
Mr. W. A. Steffess, President of the M. P. T. O.
of the Northwest, and Chairman of the Allied
Group before it disbanded in favor of harmony,
sent telegrams to the former Allied leaders and to
some other prominent exhibitor leaders, asking
their consent for a conference to discuss the con-
tract and to point out to the producers what is
wrong with it, with an intention to demand its re-
vision, so much needed. Up to the sending of that
telegram, the Hays organization refused to call a
meeting of the Contract Committee, Charlie Petti-
john, its spokesman, giving as an excuse that it
needed money to pay the railroad fare and the other
expenses of two exhibitor members if a meeting
were called, and that the Hays organization would
not foot the bill. “Somebody has to pay it, but we
won’t,” he is quoted as having stated. Mention
was made by Pettijohn of only two of the Com-
mittee members, Bernstein, of California, and
Biechele, of Kansas.
In order for you to understand fully the sig-
nificance of the sudden meeting of the Contract
Committee and of the ratification of the contract
"without reservations or exceptions of any kind or
character,” it is necessary that you be given some
inside information. At the Chicago meeting of the
Contract Committee last February, the exhibitors
demanded that, if the exhibitors were to agree to
include the arbitration clause in the contract, the
producers devise some kind of plan whereby to
finance the arbitration boards, thus lifting the bur-
den off the shoulders of the exhibitor organizations.
The demand of the exhibitors for such a plan was,
regardless of its merits, a sincere one. Having
been unable to find a solution of the problem at that
time, the Committee members decided to adjourn
with the understanding that an effort be made to
find a way out prior to May 1, the time when the
new contract was to go into effect ; and that if the
matter were not settled by May 1 , to meet again not
later than June 1.
May 1 came and no solution of the problem was
found. June 1 came and no meeting of the com-
mittee was called. Some exhibitor rumblings were
heard, and some protests were made. A few let-
ters were exchanged between Pettijohn and the
would-be head of the national exhibitors’ organiza-
tion on the subject. It was in one of his letters that
C. C. Pettijohn stated that his organization would
not pay the railroad fare of Messrs. Bernstein and
Biechele, and that, so far as he was concerned, he
preferred to have the unfinished business of the
contract remain unfinished. And, as he stated in a
postscript, he spoke for himself and not for any-
body else (I believe it is necessary for us to appoint
a committee for the purpose of finding out when
Pettijohn speaks for himself and when for Mr.
Hays).
In view of the stand the Hays organization took
in the matter of transportation for the two com-
mittee members, is it any wonder that many of us
were taken by surprise when the Committee was
called together ?
In the name of the exhibitors of the United
States, HARRISON’S REPORTS demands that
Mr. Hays answer the following questions :
Who called the meeting?
By whose authority he called it ?
When did he call it? We should like to know
the exact date.
Did he call both the regular members and the
alternates ?
If so, did he give them time enough to come to
New Tork ? At Chicago the members, both regu-
lar and alternates, were notified at least thirty days
in advance of the meeting. This gave them time to
consult with other exhibitor leaders, to put their
personal affairs in order, and to reach Chicago in
time for several conferences. Were the members
this time given a reasonable notice of the meeting?
I f so, when was the notice sent ? If not, why not ?
In one instance at least, this paper knows that the
alternate did not receive the notice until twelve
hours ahead of the time of the meeting. It was Mr.
Cole, alternate, President of the M. P. T. O. of
Texas. And the notice was sent to him, not by the
same person that sent the other notices, but by Mr.
Nathan \ amkins, that watchdog of exhibitor in-
terests.
Since his lieutenant stated in writing that his
organization would not pay the transportation and
( Continued, on last page)
166
October 20, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Moran of the Marines” — with Richard Dix
( Paramount — Oct. 6; 5,444 ft.; 63 to 77 min.)
Good. The story, though familiar, is amusing, due to the
good work of Mr. Dix, as the hero, and to the funny titles
by George Marion. Roscoe Karns as the hero’s buddy and
Duke Martin as the sergeant, add considerably to the com-
edy and cause many laughs. Miss Ruth Elder, the famous
aviatrix, is surprisingly good in her first role. Though not
a beauty, she lends charm to the picture and shows some
talent. The first half of the picture is chiefly comedy,
caused by the hero’s getting into all kinds of troubles on
account of his love ot fighting. The last half gets more
serious and becomes melodramatic when the hero saves the
heroine from the Chinese bandits after being wounded when
he pretended to be a deserter and played a trick on his
captives.
The scenes where Miss Elder rides in her plane to seek
aid when the hero is almost killed by the bandits are thrill-
ing, as is the fight between the wounded hero and the band
of Chinese bandits.
The story revolves around a fighting he-man who gets
into jail after trying to protect the heroine whom he had
met in a night club. They both fall in love with each
other. But the hero pretended to be a well-to-do railroad
man on his way to China whereas he was an enlisted Alarine
in her father's regiment. When the heroine learns this, she
has him put on duty in her home as orderly. He kisses her.
She has him courtmartialed for bad behavior, and he is
sentenced to hard labor for three years. Her love for him
causes his sentence to be suspended and when the regiment
goes to China to round up a notorious band of bandits, he
goes to do some hard labor, still under sentence. And when
the heroine and her would-be fiance are chased while she
is cruising in her plane, looking for the hero, she is cap-
tured though the fiance escapes to headquarters where he
and the hero’s buddy seek aid from her father’s regiment.
Through a ruse, the hero, learning of her capture, frees her
although he is wounded. She escapes in her plane and leads
the regiment back to where the hero is fighting single-
handed the large gang of bandits. Hero and heroine are
united .
The picture was directed by Frank Strayer from a story
by Linton Wells. Others in the cast are Brooks Benedict,
as the cowardly fiance, Captain E. H. Calvert, as the gen-
eral, and Tetsu Komai, as Sun Yat, the bandit chief. It
will please audiences who like he-man pictures and who
do not mind a few somewhat far-fetched situations, which
nevertheless are so funny.
“Marriage by Contract” — with
Patsy Ruth Miller and Lawrence Gray
( Tiffany-Staid , Nov. 1 ; 7,786 ft.; 90 to 111 min.)
The old gag of things happening in a dream, with the
spectator unaware of it because of the action’s failure to
show when the dream started until the time when the
author decides to inform him that it is all a dream, has been
revived again in this picture with fairly satisfactory re-
sults. The dream action is really a preachment — an effort
to show to those of young women that believe in marriage
by contract what a bad thing it is, and how much unhap-
piness it would have brought to the heroine had it not been
merely a dream. In this manner the author was able to
show things that it is believed he could not have shown in
straight action, or, at least, he could not have done so
wisely.
The action in the first two-thirds of the picture is rather
boresome; it shows the heroine in love with a young man,
but unwilling to marry him until he consented that they be
married by a contract marriage of one year’s duration.
Because the young man really loves her, he agrees and they
are so married. Then the action drifts into a dream. The
heroine dreams that when the year is up she marries
another man by contract. This man, when the two years
are up, takes his clothes and goes away, as if he had paid
her only a visit. She marries another one for his money.
She begins to grow old and tries everything she can to
retain her youth. She meets her first husband, happily
married and the father of a fine young boy, and her heart
breaks. In order to feel young, she divorces her old mil-
lionaire husband and marries a young lounge lizard, who,
after impoverishing her, decides to leave her. She takes a
gun and makes ready to shoot him. He grapples with her
and is killed by the accidental discharge of the gun. She
is about to be arrested by a policeman for murder when
she wakes up frightened, and realizes that it was only a
dream. She then rushes to her husband-by-contract and begs
him to take her to a church where they could be married
in the old-fashioned way.
The last two reels are pretty strong. In one or two places
the action is powerful. Miss Miller’s acting is so good in
those situations that the action becomes realistic in the
extreme. The lesson is put over in those scenes in good
shape, and had the early action been interesting the picture
would have turned out to be very good. As it is, it is only
fairly good. But it is pretty sexy, too.
The story is by Edward Clark. It was directed well by
James Flood. Lawrence Gray is the first husband. Robert
Edeson, John St. Polis, Claire McDowell, Shirley Palmer,
Raymond Keane and others are in the cast.
“Power of Silence” — with Belle Bennett and
John Westwood
( Tiffany-Stahl , Sept. 15 ; 5,554 ft., 64 to 79 min.)
A pretty good mystery melodrama. It holds the spec-
tator’s interest all the way through because the real mur-
derer is not disclosed until the end and it is rather a sur-
prise. It is filled also with pathos. The story revolves
around a mother’s love and sacrifice for her son. Miss
Bennett has the very sympathetic role of being the accused
murderess who refuses to tell anything and almost is sen-
tenced for first degree murder, but for the heart-rendering
plea of her defending attorney, who uses her dairy as a
silent witness to prove to the jury that she had no motive
in killing the man ; he was the father of her boy but she
had been separated from him before the child was born,
because he was the son of wealthy parents and she the maid-
servant in that family. It is told in flashbacks, the scenes
changing from the court room where she sits passively, to
the time from the day she is turned away from her hus-
band, showing her struggles to raise the little one till he
was a grown man, and then in court, with his young wife.
The opening scenes reveal the mother going to the
apartment of the murdered man who was her husband.
When the hotel clerk hears a revolver shot, he comes to the
apartment and finds her holding a revolver in her hand
which she had really picked up from the floor. Later, after
the trial, and when she is back home with her son and is
called “murderess” by her daughter-in-law, the mother
tells the daughter-in-law that she had seen her in the apart-
ment running away from her husband, who was trying to
make love to her. The daughter-in-law had accidentally
shot him and then escaped through the window. This
brought the daughter-in-law to her knees because she re-
alized what a wonderful woman her mother-in-law had
been to protect her son both from the knowledge that his
wife was running around carelessly with another man and
from the fact that she was a murderess.
The story and continuity were written by Frances Hy-
land and the picture was directed by Wallace Worsley.
John Westwood is likeable as the young son and Marion
Douglas is quite good in her small role as daughter-in-law.
Others in the cast are Anders Randolf and John St. Polis.
“Court Martial” — with Jack Holt and
Betty Compson
( Colwmbia , August 12 ; 6,014 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
A good picture of the Civil War days, in which President
Lincoln is shown as engaging a young captain to go west
and, by employing his own tactics, to capture a famous
woman bandit. Even though Miss Compson, as the “tough”
woman bandit, is not convincing, because of the fact that
she does not look like one, yet the picture has been directed
so well that one is made to forget this, and to take an inter-
est in what is unfolded. There is suspense in some of the
situations. This is caused by the hero’s masquarading as a
bandit and entering the heroine-bandit’s lair, thus risking
capture and inevitable shooting. The scenes where he is
shown as’ having been discovered and taken to a tree to be
lynched are suspensive. The scenes that show the hero and
the heroine escaping from the heroine’s band hold one in
pretty good suspense, too. So do the scenes that show the
heroine escaping the second time and reaching the post,
and giving herself up, clearing the hero, who had been court-
martialed and was about to be shot for treason as a result
of his having left the heroine escape, and whom she loved.
The story ends showing the heroine die ; she had been hit
by her own men while she was escaping,
The plot has been founded on a story by Elmer Harris.
The picture was directed by George B. Seitz well. Frank
Lacteen and Otto Matieson are in the cast.
October 20, 1928
167
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Battle of the Sexes” — with Jean Hersholt,
Belie Bennett, Phylis Haver, Sally
O’Neil and Don Alvarado
( United Artist s-Griffith, Oct. 12; 8,180 ft.)
W. D. Griffith produced “The Battle of the Sexes” sev-
eral years ago. I he present version is as antiquated. It lacks
inspiration, and the theme is of the kind that have been put
into pictures at least one hundred times, almost in the same
form. There is not a new idea in the treatment of this
theme. It is about the same father, a kind-hearted, loving
head of the family, who becomes infatuated with a gold-
digger, a woman that had planned to relieve him from some
of his money, but who eventually comes to his senses, going
back to his old home, and making everybody happy. In this
instance, the happy result is brought about by the hero’s
daughter, who, grieving for her mother, takes a gun and
goes to the vampire’s apartment with the intention of killing
her ; but she fails to carry out her purpose, perhaps because
Mr. Griffith did not want to make the young girl a murderer,
lest he have the censors after him.
There is a touch of heart interest here and there, and
some suspense. The scenes, for example, that show the
mother on the roof, walking close to the fire wall and liable
to fall off any time are, indeed, suspensive. The scenes in the
cabaret where the daughter sees her father in company with
the bad woman and pretends that she is ill, her object being
to draw her mother away from the cabaret and thus spare
her of a possible meeting face to face with her husband in
the company of another woman, are sympathy arousing. The
sufferings the mother goes through as a result of her losing
the affection of her husband, too, arouse one’s sympathy for
the mother and for the other members of the family. But
these are not strong enough to put the picture over. More-
over, the obviousness of the plot kills whatever effect these
situations might exert upon the spectator.
The picture has been directed well, the acting being of
first order. The cast consists of real artists. The sets are
magnificent.
The picture is decidedly “sexy.” The hero is shown
abandoning his wife and children and living with a prosti-
tute. The scenes that show the vampire’s lover in the
room at a time when she had been living with the hero are
not very edifying to young folk.
The plot has been founded on the old story by Daniel
Garson.
“The Wedding March” — with Special Cast
( Paramount-von Stroheim, Oct. 6; 10,400 ft.)
Three years in the making and nearly a million and half
expended ! But, though from the point of view of direction,
acting, settings and of the other trimmings it is a big pic-
ture, from the point of view of entertainment it is not as
good as “The Merry Go Round,” to which picture it bears
a great resemblance. The story was written and directed
by Mr. von Stroheim, the famous director, and the action,
which unfolds in Vienna, revolves around the love of an
aristocrat, officer in the Imperial Guard, a lady killer, for
a beautiful girl, of lowly station of life. In the develop-
ment, the hero’s parents are shown as having decided that a
marriage between their son and the ugly daughter of a
millionaire would prove much more suitable to their empty
purse than his marriage to the beautiful but poor girl. So
they set out to arrange the marriage. The fact that the
wealthy girl was, besides ugly, also lame, did not make any
difference. They eventually succeed in inducing the hero
to forget his sweetheart and to marry money.
The story is really a tragedy, for tragic was the life of
the heroine. In one situation it is implied that the heroine
had had a love union with the hero. This is shown when
the heroine goes to the church and confesses to the priest.
Here and there is a touch of sympathy. But most of this
is lost by the sight of pigs wallowing in the mire, of char-
acters easting sausages, and of other filth (a touch of
Greed”), which situations though dramatic, as they offer a
contrast between the hero’s wealthy environment and the
heroine’s filthy surroundings, cannot be relished by the
average picture-goer. Some of the sets are magnificent.
The introductory part is in techinicolor. It is beautiful.
The cast includes Eric von Stroheim himself, as the hero.
Fay Wray, as the heroine, George Fawcett, as the prince,
father of the hero, Zasu Pitts, as the corn plaster mil-
lionaire father’s daughter, whom the hero married, George
Nichols, Mathew Betz, Cesare Cravina, Maude George and
others.
THE PLATTER CABINET CO.
North Vernon, Indiana
October 11th, 1928.
P. S. Harrison,
No. 1441 Broadway,
New York, N. Y.
Dear Sir :
As you are no doubt continuing your investigation on
non-synchonous instruments for the movies, we wish to call
your attention to further improvements with Phototone as
made and which added improvements are now available
to exhibitors.
Phototone at $500.00 was equipped with large exceptional
type of horn. With the improvement in dynamic speakers
we have devised a combination bell and dynamic, also com-
bination dynamic and new double wall baffle sound board
speaker. In addition to our regular Phototone, we have
devised a new and heavier instrument Phototone Senior,
using four dynamic sound board speakers, either of the bell
or baffle board type.
We are using with this outfit three stage amplifier with
output of 15 watts which is the same power used by Vita-
phone. This amplifier has quality of reproduction of the
highest order.
This job is also equipped so that 10", 12" and 16" records
may be used. This new amplifier will operate up to 30 or
more speakers if necessary, and has the power to operate
four large speakers, which will give sufficient volume for
most any theatre regardless of size or seating capacity.
We take great pride in the quality of tone in both of our
reproducing instruments, simplicity and ease of operation,
freedom from expensive servicing, high quality of mate-
rials, and adaptability with low operating costs and low
first cost.
We agree in our :ontracte with the exhibitors to replace
without charge any part o? this outfit, which may prove
defective with the exception of tubes for a period of 90 days
from the date of sale.
We are ready at any time to make comparative tests
with any outfit now made as for quality of tone reproduc-
tion.
We now have 38l Phototone outfits installed in the past
six months and out of that number, there has only been
nine instruments returned and most of these were because
the theatres were unable to keep up their payments, two or
three because of poor reproduction because of wires being
broken in shipment and the exhibitors becoming impatient
and not allowing us to repair or look for the trouble and
returning them without giving us an opportunity to make
the instrument good.
Every Phototone installation has been a success where
the operator has used reasonable judgment in this operation.
We are also pleased to advise you that two of the largest
record manufacturers are making a series of sound records
for us, which we expect to have ready for release within
the next two or three weeks. In addition to this theme
records are being made by them and it will not be long
until the exhibitor may buy at moderate cost good sound
and good theme records with new effects and themes coming
out from time to time as needed.
Yours truly,
PLATTER CABINET CO.,
By O. R. Platter,
Secretary and Treasurer.
P. S. — We are now equipping our regular Phototone
model so that 16" records may be used on each turn table,
same records which are now being made and distributed by
the film producers for use on non-synchronous instruments
at no additional charge to the exhibitor.
We also expect to furnish blue prints to all who already
have Phototone installed so that they can change by slight
expense for 16" records.
We also have coming out a device which can be put on
Phototones already sold, probably in the course of two or
three weeks, from this date, we will have new device on all
Phototones going out whereby sound effects can have a
musical background by having the two turn tables playing
records in unison, theme rcord on one turn table and sound
record on the other turntable.
In regard to the AC hum this matter has been taken care
of on each Phototone by an adjustment of little set screw
between the first and second tubes on the amplifier so that
when the hum is discernable, it can be faded out by adjust-
ing this screw.
168 HARRISON’S
other expenses of Bernstein, of California, and of
Biechele, of Kansas, who paid them now ? Were
the other members, Cole of Texas, for example,
Mr. Yamins, of Massachusetts, and Mr. Riche, of
Michigan, paid their own expenses?
Who is the Chairman of the Contract Committee,
and who appointed him ?
In the Committee deliberations on October 5, the
producer-distributors were represented by two
alternate members of the committee ; only one of
the regular members was present. Now, if the
producer-distributor alternates were notified to ap-
pear, why were the exhibitor alternates not called ?
This paper has authentic information to the effect
that they were not called. Why were they not
called ? What was the motive ?
Why the secrecy that surrounded the meeting?
And above all —
Why did Mr. Cole resign ? What were the real
reasons ?
Mr. Hays must answer these questions. If he
fails to do so, then you must give up the hope that
round table deliberations with producers will ever
get you anywhere, and must take other steps to pro-
tect your interests. The interests of fifteen thou-
sand of you are at stake. And yet, two persons are
allowed to pass upon the contract in star chamber
proceedings. What a pity ! What a perversion of
the intention of the Government, who called rep-
resentatives of producer-distributors and of ex-
hibitors to a meeting to make them adopt fair busi-
ness methods ! What a farce !
If the contract goes through as it is, there is just
one thing you could do. Take your woe to Senator
Walsh, of Montana, or to any other Senator, and
ask for an investigation of the acts, not only of the
producer-distributor, but also of the exhibitor com-
mittee members. A thorough investigation of the
acts of this committee is needed to clear up the
mystery. And such an investigation can be brought
about only by the United States Congress. The
contract, as it now stands, is worse than the con-
tract that was in effect last year and the year be-
fore. Any one with an ounce of intelligence will
tell you that. And yet it has been ratified without
any changes ! The Trade Practice Conference last
year decreed that all disputed points of the contract
should be submitted to a seventh arbitrator, to be
appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court. Commissioner Myers foresaw the possi-
bility of disagreement among producers and dis-
tributors on points of the contract and sought to
safeguard the interests of the exhibitors by having
all disputed points submitted to a seventh arbitra-
tor, appointed by a medium whose sincerity and
sense of fairness could not be doubted. But not a
single clause has been referred to such an arbitra-
tor. At Chicago, A1 Steffess proposed that the ex-
hibitor members vote unanimously on all disputed
clauses, his intention being to force such clauses to
the seventh arbitrator. But by some manipulation
the “unanimous rule’’ was made “unity rule.” So
no matter what one of the exhibitor members of the
committee thought of a clause, he was unable to
make his opinion prevail, because of the “unit rule,”
put over on the exhibitors by the producers by
steamroller tactics.
Wake up! Do something! They are robbing
you of everything you have by political manipula-
tion. They are chaining your foot to an iron ball.
REPORTS October 20, 1927
And you are permitting it. Have you become a
fatalist?
THE CONTRACT FOR INTERNATIONAL
NEWS
Mr. R. V. Anderson, Sales Manager of Interna-
tional News, informs this paper that the contracts
for their newsweekly is for a stated number of is-
sues. When the exhibitor runs all the issues, the
contract becomes automatically cancelled.
In sending this information to HARRISON’S
REPORTS, Mr. Anderson was prompted by the
editorial about the cancellation provision in some
News Weekly contract, printed in the issue of
October 6.
THE SEVENTH ARTICLE ON TALKING
PICTURES
If you are contemplating the purchase of a non-
synchronous instrument or of a talking picture in-
strument, wait until the seventh article on “Facts
About Talking Pictures and Instruments” appears
in these columns. Because of the technical infor-
mation that I was obliged to secure, I could not
make this article ready to print it this week. But I
shall do so next week.
The information you will get from this article
will enable you to determine what instrument is the
best on the market. Thus you will save yourself
of much money by making it unnecessary to buy a
good instrument after you bought a pretty good,
a fair, or a mediocre instrument. Facts will be
printed that will enable you to determine this mat-
ter for yourself. A big exhibitor can afford to in-
vest extra money for the purchase of a better in-
strument, but the small exhibitor cannot. So if you
are a small exhibitor, wait another week.
TO THE “LITTLE FELLOWS,” MANU-
FACTURERS OF NON-SYNCHRONOUS
INSTRUMENTS
Some exhibitors, and some non-exhibitors, have
requested me to review in HARRISON’S RE-
PORTS the non-synchronous instruments they
manufacture so as to bring them to the attention
of the exhibitors.
As much as I should like to help them out, I can-
not do so unless they comply with certain condi-
tions : ( 1 ) They must have an instrument in this
city for me to look over. (2) They must prove to
this paper that their manufacturing facilities are
such that they can render service to the exhibitor
without interruption. (3) They must prove that
they will be able to supply to the exhibitor cue
sheets so that he may be enabled to accompany the
picture with appropriate music. And the cue
sheets must be prepared by a competent musician.
In view of the fact that a commendation of these
instruments in HARRISON’S means free public-
ity to the value of tens of thousands of dollars, it is
not unreasonable to request that the manufacturers
of these instruments comply with these rules. I
cannot take the responsibility of advising any one
of you to purchase an instrument unless I am sure
first that they will be able to perform their obliga-
tions towards you. The instruments may be first
class, but without cue sheets and without good rec-
ords, they are of little value.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
IIARRISO TV’S REPORTS
Vol. X
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1928
No. 42
(Partial Index — No. 5 — Pages 127 to 164)
''Air Circus, The — Fox . . . . 146
Albany Night Boat, The. . A 151
Baby Cyclone — Metro-Goldwyn 158
Beautiful But Dumb — Tiffany-Stahl 142
Beggars of Life — Paramount 155
Beware of Blondes — Columbia 134
Butter and Egg Man, The — First National 138
Camerman, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 155
Captain Swagger — Pathe 155
Cardboard Lover, The — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 143
Celebrity — Pathe 146
-Circus Kid, The — F BO 150
Danger Street — F. B. O 159
Divine Sinner, The — Rayart 150
Docks of New York, The — Paramount 154
Excess Baggage — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 154
First Kiss, The — Paramount 135
Fleet’s In, The — Paramount 158
Forbidden Love — Pathe 158
Four Devils — Fox 162
Four Walls — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 134
Grain of Dust, A — Tiffany-Stahl 151
Kit Carson — Paramount 143
Man Made Woman — Pathe 154
Manhattan Knights — Excellent-Reg 143
Mating Call, The — Paramount 162
Midnight Life — Gotham-Reg 147
Mother Knows Best — Fox 159
Night Bird, The — Universal-Jewel 142
Night Watch, The — First National 139
Oh, Kay — First National 138
Our Dancing Daughters — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 163
Out of the Ruins — First National 135
Patriot, The — Paramount 139
Plastered in Paris — Fox 158
Power — Pathe 146
Red Mark, The — Pathe 150
River Pirate, The — Fox 154
Romance of a Rogue — Regional (State Rights) 138
Sawdust Paradise, The — Paramount 139
Scarlet Lady, The — Columbia 134
Shadows of the Night — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 150
Show Girl — First National 155
Singapore Mutiny — F B O 163
Singing Fool, The — Warner Bros 162
Son of the Golden West — F B O 158
Speed Classic, The — Excellent-Reg 134
State Street Sadie — Warner Bros 147
Submarine — Columbia 142
Sweet Sixteen — Rayart 147
Terror, The — Warner Bros 134
Toilers, The — Tiffany-Stahl 163
Virgin Lips — Columbia 138
Water Hole, The — Paramount 142
Waterfront — First National 146
Whip, The — First National 155
Win That Girl — Fox 159
Wright Idea, The — First National 135
436 Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come — April 8 1,300,000b
461 Chinatown Charlie — April 15 800.000B
468 Canyon of Adventure — April 22 700.000B
444 Harold Teen — April 29 9OO,000B
449 Lady Be Good— May 6 900.000B
456 Vamping Venus — May 13 l,100,00OB
435 The Yellow Lily— May 20 1,100,000B
442 The Hawk’s Nest — May 27 950.000B
467 The Upland Rider— June 3 700.000B
460 Three Ring Marriage — June 10 800.000B
438 Wheel of Chance — June 17 (Roulette) l,30O,00OB
429 Happiness Ahead — June 24 1,300,(KX)B
466 Code of the Scarlet — July 1 700.000B
539 Good Bye Kiss (S) — July 8 Special
463 The Wright Idea— Aug. 5 800,0O0B
439 Out of the Ruins — Aug. 19 1,300,000B
430 Oh, Kay— Aug. 26 l,30O,00OB
551 Butter and Egg Man — Sept. 2 Special
490 The Night Watch (S) — Sept. 9 1,100,000B
496 Waterfront (S)— Sept. 16 900,0()0B
502 Show Girl (S)— Sept. 23 1,000,000b
552 The Whip (S) — Sept. 30 Special
495 The Crash— Oct. 7 950.000B
FEATURE RELEASE SCHEDULE
(Note: Notice that hereafter all synchronised subjects
will be indicated on the list as follows: "S” means that the
subject has been synchronized, but only with music — in no
part of the film do the characters talk; “PT” means that
the characters talk in some of the situations, and that the
remainder of the film is synchronized with music; "AT”
means that the characters talk all the way through.)
Columbia Features
The Scarlet Lady — Lya de Putti-Don Alvardo .... Aug. I
Court-Martial — Jack Holt-B. Compson Aug. 12
Runaway Girls — S. Mason-A. Rankin (reset) . . . .Aug. 23
Street of Illusion — V. Valli-I. Keith Sept. 3
Sinner’s Parade — D. Revier-V. Varconi Sept. 14
Submarines — Jack Holt-R. Graves-D. Revier Sept. 23
Driftwood — -M. Day-D. Alvardo Oct. 15
Stool Pigeon — O. Borden-C. Delaney Oct. 25
Power of the Press — J. Ralston-D. Fairbanks, Jr.. .Oct. 31
Nothing to Wear — J. Logan-T. Von Elts Nov. 5
Submarine — J. Holt-R. Graves-D. Revier (reset). Nov. 12
The Apache — M. Livingston-D. Alvardo Nov. 19
The Lone Wolf’s Daughter — B. Lytell-G.Olmstead.Nov. 30
Excellent Features
Manhattan Knights — Bedford-Miller (reset) Aug. 15
Life’s Crossroads — G. Hulette-Wm. Conklin Aug. 25
Power of the Press Sept. 10
Dream Melody Sept. 20
Confessions of a Wife Sept. 30
Life’s Crossroads — G. Hulette-W. Conklin (reset) .Oct. 15
The Passion Song — N. Beery-G. Olmstead Oct. 20
Broken Barriers Nov. 1
Power of the Press Nov. 10
Dream Melody Nov. 20
Confessions of a Wife Nov. 30
FIRST NATIONAL EXHIBITION VAULES
546 Shepherd of the Hills — Jan. 1 Special
542 Helen of Troy — Jan. 8 Special
446 French Dressing — Jan. 15 900,00OB
459 Sailors’ Wives — Jan. 22 800, 000 B
437 The Noose— Jan. 29 1.300.000B
445 The Whip Woman — Feb. 5 900,OOOB
426 The Chaser— Feb. 12 l.OOO.OOOB
464 The Wagon Show— Feb. 19 700.000B
455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 l,100,0OOB
447 Mad Hour — March 4 900.000B
440 Burning Daylight — March 11 950.000B
434 Heart of a Follies Girl — March 18 1,100,000B
448 The Big Noise — March 25 900.000B
451 Ladies’ Night — April 1 1,000,000B
F. B. O. Features
8247 The Bantam Cowboy — Buzz Barton Aug. 12
9221 Terror Mountain — Tom Tyler Aug. 19
• 9211 The Perfect Crime (PT) — C. Brooks Aug. 19
9201 Danger Street — W. Baxter-M. Sleeper Aug. 26
-9233 Captain Careless — Bob Steele Aug. 26
9291 Dog Law — Ranger Sept. 2
-9212 Taxi 13 (PT) — Conklin-Sleeper Sept. 2
■ 9215 Gang War (PT) — O. Borden-J. Pickford. . .Sept. 2
-9202 Stocks and Blondes — Logan-Gallagher Sept. 9
-9203 Charge of the Gauchos — Logan -Bushman ..Sept. 16
9241 The Young Whirlwind — Buzz Barton Sept. 16
0213 Hit of the Show (PT) — Olmstead-Brown.Sept. 23
9251 Son of the Golden West — Tom Mix Oct. 1
9222 The Avenging Rider — Tom Tyler Oct. 7
9214 The Circus Kid (PT) — Darro-Hanneford . . .Oct. 7
9205 Sally’s Shoulders — Wilson-Hackathorne Oct. 7
•9209 Singapore Mutiny — E. Taylor-R. Ince Oct. 14
9232 Lightning Speed — Bob Steele Oct. 21
9242 Rough Ridn’ Red — Buzz Barton Nov. 4
HARRISON’S REPORTS Partial Index No. 5
October 20, 192i
9293 Tracked— Ranger Nov. 4
9206 Sinners in Love— O. Borden-H. Gordon Nov. 4
9207 His Last Haul— S. Ovven-T. Moore Nov. 11
9212 Taxi 13 (PT)— Conklin-Sleeper (reset) Nov. 18
9225. Tyrant of Red Guleh- — Ton Tyler Nov. 25
9252 King Cowboy- — Tom Mix Nov. 26
Fox Features
Street Angel (S) — Gaynor-Farrell (reset) Aug. 19
The River Pirate (S)— McLaglen-Moran (reset) Aug. 26
Four Sons (S) — Mann-Collyer-Hall (reset) Sept. 2
Fazil (S) — Farrell-Nissen (reset) Sept. 9
Win That Girl (S) — Rollins-Carol Sept. 16
Plastered in Paris (S) — Cohen- Pennick Sept. 23
The Air Circus (S) — Rollins-Carol Sept. 30
Dry Martini (S) — Astor-Moore-Gran (reset) Oct. 7
Making the Grade (S) — Lowe-Moran (reset) Oct. 14
Mother Machree (S) — Bennett-McLaglen Oct. 21
Mother Knows Best (PT)— Bellamy-Dresser Oct. 28
Sunrise (S) — Gaynor-O’Brien Nov. 4
Prep and Pep — Rollins-Drexel Nov. 11
Me, Gangster (PT) — Terry-Collyer-Macdonald. .Nov. 18
Riley the Cop (PT) — Macdonald-Drexel-Rollins.Nov. 25
The Red Dance (S) — Del Rio-Farrell Dec. 2
Gotham Features
Midnight Life (Man Higher Up”) — Bushman Aug. 15
The River Woman — L. Barrymore-J. Logan Aug. 22
Through the Breakers — Livingston-Herbert Sept.
The Head of the Family — Russell-Bennett-Corbin. .Oct.
Times Square (S) — Day-Lubin Oct.
A Modem Sappho — B. Bronson Nov.
Knee High — Virginia Lee Corbin Dec.
Father and Son — N. Beery, Sr.-N. Beery, Jr Not set
Girl from Argentine (S) Not set
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Features
•''S3 5 Four-Walls — Gilbert- Crawford Aug. 11
—829 The Cardboard- Lover — Davies-Goudal Aug. 25
^.907 Our Dancing Daughters (S)Crawford-Brown-Sept. 1
•-914 Excess Baggage (S) — Wm. Haines-J. Dunn .Sept. 8
-942 Beyond the Sierras — Tim McCoy Sept. 15
-918 The-Cameraman — B. Keaton (reset) Sept. 15
-902 Beau Broadway- — L. Cody (reset) Sept. 22
-938 While the City Sleeps (S) — Chaney (reset) . Sept. 29
-949 Shadows of the Night — Flash Oct. 6
-811 Napoleon — French cast Oct. 13
—911 Brotherly Love (S) — Dane-Arthur Oct. 13
—935 Show People (S) — M. Davies Oct. 20
- 936 The Wind (S)— L. Gish Oct. 27
-901 The Baby Cyclone — Cody- Pringle Nov. 3
-930 Mask of the Devil — L. Gilbert Nov. 10
•-943 The Bushranger — Tim McCoy Nov. 10
-9 37 A Woman of Affairs— G. Garbo-J. Gilbert Nov. 17
—915 Alias Jimmy Valentine — Wm. Haines Nov. 24
Paramount Features
*2801 Warming Up (S) — Dix-Arthur (reset) .. .Aug. 4
2874 Forgotten Faces — Brook-Brian (reset) Aug. 11
. 2819 Loves of an Actress (S) Negri (reset) Aug. 18
* 2835 Just Married — Hall-Taylor (reset) Aug. 18
*2870 The Water Hole — J. Holt-Carroll (reset) . .Aug. 25
•2804 The First Kiss — Cooper-Wray Aug. 25
-2829 Sawdust Paradise (S) — Ralston-Bosworth. Sept. 1
•2852 The Patriot (S) — E. Jannings-L. Stone Sept. 1
*2855 The Fleet’s In — Clara Bow Sept. 15
•2862 Beggars of Life (S) — Beery (reset) Sept. 22
2839 Model from Montmartre — Petrovich (reset) . Sept. 22
'2807 The Docks of N. Y. — Bancroft-Compson. . . .Sept. 29
•2853 Weeding March (S) — Von Stroheim (reset). Oct. 6
• 2802 Moran of the Marines — R. Dix-R. Elder Oct. 6
-2810 Take Me Home — B. Daniels-N. Hamilton. . .Oct. 13
• 2814 Varsity (PT) — C. Rogers — (“Sophomore”) .Oct. 27
2820 Woman from Moscow (S) — Negri-Kerry. . .Nov. 3
2838 Huntingtower (BRIT) — Sir Harry Lauder. .Nov. 3
•2824 Avalanche — Jack Holt-Hill-Baclanova Nov. 10
• 2821 His Private Life — A. Menjou Nov. 17
2866 Manhattan Cocktail (S) — Arlen-Carroll Nov. 24
Pathe Feature#
9520 The Cop— William Boyd Aug. 19
9521 The Red Mark Aug. 26
9671 The Black Ace Don Coleman Sept. 2
9544 Man-Made Women — L. Joy-H. B. Warner. .Sept 9
9519 Craig’s Wife — I. Rich (reset) Sept. 16
9513 Power — Wm. Boyd Sept. 23
9511 The King of Kings — H. B. Warner Sept. 23
9511 The King of Kings (S) — Warner (reset) . .Sept. 30
9621 Burning Bridges — Haryr Carey Sept. 30
9515 Celebrity — Robt. Armstrong Oct. 7
9545 Captain Swagger (S) — Rod La Rocque Oct. 14
9516 Show Folks (PT)— E. Quillan Oct. 21
9546 Forbidden Love — L. Damita Oct. 28
9531 Sal of Singapore (PT) — P. Haver Nov. 4
9532 Marked Money — Jr. Coghlan Nov. 11
9514 Annapolis (S) — Loff-Brown Nov. 18
9512 Love Over Night — R. La Roque (reset) Nov. 25
Rayart Features
Man From Headquarters — E. Roberts-C. Keefe. Aug. —
Sweet Sixteen — Helen Foster-Gertrude Olmsted. Aug. —
The City of Purple Dreams — Fraser-Bedford. . Sept. —
Sisters of Eve — B. Blythe-A. Stewart Sept. —
Isle of Lost Men — T. Santschi-A. Connor Oct. 15
Should a Girl Marry? — H. Foster-D’Keith Nov. 1
Tiffany-Stahl Features
Domestic Relations — Claire Windsor Aug. 15
The Toilers (S) — Fairbanksjr.- Ralston (reset) . Sept. 1
The Naughty Duchess — Southern-Warner (reset) .Sept. 10
Power of Silence — Bennett- Westwood (reset) . . . .Sept. 20
The Cavalier (S) — R. Talmadge-B. Bedford Oct. 1
The Floating College — S. O’Neill-W. Collier Oct. 10
George Washington Cohen — George Jessel Oct. 20
Marriage by Contract (Tomorrow) (S) — Miller.. Nov. 1
The Gun Runner — R. Cortez-N. Lane Nov. 10
Queen of Burlesque — B. Bennett -J. E. Brown Nov. 20
United Artists Features
Tempest (S) — Barrymore-Horn (reset) Aug. 25
Two Lovers (S) — Colman-Banky (reset) Sept. 7
Battle of the Sexes (S) — Hersholt-Haver (reset) . .Oct. 12
Woman Disputed (S) — N. Talmadge Oct. 20
Revenge (S) — D. Del Rio (reset) Nov. 3
Awakening, The (S) — Banky (song film) Nov. 17
The Rescue (PT) — Colman-Damita Nov.
The Love Song (PT) — Goudal-Velez Nov.
Hell’s Angels (S) — Lyon-Nissen Roadshow
Universal Features
A5732 Home, James — L. LaPlante Sept. 2
A5734 Anybody Here Seen Kelly — T. Moore. ... Sept. 9
A5735 The Night Bird — Denny Sept 16
A359 Guardians of the Wild — Rex-J. Perrin. . .Sept. 16
A5733 Foreign Legion — L. Stone-N. Kerry Sept 23
A 5744 Grip of the Yukon — Marlowe-Bushman. Sept. 30
A360 The Cloud Dodger — Al. Wilson Sept. 30
A5754 Clearing the Trail — Gibson Oct. 7
A5738 How to Handle Women — Tryon Oct. 14
A5739 The Michigan Kid — Adoree-Nagel Oct. 21
A5740 Freedom of the Press — Lewis Stone Oct. 28
A5741 Man Who Laughs (S) — Philbin-Veidt. . . .Nov. 4
A5736 Jazz Mad — Hersholt-Nixon Nov. 11
A5743 The Danger Rider — Gibson Nov. 18
A5742 Red Lips — Rogers-Nixon Dec. 2
Warner Brothers
218 State Street Sadie (PT) — M. Loy-C. Nagel.. Aug. 25
228 Women They Talk About (PT) — Rich Sept 8
227 Caught in the Fog (PT) — McAvoy-Nagel. .Sept. 22
223 The Midnight Taxi (PT) — Moreno-Costello . Oct. 6
The Terror (AT) — M. McAvoy-E. E. Horton. Oct. 20
ONE AND TWO REEL COMEDIES
Educational — One Reel
He Tried to Please — Collins-Hutton Aug. 12
Troubles Galore — Collins-Ruby McCoy Aug. 26
Cook, Papa, Cook — Murdock-Hutton-Cameo Sept. 9
Wife Trouble — Graves-Cameo Sept. 23
The Lucky Duck — Dale-Cameo Oct. 7
All in Fun — Mandy-Cameo Oct. 21
Hay Wire — Stone-Dale-Cameo Nov. 4
Bumping Along — Stone-Marshall-Cameo Nov. 18
Educational — Two Reels
Goofy Birds — Bowers Aug. 12
Just Dandy — Drew-Mermaid Aug. 19
Wedded Blisters — Lupino-Boyd-Tuxedo Aug. 26
Hot Luck — Big Boy- Juvenile Sept 2
O ctober 20, 1928
Partial Index No. 5
Pirates Beware — Lupino Lane
Girlies Behave — Drew-Ideal
Call Your Shots— A1 St. John-Mermaid
Polar Perils— Monty Collins-Mermaid . .
Companionate Service — Devore
Come to Papa — Big Boy-Juvenile
Stage Frignts — Davis-Mermaid
Fisticuffs — Lupino Lane v
Making Whoopee — T uxedo Comedy
The Quiet Worker — Drew-Ideal
Hold That Monkey — Collins-Mermaid. . .
F B O — One Reel
Believe It or Not — Curiosities
Fishing and How — Curiosities
Pets — Curiosities
Facts or Fancies — Curiosities
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Sept. 9' Baby Feud — Krazy Kat
Sept. 9 Koko Heaves Ho — Inkwell Imps .
Sept. 16 Sea Sword — Krazy Kat
Sept. 30 ' Koko’s Big Pull — -Inkwell Imps . .
Oct. 7/ Show Vote — Krazy Kat
Oct. 14 ( Koko Kleans Up — Inkwell Imps . .
Oct. 21 The Phantom Trail — Krazy Kat. .
Oct. 28 Koko’s Parade — Inkwell Imps...
Oct. 28 y Some Easy, Go Slow — Krazy Kat .
Nov. 4 y Koko’s Dog Gone — Inkwell Imps.
Nov. 11 Beaches and Scream — Krazy Kat.
Koko in the Rough — Inkwell Imps.
Nicked Nags — Krazy Kat
Sept 26 Koko’s Magic — Inkwell Imps
qc^ iQ The Liar Bird — Krazy Kat
'. '. '. '. 1 ’. '. Oct'. 24
N°v- 7 Paramount — Two Reels
Aug. 18
Aug. 25
Sept. 1
Sept. 8
. Sept. 15
. Sept. 22
. Sept. 29
. .Oct. 6
, .Oct. 13
..Oct. 20
. .Oct. 27
. Nov. 3
.Nov. 10
.Nov. 17
.Nov. 24
F B O — Two Reels
Jessie's James — Vaughn-Cooke Aug. 26
The Wages of Synthetic — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 2
Mickey’s Movies — Micky McGuire Sept. 2
You Just Know She Dares ’Em— Vaughn-Cooke . .Sept. 9
Horsefeathers— Barney Google-Davis-Hallum... . Sept. 9
Fooling Casper— Toots and Casper-Hill-Duncan. . Sept. 16
The Arabian Fights — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 16
Ruth Is Stranger Than Fiction — Vaughn-Cooke. . Sept. 23
The Sweet Buy and Buy— Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 30
Mickey’s Rivals — Mickey McGuire Sept. 30
Watch Your Pep — Vaughn-Cooke Oct. 7
OK MNX — Barney Google Oct. 7
Mild But She Satisfies — Caughn-Cooke Oct. 14
What a Wife — Hill-Duncan Oct. 14
What a Wife — Hill-Duncan Otc. 14
That Wild Irish Pose — Vaughn-Cooke Oct. 21
The Six Best Fellows — Vaughn-Cooke Oct. 27
Mickey’s Detective — Mickey McGuire Oct. 28
The Naughty Forties — Vaughn-Cooke Nov. 4
T-Bone Handicap — Barney Google Nov. 4
Broadway Ladies — Vaughn-Cooke Nov. 11
The Family Meal Ticket— Hill-Duncan Nov. 11
Mickey’s Athletes — Mickey McGuire Nov. 25
Fox — One Reel
Snowbound — Varieties -Aug. 19
Neapolitan Days — Varieties Sept. 2
Through the Aisles — Varieties Sept. 16
Spanish Craftsmen — Varieties Sept. 30
Steeplechase Oct. 14
Drifting Through Gascony * Oct. 28
Glories of the Evening Nov. 11
Monument Valley Nov. 25
Dizzy Diver (S) — Dooley (reset) Aug. 11
Hot Scotch (S) — MacDuff (reset) Aug. 18
Stop Kidding (S) — Vernon (reset) Aug. 25
Skating Home — Chorus Girl Sept. 1
Two Masters — Stars & Authors (reset) Sept. 8
Vacation Waves (S) — Horton (set) Sept. 15
The Sock Exchange (S) — Vernon (set) Sept. 22
Oriental Hugs (S) — Dooley Sept. 29
Loose Change — MacDuff Oct. 6
Picture My Astonishment — Chorus Girl Oct. 13
Call Again — Horton Oct. 30
The Dancing Town — Stars and Authors Oct. 27
Hot Sparks — Vernon Nov. 3
A She-Going Sailor — Dooley Nov. 10
Lay on MacDuff — MacDuff Nov. 17
Believe It or Not — Chorus Girl Nov. 24
Pathe — Two Reels
His Unlucky Night — Sennett Aug. 12
Smith’s Restaurant — Smith Family Aug. 19
The Chicken — Sennett Aug. 26
His Royal Slyness — Harold Lloyd (re-issue) Sept. 2
Taxi for Two — Sennett-J. Cooper Sept. 2
Caught in the Kitchen — Sennett-B. Bevan Sept. 9
A Dumb Waiter — Sennett-J. Burke Sept. 16
The Campus Carmen — Sennett Girls Sept. 23
Motor Boat Mamas — Sennett Sept. 3o
No Picnic — Smitty-Dempsey Oct. 7
The Bargain Hunt — Sennett De Luxe Oct. 14
Smith’s Catalina Rowboat Race. . Sennett- Smith. . .Oct. 21
Taxi Scandal — Sennett-Cooper Oct. 28
Hubby’s Latest Alibi — Sennett-Bevan Nov. 4
A Jim Jam Janitor — Sennett-Burke Nov. 11
No Sale — Smitty-Hamilton Nov. 18
The Campus Vamp — Sennett Girls Nov. 25
Fox — Two Reels
Her Mother’s Back — Imperial Aug. 19
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
The Eagle’s Nest — Oddity Aug. 18
The Sacred Baboon — Oddity Sept. 1
Bits of Africa — Oddity Sept. 15
Murder — Oddity Sept. 29
World’s Playground — Oddity Oct. 13
Wives For Sale — Oddity Oct. 27
Lonely Lapland — Oddity Nov. 10
Savage Customs — Oddity Nov. 24
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Imagine My Embarrassment (S) — Chase Sept. 1
Should Married Men Go Home — Laurel-Hardy. . . Sept. 8
That Night — All Star Sept. 15
Growing Pains (S) — Gang Sept. 22
Heart of Gen. Lee — Events Sept. 22
Early to Bed— Laurel-Hardy Oct. 6
Do Gentlemen Snore — Stars Oct. 13
The 01’ Gray House (S) — Gang Oct. 20
All Parts — Chase Oct. 27
Two Tars — Laurel-Hardy Nov. 3
The Boy Friend — Stars Nov. 10
Madame Dubarry — Events Nov. 17
School Begins — Gang Nov. 17
The Booster (S) — Gang Nov. 24
Paramount — One Reel
Koko’s Chase — Inkwell Imps Aug. 11
Universal — One Reel
King of Shebas — Drugstore (reset) Aug. 13
Hot Dog — Oswald Cartoon (reset) Aug. 20
A Hurry Up Marriage — Harold Highbrow (re.) .Aug. 27
Sky Scrapper — Oswald Cartoon Sept. 3
Hollywood or Bust — Horace in Hollywood Sept. 10
Mississippi Mud — Oswald Cartoon Sept. 17
Panicky Pancakes — Oswald Cartoon Oct. 1
Come on, Horace — Horace in Hollywood Oct.’ 8
The Fiery Fireman — Oswald Cartoon Oct. 15
Bull-Oney — Oswald Cartoon Oct.29
Fun in the Clouds — Horace in Hollywood Nov. 5
Rocks and Socks — Oswald Cartoon Nov. 12
Universal — Two Reels
Newlyweds’ Anniversary — Jr. Jewel Aug. 6
McGinis vs. Jones — Stern Bros Aug. 8
Busting Buster — Stern Bros. Aug. 15
She’s My Girl — Stern Bros Aug. 22
Husbands Won’t Tell — Stern Bros Aug. 29
Newlyweds’ Hard Luck — Jr. Jewel Sept. 5
Rubber Necks — Stern Bros Sept. 12
Half Back Buster, Stern Bros Sept. 19
Just Wait — Stern Bros Sept. 26
Newlywed’s Unwelcome — Jr. Jewel Oct. 3
Look Pleasant — Stern Bros Oct. 10
Buster Trims Up — Stern Bros Oct. 17
Shooting the Bull — Stern Bros Oct. 17
Newlywed’s Court Trouble — Jr. Jewel Oct. 31
Cross Country Bunion Race — Stern Bros Nov. 7
Teacher’s Pest — Stem Bros Nov. 14
CHART OF RELEASE DAYS FOR ALL NEWS WEEKLIES
International News
Pathe News
Fox News
Kinograms
Paramount N
ews
M-G-M New.
Even Odd
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Even
1 Odd
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
ReL
ReL
ReL
ReL
Ret
ReL
Ret
Albany
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sat 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Wed.
0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Atlanta
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
i
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Boston
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. I
Thur.
l
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Buffalo
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
l
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Butte
...Wed. 4
Sat 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. ‘ 3
Tues. 3
—
—
Tue. 3
Sat
3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Charleston
Thur. 1
—
—
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
—
—
—
—
Charlotte
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Chicago
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Cincinnati
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Cleveland
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed.
0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Columbus . . . .
...
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
—
—
Dallas
. . .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Mon. 2
Sat 3
Wed. 4
Sat.
3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Denver
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Mon. 2
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat
3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Des Moines . . .
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed.
0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Detroit
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
El Paso
—
—
—
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
—
—
—
—
—
—
Indianapolis . . .
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Jacksonville ...
Thur. 1
—
—
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
—
—
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
—
—
Kansas City .. .
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Los Angeles . . .
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Sun. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Tue. 3
Sat.
3
Tues. 3
Sat 3
Memphis
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Milwaukee . . . .
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Minneapolis . . .
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sat. 3
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
New Haven . . .
. . .Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
New Orleans . .
Thur. 1
Thur. 5
Fri. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Mon. 2
Fri. 2
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
New York . . . .
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed.
0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Oklahoma City
. . . Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 4
Sat
3
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Omaha
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Peoria
. . .
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
—
—
Philadelphia ...
...Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Pittsburgh
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Portland, Ore.
. . .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Mon. 5
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
—
—
Wed. 4
Sun.
4
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Portland, Me. .
. . .Sun. 1
Thur. 1
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
—
—
St Louis
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Salt Lake City.
. . .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Fri.
2
Wed. 4
Sat 3
San Antonio . .
..
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wed. 4
Sat
3
—
—
San Francisco .
. . .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Sun. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Tue. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat
3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Seattle
. . .Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Sat. 3
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat.
3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sioux Falls . . .
Thur. 1
—
—
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
—
—
WeH 0
Washington
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Wichita, Kans.
. . Mon. 2
Thur. 1
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wilkes Barre .
. . .
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur.
1
—
—
Winnipeg
—
—
Mon. 5
—
—
—
—
—
—
NEW YORK RELEASE DATES OF THE DIFFERENT NEWS WEEKLIES
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer
15 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 3
16 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 6
17 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 10
18 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 13
19 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 17
20 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 20
21 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 24
22 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 27
23 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 31
24 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 3
25 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 7
26 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 10
27 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 14
28 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 17
Paramount
20 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 3
21 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 6
22 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 10
23 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 13
24 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 17
25 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 20
26 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 24
27 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 27
28 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 31
29 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 3
30 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 7
31 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 10
32 Even Number. . . .Wednesday, Nov. 14
33 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 17
Fox
3 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 3
4 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 6
5 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 10
6 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 13
7 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 17
8 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 20
9 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 24
10 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 27
11 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 31
12 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 3
13 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 7
14 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 10
15 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 14
16 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 17
Pathe
82 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 3
83 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 6
84 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 10
85 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 13
86 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 17
87 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 20
88 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 24
89 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 27
90 Even Number Wednesday, Oct. 31
91 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 3
92 Even Number. .. .Wednesday, Nov. 7
93 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 10
94 Even Number. . . .Wednesday, Nov. 14
95 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 17
International
79 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 3
80 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 6
81 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 10
82 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 13
83 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 17
84 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 20
85 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 24
86 Even Number Saturday, Oct. 27
87 Odd Number Wednesday, Oct. 31
88 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 3
89 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 7
90 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 10
91 Odd Number Wednesday, Nov. 14
92 Even Number Saturday, Nov. 17
Kinograms
5436 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Oct. 3
5437 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 6
5438 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Oct. 10
5439 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 13
5440 Even Number ... Wednesday, Oct. 17
5441 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 20
5442 Even Number ... Wednesday, Oct. 24
5443 Odd Number Saturday, Oct. 27
5444 Even Number. . .Wednesday, Oct. 31
5445 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 3
5446 Even Number . .Wednesday, Nov. 7
5447 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 10
5448 Even Number . .Wednesday, Nov. 14
5449 Odd Number Saturday, Nov. 17
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1928
No. 43
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments--No. 7
After seeing and hearing “The Singing Fool,” I could
not help coming to the conclusion that talking pictures
are here to stay, that they are a permanent institution, a
new form of entertainment, the kind that fires the imagi-
nation of the picture-goer.
There is, however, this to say — before talking pictures
can become a permanent institution, two things are neces-
sary : good talking pictures, pictures of the caliber of “The
Singing Fool,” and instruments that will give the best
tone quality possible.
How talking pictures of “The Singing Fool” quality can
be made is a problem that concerns the producers of such
pictures ; what concerns us is to determine what instru-
ment will give the best tone quality.
In the first article of this series, I expressed the theo-
retical opinion that the film method of sound recording
and reproducing is better than the disc method, and that
of the two types of film recording and reproducing, the
variable density and the variable width, the variable width
is the better. Since that time, I have given the matter a
practical study and am now thoroughly convinced that my
opinion of the variable width (Photophone) method of
sound recording and reproducing is correct, not only the-
oretically but also practically.
Before going into the subject with a view to demon-
strating by technical proof why the variable w'idth type of
sound recording and reproducing is better than the variable
density method, kt us once more discuss the disadvantages
of the disc system. As I said in the first article of this
series, the disc system does not record some of the audible
high and low frequency sounds for the reason that, first,
much of the vibrating energy generated either by the vocal
cords or by a musical instrument is lost, being used up to
cause the cutting tool to cut into the wax ; and secondly
the producers fear to record very low sounds for the reason
that the oscillation of the cutting tool sideways is so great
when affected by such sounds that it breaks the wall of the
groove. In fact, the disc system cannot reproduce sounds
of lower than 120 cycle frequency, or of higher frequency
than 3,500 cycles, as against 60 and 5,000 cycles, respec-
tively, recorded by the film method.
For the benefit of those that want the meaning of the
word “cycles” defined more clearly let me say that a
“cycle” is the wave that is generated by a vibrating body ;
and the number of cycles is the number of equidistant
waves generated by such body per second. As the pitch of
sound depends on the number of cycles, the fewer the
cycles per second the lower the note, and the higher the
cycles per second the higher the note.
* * *
As said, in the low-frequency region, the disc system
does not record sounds below 120 cycles, whereas the film
system records as low as 60 cycles ; and that, in the high-
frequency region, the disc system does not go above 3,500,
whereas the film system records with satisfactory results
as high as 5,000 cycles. This represents a loss in the disc
system of as much as one full octave on either end of the
musical scale. In other words, one octave is cut off from
the scale in the bass note end, and one octave in the high
note end. This is like trying to reproduce player-piano
music by using the old style of sixty-six note player-piano
instead of the modern eighty-eight note. The fact that a
full octave is cut off from the low frequency sound region
may be noticed in the playing of a photo-orchestra ; one
will see the hand of the bass violinist move to and fro,
the cymbalist strike the cymbal, the bass drummer hit
the bass drum, but one will not hear the sound. I have
noticed the same effect in a bass guitar ; I saw the fingers
of the player strike the strings, but I heard no sound.
Next time you see a talking or a sound picture that con-
tains shooting, notice that the shots sound like wind puffs.
Such sounds are difficult of recording on the disc, as are
several other kinds of sounds.
There are other disadvantages in the disc system. The
fact, for example, that the inside grooves of the disc are
of smaller circumference than the outside grooves pro-
duces an unequal tone quality ; it gets worse and worse
as the needle approaches the end of the record, for this
reason : The outermost groove in a sixteen-inch record is
approximately fifty inches long, whereas the innermost
groove is, assuming that the grooves end within two and
one-half inches of the centre of the record, only fifteen
inches. Thus you will see that a given note is recorded,
on the outside, in a groove fifty inches long, whereas
on the inside, in a groove only fifteen inches long ; and as
the tone quality depends on length, the inside grooves do
not record as many of the overtones as do the outside
grooves, and naturally the tone quality grows poorer the
further the needle gets away from the outer end of the
record.
You may be surprised to know that the 16-inch syn-
chronous records, which are run at 33)4 revolutions per
minute, do not give as good a tone quality as do the 12-inch
commercial records, for this reason : In the synchronous
(16-inch) record, .5555 of a turn is run in one second, or
28 inches of groove, if the outside grooves are taken as the
basis of calculation ; whereas in the commercial ( 12-inch )
record, the circumference of who.se outside groove is
37 inches, about one and three- tenths of a turn are run
in one second, because they are run at 78 revolutions per
minute; and as the length of the groove is three (3.1416)
times twelve inches, or about 37)4 inches, approximately
49 inches of groove length are run in one second. In
other words, a note of one second duration is recorded, in
the case of the synchronous disc record, on 28 inches of
groove length, whereas in the commercial disc record, on
49 inches of groove length ; and as the tone quality de-
pends, as said, on length, you will realize, I am sure,
why tire commercial record gives at least fifty per cent,
better tone quality than does the synchronous record.
There are still other disadvantages in this system: The
needle, for example, may jump and enter another groove,
This will, you realize, I am sure, throw the action and
words or sound out of synchronism. I have been in-
formed reliably that while “The Jazz Singer” was shown
in this city, the operator one evening had to change fifteen
records. The needle either jumped or broke the wall of the
groove and entered another groove while it was on the
spot of the record where low-frequency sounds had been
recorded. If the arm bears lightly on the record, the
needle may j ump the groove ; if it bears heavily on it, it
wears out the record after three or four playings.
The fact that the arm changes its angle, too, is detri-
mental to the quality of sound.
The fact that the needle wears off considerably before
reaching the end of the record, even in one run, is still
another drawback. If one were to examine the needle
under a microscope after it had run even over half of
the record one will be surprised to see how much it is
worn off. The record itself wears down, too; after it is
used five or six times it must be replaced, if one is to get
the best tone quality possible out of the limited possibilities
of this system.
If the film is patched in several places and the part cut
off is not put back from newr stock, the action and words
are thrown out of synchronism. This will necessitate the
constant replacing of prints, making the cost of film to the
smaller exhibitor almost prohibitive.
The discs are liable to break while in transit. A mix-up
in shipment may also occur, the exhibitor receiving the
( Continued on last page )
170
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Take Me Home” — with Bebe Daniels
( Paramount , Oct. 13; 5,614 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
Not bad, although not anywhere near the quality of
former Bebe Daniels contributions. It is a different
kind of story from those that were given Miss Daniels
in the past. Instead of being an athlete, she is a
chorus girl, although she does not miss the opportun-
ity of showing her strength when she gives the leading
woman of the company a good beating. There is
mild pathos in the part of Miss Daniels, and a great
deal of comedy. The comedy is provoked by the
situations as well as by Miss Daniels’ good acting, but
chiefly by Miss Daniels’ acting.
The story is that of a young chorus girl who, al-
though not flush with money, and has an invalid
sister to support, decides to help a young man (hero),
who is down and out. She eventually helps him get a
job as a chorus boy in her own company. She falls
in love with him; he, too, falls in love with her. The
temperamental star becomes fascinated with him and
throws her lines out to catch him. She invites him to
her home, tricking the hero by making him believe
that she would send for the heroine afterwards, when
in reality she did not intend to do so. The heroine is
heart-broken and, thinking that the hero is false,
turns against him. In the end, however, she is con-
vinced that he is true to her.
The plot has been founded on a story by Harlan
Thompson and Grover Jones. The picture has been
directed by Marshall Neilan well. Neil Hamilton is
the hero. Lilyan Tashman is the temperamental
actress. Joe Brown, star of the FBO picture “The
Hit of the Show,” is the friend of the heroine, who
brings about her reconciliation with the hero.
“Red Lips” — with Charles Rogers
and Marian Nixon
( Universal , Dec. 2; 6,957 ft.; 80 to 99 min.)
Not much to it. It is a picture whose plot has been
founded on the Percy Marks’ story, “The Plastic
Age,” which was put into picture by B. P. Schulberg
in 1925, so successfully. The interest is never aroused
very tense, and there is very little sympathy for any
of the characters. The characterization of Miss Nixon
is so bad that one feels antipathy for her rather than
sympathy.
It is the story of a young college boy, (hero) crack
football player, who falls in love with one of his room-
mate’s girl (heroine), whose picture hung on the
wall of their room; he had never seen the girl. At a
fraternity affair he meets the heroine. The heroine
enters his dormitory at night with other students.
The hero returns and is shocked to find her there. He
orders her away, telling her that she has violated the
rules of the college. A friend tells the heroine that
she is an iinpcdence to his career and she decides to
leave town quietly. The hero forms the opinion that
she is a frivolous girl, and turns against her, even
though he loves her. In the end, however, she proves
to him that she loves him. They become reconciled.
Melville Brown has directed the picture. Hugh
Trevor, Stanley Taylor, Hayden Stevenson, and others
are in the cast.
“The Naughty Duchess” with H. B. Warner
and Eve Southern
( Tiffany-Stahl , Oct. 10; 5,271 ft.; 61 to 75 min.)
A fair program picture for neighborhood houses. It is
conventionally directed and acted according to pattern.
H. B. Warner gives his usual performance, well acted and
interesting. Miss Southern is charming as the girl who
captivates all the men by her beauty. Duncan Rinaldo is
fair enough as a ladies’ man.
The story revolves around a young woman who enters
the train and requests the passenger, who turns out to be
a Duke, to protect her from the police by saying that she
is his wife. This he does, and because the detectives fol-
low them all the way to his house, he has to pretend to
his household that she is his wife and the usual complica-
tions follow. The Duke falls in love with her, and de-
cides that he really does want to marry her. And when
the detective reaches the house with a warrant to arrest
her, he decides to protect her at any cost. After telling
him a wild story of having been lured to a roadhouse and
October 27, 1928
been forced to kill her admirer to protect her honor, he
learns that she is really dodging a process server and so
he promises to stand bail for her.
The picture was directed by Tom Terriss, the plot has
been suggested by the Anthony Hope novel, “The Indis-
cretion of the Duchess.” Others in the cast are Gertrude
Astor as the Duke’s sweetheart, and Martha Mattox as
the housekeeper.
“While the City Sleeps” — with Lon Chaney
( Me tro-Go Idivyn, Sept. 29; 7,231 ft.; 84 to 103 min.)
This is somewhat an imitation of “Underworld,”
only that its hero, unlike the hero in “Underworld,”
is on the side of the law and order; he is a plain-
clothes man, the kind who always complain about
their lot but who really like their work. The specta-
tor’s interest is held pretty tight by the doings of Mr.
Chaney, who sets out to get his man (villain), a
leader of a gang of underworld characters. Every time
a crime is committed the villain proves that he was
one mile away from the scene of the crime. For this
he had been nicknamed “Mile-away” Skeeter. The
real thrills come when the hero eventually detects the
hideout of the villain and surrounds his lair, placing
machine guns in a house opposite the hideout. When the
villain and his gangsters open the door to enter an auto-
mobile to drive away so as to escape from the police, the
policemen open fire and kill most of the gangsters on the
spot. The villain, however, escapes. But the hero is hot on
his trail, until he eventually overtakes him and shoots
and kills him.
There is considerable comedy, caused by Polly Moran,
who is supposed to be in love with the hero.
The story has been written by A. P. Younger. The
picture has been directed by Jack Conway. Anita Page is
the young heroine. Carroll Nye is tire young man that
loved the heroine. Wheeler Oakman is the villain. Mae
Busch, Lydia Yeamans Titus, William Orlamond and
others are in the cast.
“Me, Gangster” — with June Collyer, Don
Terry and Anders Randolf
(Fox, Oct. 14; 6,042 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
A good crook melodrama. The action is fast, it has
thrills and suspense as well as a love story. It also con-
veys a moral that no matter what pull a criminal may
have, when he commits a crime he is bound to be caught
and made to suffer for it.
The story revolves around a young gangster who is
reading pages from his diary, as the story of his life
unfolds from the time he was a little chap of about four,
learning to drink at his father’s knees, thence on to his
eleventh year when he has already shown signs of being
a hoodlum, having joined the corner gang of roughnecks,
and so on to his nineteenth year when, as a full-fledged
gangster, he deceives his loving mother and “kids” his
politician father about his looking for work. Of course
he is in love with the heroine, a hard-working girl who
has an influence for good over him, even though this does
not keep him from robbing and even shooting his victims.
His father was able to save him from jail after he was
caught the first time and he became more daring. But he
is caught and sent to jail after committing a brazen rob-
bery and serves his time. Finally he reforms when he is
paroled and promises his sweetheart he would return the
stolen money when he was released, having told her
where he had hidden it so that she could take it to her
home. The gang follows him to the house and they have
a terrific fight. The hero with the help of a tenant in the
house who had come up to find out what all the noise
was about, succeeds in calling the police and of course
the money is restored to its rightful owner and hero and
heroine are united.
The sordid scenes’ in the tenament are realistic as are
the scenes in the jail. Anders Randolf is very good in
his role of roughneck father who had risen from steve-
dore to ward-heeler, taking bribes from gambling joints
and otherwise protecting the criminals of his district ;
then getting a swell head, and being reduced in power,
once more becoming a dock worker. Don Terry is like-
able as the gangster; he is fearless and acts naturally.
Miss Colyer is charming. Others in the cast are Burr
McIntosh and Gustav Von Seyffertitz. The picture,
adapted from the Charles Francis Coe novel, was directed
skillfully by Raoul Walsh.
October 27, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
‘‘Sal of Singapore” — with Alan Hale
and Phyllis Haver
(Pat'ie, Nov. 4; 6,804 ft.; 79 to 97 min.)
A good melodrama, with a great deal of heart inter-
est and some comedy. It is the story of a captain of
a sail ship, who, while returning to his ship finds in
the skiff a baby. He decides to keep it and to find
some woman to take care of it. He comes upon
Singapore Sal, a girl of the underworld, and lures her
to his ship where he locks her in his cabin until they
weigh anchor and set sail. Then he liberates her. At
first she is furious but the cries of the baby attract her
and she nurses it. On their return to San Francisco
the baby becomes ill, and both spend sleepless nights
by its bedside, nursing it and praying for its recovery.
When they reach Golden Gate the hero, who had
learned to love the heroine, tells her that she has
greater claim on the baby than he had, and asks her
to take it along when she goes ashore. The heroine,
feeling inwardly that she is not fit to raise a baby,
leaves a note telling the hero to keep the baby and to
forget her. She then puts on the cheap finery she had
worn when she was taken to the ship and goes into
the ship of a rival of the hero, which ship was just
setting sail for distant lands. The hero learns that the
heroine had gone aboard his rival s ship and, ordering
his men to weigh anchor, sets sail and overtakes the
other ship and, after a fight between the two crews,
takes the heroine away. The heroine is glad to be
"rescued,” for she came to realize that she could not
live without the baby and the hero. t
The plot has been founded on Dale Collins "ihe
Sentimentalist.” The picture has been directed by
Howard Higgin. Fred Kohler is the rival. Jules
Cowles, Dan Wolheim and others are in the cast.
FACTS ABOUT TALKING PICTURES
( Continued from other side)
Comparing the tone quality of these two systems and
expressing the results in percentages, one may say that—
A film made by the Movietone process and run on a
“Movietone” type of talking picture instrument should
give about 40 per cent, tone quality.
A film made by the Movietone process and run on a
Photophone instrument should give 65 per cent, tone
quality.
A film made by the Photophone process and run on a
“Movietone” instrument should give 75 per cent, tone
quality-
A film made by the Photophone process and run on a
Photophone instrument should give about 90 per cent, tone
quality.
The following producers-distributors use the Movietone
system in addition to Fox : Paramount, Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer, First National, Universal, and Columbia.
* * *
Comparing the variable density system with the disc
system one may say that the disc system, with all its lim-
itations, is better than the variable density system for the
reason that the former, even though it loses an octave from
each end of the musical scale, is free from the grinding
noises that accompany a film made by the variable density,
or Movietone, system.
In making up your mind what instrument to buy, how-
ever, you must take into consideration that Warner Broth-
ers, who use, as you know, the disc system, are far ahead
of any other producer of talking pictures. They have, for
example, produced “The Jazz Singer” ; and it has made
money for the exhibitors. They have made “The Terror,”
and it is pretty sure to draw well. And they have made
“The Singing Fool,” which, in this city, has had a bigger
advance sale than any picture that has ever been produced
during the entire life of the motion picture industry. And
they have produced other money-makers. They have been
“dabbling” in talking pictures for over two years now and
have solved problems that will require the other producers
as long to solve. So no matter how wrong in principle is
the disc system ; it is now bringing results to exhibitors.
It will take the other producers two years before they catch
up with Warners. And by the time they catch up with
them, the Warner boys may again be found several jumps
ahead.
But even though the Warners are just now ahead of every
171
other talking picture producer, the disc system cannot
endure ; it is wrong in principle, and when those of the
producers that use, or will use, the Photophone system,
or a better system than the Photophone, will start making
good talking pictures, it will be the beginning of the end
for this system. Those that use it, then, will be compelled
to adopt the best film system in existence. They will have
to ; the public will compel them to, through lack of support
at the box office. When the exhibitor that installs the best
talking picture instrument, for example, starts showing as
good talking pictures as his disc system using competitor,
the public will be able to compare the two systems and will
realize how inferior the disc system is. If they do not
drop the disc system, the producers will not be able to
receive as high film rentals as will those that produce films
with the best existing system.
As far as interchangeability is concerned, even though it
is bothering your minds now, let me say that this is not your
problem ; it is a problem that belongs to the producers, and
by whom it will be solved. They have to solve it, for this
reason :
Suppose there are one thousand Photophone instruments,
or instruments even better than the Photophone, which may
be invented, and the one thousand owners of them are will-
ing to pay one thousand dollars each for a particular film,
a film, say, like the "The Singing Fool” ; if the producer
refuses to let them have the film, his loss of revenue will
be nearly one million dollars, or three-fourths of that
amount, if one may take into consideration that the film
may be run as silent at reduced rentals. How often will the
producers be able to stand such a loss? After all, the
manufacturer of the instruments, who, by a provision in
his contract with the producers, forbids such producers to
let them rent their talking pictures to those that have not
installed his brand of instrument, will not be the sufferers.
So you realize, I am sure,, that it is altogether uneconom-
ical, against all sound logic, for such a condition to be
allowed to exist. If it should be allowed to exist, then
these producers will be out of luck ; for no one can arrest
progress. If a particular system can give better tone qual-
ity, such system will find its way into the theatres, in some
way, patents or no patents, restrictions or no restrictions.
After all, the public will have something to say in this
matter.
♦ * *
Now comes the question of non-synchronous instruments :
Since the Photophone non-synchronous instrument is the
only one at present that uses the cone system of sound pro-
jection, it follows that this instrument is the only one that
can give the best tone quality obtainable, just now. So it is
up to you whether you want to wait to get the best, or to go
ahead and get the best that can be obtained just now.
There is just one more observation that I desire to make
to those of exhibitors that have installed or are intending
to install, a talking picture instrument, of any kind : Do
not buy sound pictures, because you can give a better tone
quality with records obtained either from the Victor Phono-
graph Company, or from the Brunswick Company, or from
any other record making company. Install a non-syn-
chronous instrument and “synchronize” them yourself.
There is no sense in paying big money for canned music of
the worst kind. As far as the sound effects are concerned,
if you want to pay one hundred dollars a day to hear some
character cry, go ahead and pay it. Nobody can stop you.
But why not buy a record with “tears” and make that char-
acter cry for seventy-five cents yourself, thus saving one
hundred dollars or more a day? The Platter Cabinet
Company, manufacturers of the Phototone, are about to
make records with all the sounds known in life, even
laughing and crying. The Victor Phonograph Company
will, I am sure, make such records if requested. So will
the Brunswick Company. By aid of these records, you
can reproduce any sound a particular situation demands,
at little cost. And produce it far better than some makers
of talking pictures can. Even if the sound effects that are
bought with the film were to be as good as the “home
made,” why pay so heavily for the sound rights, when
you can manufacture them yourself? What you really
need to stimulate your business is not sound pictures, but
talking pictures. Most of the sound pictures put out just
now will drive business away instead of attracting it.
I have tried to present you with accurate information to
enable you to determine what kind of talking picture instru-
ment will give the greatest satisfaction to your public.
Study these facts carefully, and then use your own judg-
ment.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
October 27, 1928
172
wrong discs. These possibilities the distributors are try-
ing to overcome by shipping two or three sets of records
at different times. This, however, causes the express
charges to mount.
In the film system of sound recording and reproducing,
no such drawbacks exist, because of the fact that the
sound is, as said, imprinted on the film itself.
* * *
Let us now discuss the advantages of the variable width
system of sound recording and reproducing over the variable
density system :
As said in the first article about the two film systems, in
the variable density (Movietone) system, the various
shades of lines run across the sound track ; whereas in the
variable width (Photophone) system, the sound track is
transparent on one side, and dark on the other, the division
line resembling, at times a saw, with the teeth uneven in
length, at times a miniature mountain range, the shape of
the “mountain” ridge depending on the pitch and volume
of sound. In order for you to get a clearer conception of
what these sound tracks are, examine the two cuts, which
have been reproduced elsewhere in this issue. They are
thirty-five times larger than the original. How large they
are you may realize from the fact that the height of each
cut represents one frame.
I have already said that any defects on the emulsion of
the variable density system of sound track affects the
quality of sound detrimentally, because there is no way by
which they could be corrected. This you will realize fully
well when you bear in mind that defects occur either in
the manufacture of the raw stock or in developing. Such
Variable Density ( Movietone ) Sound Track.
defects cause a ground noise. I have noticed such noises
in almost every Fox film that I have so far reviewed. In
“The Four Devils” it is noticeable even to the untrained
ear. In "Win That Girl” it is very bad. In “Me Gangster,”
which is playing at the Roxy this week, it is “terrible.”
In fact it is a great surprise to me that Mr. Rothafel, whose
ears are so well tuned to music, could tolerate such noises.
They are enough to drive away patrons, not to attract
them.
Ground noises do not occur in the variable width system,
or at least they occur seldom, for the reason that the
variations of sound do not depend on “shadings” of the
emulsion, as you will notice when examining the proper
picture; the light goes through the transparent part, and
does not go through the dark part. Any defects on the
emulsion of the sound track of this system can be painted
over, and the defect eliminated. It is my opinion that the
variable density system of sound recording, if not dropped,
is going to cost the producers millions of dollars a year in
retakes and in discarded bad prints. When the print
gets a little old it has to be thrown on the junk pile. If
it is not withdrawn, it is going to drive an exhibitor’s
custom way. The producers should adopt the Photophone
system, because it gives the best results. The matter of
obtaining the rights to use that system is not, in my opin-
ion, difficult. If money is needed to secure these rights, the
Variable Width ( Photophone ) Sound Track.
producers will be the gainers in the end if they pay the
price. In the long run, they will have to adopt a better
method anyway ! Why not now ? Why continue throw-
ing money away, in addition to retarding the development
of this branch of entertainment?
* * *
Let us now discuss the two systems of sound projection,
the horn and the cone.
In the first article of this series, I stated that the cone
system of sound projection is better than the diaphragm-
horn system. After hearing “The Toilers,” which has
been synchronized by the Photophone system, I have come
to the conclusion that there is nothing in the market at
present that will even approach the tone quality of the
cone.
In order for you to understand the reasons why the cone
can give better tone quality than the diaphragm-horn sys-
tem, allow me to present you with some technical facts:
The vibrations of a sound-producing medium set up air
waves, which are projected into space. These waves, after
reflection and absorption, disappear when the vibrating
body ceases to vibrate. In the Photophone system, these
air waves are sent out into space as they are generated
by the cone, free from modification. In the horn system,
the air waves are generated by the vibrations of the dia-
phragm. After being generated, they go through the
horn. In the passage, they are modified, and even distorted,
so that when they reach one’s ear they are modified.
Another drawback in the horn system is the resonance.
According to the science of acoustics, each body has its
own sound pitch. When a note that is reproduced by the
diaghragm is of the same pitch as that of the horn, it sets
the horn to vibrating sympathetically, strengthening that
note, without affecting the other notes. This is what is
called resonance. It affects harmony adversely.
* * *
Summing it all up, one may say that examination of
these facts proves that the Photophone, or variable width,
system of sound recording, reproducing and projecting is
far superior to the Movietone, or variable density, system.
( Continued on other side )
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at ihe post olfice at Nev\ York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Bates:
United States ....... $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand . 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries , 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1,1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1928
No. 44
EVERYTHING IS ALL RIGHT NOW!
Now that the Toronto Convention came together,
“whereased” affiliated exhibitors into the MPTOA ranks,
and disbanded, going home with our friend Pete Wood-
hull holding the bridles for another year, no independent
exhibitor need worry. The millenium, which generations
have dreamed and seen it slip by, has come. It’s here ! I
am sure that by next year every one of you will be float-
ing in millions. ’Tis too bad that the convention was not
held before the selling season had been ushered in. If it
had, you would now be getting film for nothing ; or, to be
more accurate, the exchanges would be glad to let you
have it for nothing.
Everything is all right now !
Why ! Aren’t you now brother-members with producer-
distributors-exhibitors of the same organization? Just
think of it, you Cleveland exhibitor disturbers, who have
been keeping the industry sitting on needle points because
of your constant naggings ! Protection has been bothering
you. Allocation of product has been bothering you. I
really don’t know of anything that has not been bothering
you. But you will no longer have cause for complaint. If
you need Metro films, or Paramount Superspecials, or
Warner Brothers talking pictures, or First National, or
Universal, or the films of any other producer-distributor,
all you have to do is to go to Fred Desberg and tell him:
“Fred! I need some pictures. I prefer Metro-Goldwyn-
Mayer pictures and part of the best product you have con-
tracted for,” and I am sure Fred will reply: “Billy!” or
“George !” Here’s a list of what I’ve bought this season !
Take out of it what you want and leave me the rest !” For
isn’t Fred now a member of the board of directors of your
organization?
You, of the Chicago zone, too, are fortunate because of
the new order of things ; for all you have to do now is to
go to Sammy Katz and YOU’LL GET IT. I don’t know
where, but you’ll get it.
As far as you, the New York zone exhibitors, are con-
cerned, you’ll get it, and APLENTY, if you should decide
to call on Nick Schenck for part of his product — the
product he runs in the Loew theatres. I have never known
another individual as tender-hearted as Nick and the other
Loew Enterprises executives when it comes to giving up
film. Many exhibitors of this zone, competitors of Nick
Schenck, had to tell him quite often not to give up so much
for them, for he might hurt his own theatres. It is real
brotherly love with Nick.
I could travel from one end of the country to the other
showing how fortunate you are now. The only thing I am
afraid of is lest you get too greedy. Be reasonable ! When
you go to Fred, or to Sammy, or to Nick, don’t ask for
everything. Be content with half. Let them have the other
half.
Everything is all right now !
I really don’t see the need of arbitration boards any
longer. The brother-exchangemen would not think of
dragging you before the arbitration board. What matters
if the contract is lopsided? Pretty soon you will not need
any contracts. All you will have to do will be to take the
word of the salesmen. If any one of them should dare vio-
late his promise with you, Pete, the national president, the
man who knows how to ride two horses at the same
time so well, will be there to adjust everything for you.
Everything is all right now, even Hess’ Copyright Pro-
tection Bureau !
Brookhart Bill? Oh, no! You don’t need it now.
Didn’t Pete and the boys say so at Toronto? Besides, the
Brookhart Bill was proposed to help you get product. Now
that you can GET IT by merely asking for it, what need is
there of such a bill? Let us tell Senator Brookhart that
you are all happy now, and that you don’t need the Gov-
ernment to protect you. Pete and the gang WILL DO IT.
You are safer in their hands than you would be in the hands
of the Government.
Everything is all right now !
As to the contract committee, I suggest that we keep it
intact for the purpose of helping our friend Dick Biechele’s
son keep his job of hauling films from the exchanges to
the Kansas board of censors, at seventy-five dollars per, or
whatever the price “per” is.
Everything is all right now !
What worries me now is what friend Charlie Pettijohn
is going to do ! Heretofore he would while his hours away
by travelling arm in arm with Pete Woodhull from state
to state, attending exhibitor conventions, and trying to
drive it into your head what a fine thing it would be if
unaffiliated and affiliated exhibitors were to join the
same organization. But now that the thing is accomplished
his services will no longer be required. And as you hate,
I am sure, to see Charlie fade out of the picture, I sug-
gest that he start a golf school, giving the independent
exhibitors free golf lessons. The exhibitors wil get so fat
from being rich under the new regime that they will
need the exercise to keep weight down.
Since childhood I dreamed of the millenium. But who
would ever think that it would come about in my time ! And
it is all due to Charlie and Pete. Three cheers for them !
P. S. : I have just read in the trade papers that the
Omaha convention pledged allegiance to M. P. T. O. A.
Pete and Charlie, the Siamese Twins, were present.
The President of the Omaha M. P. T. O. A. has a great
heart. It was he that last fall, in an endeavor to protect
the interests of independent exhibitors, went to Washing-
ton, at his own expense, and dragged his lawyer along
with him, again at his expense, and told the Senate Com-
mitee that held the hearing how runious the Brookhart
Bill would prove to the interests of the distributors. With
big hearted men such as the President of M.P.T.O.A. of
Nebraska, you have nothing to fear. Your interests are
well protected.
THE SUBJECT OF MUSIC TAX
In the issue of September 29, I printed the following:
“Exhibitors that pay music tax to the Society of Com-
posers, Authors and Publishers will not be charged an
additional tax when they lease Victor ‘Pict-ur-music,’ as
this library is called; the Victor Phonograph Company is
paying the royalty to the Society, thus protecting its
subscribers.”
Through a conversation with a representative of the
Victor Phonograph Company I received the impression
that users of other than Victor records had to pay royalty
to the Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers,
irrespective of whether he paid such royalty for playing
other music.
Since that time I received a request for more definite
information on the subject. As a result I called on a repre-
sentative of the Society and was told by him that those
who pay royalty for sheet music will not have to pay other
royalty ; that only one royalty is charged by the organi-
zation he represented. In other words, an agreement be-
tween an exhibitor and the Society fixing the royalty on
a certain price per seat entitles such exhiitor to play any
kind of music, played on any kind of instrument.
ABOUT COLUMBIA’S “SUBMARINE”
The original title of “Submarine” was “Into the Depths.”
It was the working title, according to a news item in Co-
lumbia Chats, a house organ of this producer-distributor.
174
“The Home Towners” (AT) with a
Star Cast
( Warner Bros., date not yet set; synchr. 8,693 ft.)
This is what may be termed the first “stage
picture-play” that has been put into pictures ; that
is, it is an exact reproduction of George Cohan’s
stage play. Nine-tenths of it is conversation, and
only about one-tenth physical action. It is a com-
edy drama, the underlying idea being the mis-
fortune that a friend nearly brought upon another
friend through his narrow views about life. He
hailed from a small town, and his ideas were
those of a small-town man ; he viewed big city
people with small-town glasses. As a result, he
thought that all big-town people were crooks, un-
til a young man, brother of the sweetheart of the
big-town friend, by his manly conduct, brought
the small-town man to the realization that his
views about big town people were warped. This
brought about happiness all around.
There is comedy all the way through, and some
pathos. The characters live their part. Robert
.McWade, who takes the part of the man with
small town ideas, played the same part in the
stage play. He is superb. Gladys Brockwell, who
takes the part of this man’s wife, is very good,
too. Richard Bennett, as the big-town man, also is
very good. Others in the cast are : Robert Edeson,
Vera Lewis and Stanley Taylor. The picture was
directd by Bryan Foy.
While the dialogue is good, the tone quality is
not so good ; there is too much reverberation. It
is evident that the studio had not been made
thoroughly sound-proof. As a result, the talk is
somewhat irritating. On the whole, it is a fairly
good picture.
“Runaway Girls” with Shirley Mason and
Arthur Rankin
(Columbia ; Aug. 23; 5,725 ft.; 65 to 81 min.)
Fair. It is a modern story, conveying the lesson
to parents that neglect of their children forces
them to leave home, and that they fall into the
clutches of men who prey upon the young girls.
Shirley Mason is good enough as the college girl
who loves her parents very much and is waiting
for the school term to close so that she might re-
join them. Arthur Rankin is fair as the hero (her
sweetheart) who, too, is leaving college to seek a
career as reporter and saxaphone player.
The picture was directed by Mark Sandrich
from a story by Lillie Heyward. Others in the
cast are Hedda Hopper as the girl’s fast-living
mother; Alice Lake, as the manicurist, Edward
Earle who was good as the villain and George
Irving.
“Stool Pigeon” with Olive Borden and
Charles Delaney
(Columbia; Oct. 25; 5,792 ft.; 67 to 82 min.)
Still another gangster melodrama. Like its
predecessors, it has the usual thrills, suspense and
action but it is only an ordinary program picture.
Olive Borden as the hero’s sweetheart is fair
enough. Charles Delaney as the hero is not very
convincing as a crook because his great love for
his mother made him too much of a mother’s boy
November 3, 1928
to want to do anything that would bring sorrow to
her. Louis Natheaux is good as the leader of the
gang who suspencted the hero of snitching to the
detectives whenever a job was to be pulled, and so
was determined to take his life.
This time the young gangster (hero) is sus-
pected of betraying the gang to the police because
every time they planned a robbery the detectives
were on the scene and so frustrated the hold-up.
The leader attempted to kill him while the gang
were all in a dance hall but a cigarette case in his
pocket, given to him by his mother, prevented the
bullet from doing the trick. To prove that he was
not the stool-pigeon, even though he wanted to
quit the game, he agrees to join them in another
job. The heroine, thinking that her sweetheart
had been killed, to get even with the gang tells the
detectives. When it is too late to call them off,
learning that her sweetheart was not killed, she
tells the detectives that her boy friend was forced
to go with the gang to save his life. But when the
leader and the hero escape in their automobile,
which was wrecked in the accident, while the
leader had been killed, the hero, only wounded, is
allowed to go free and hero and heroine are
united, both wanting to go straight.
The picture was directed by Renaud Hoffman
from a story by Edward Meagher. Lucille Beau-
mont as the hero’s mother is sweet.
“The Midnight Taxi” (PT) with Antonio
Moreno and Helene Costello
( Warner Bros., Oct. 6; synchronised, 5,729 ft.)
There are about three situations where the char-
acters talk ; the remainder is synchronized with
music. The talk is not bad, but it is doubtful
whether it adds to the entertaining values of the
picture. It is a good melodrama, revolving around
bootleggers. There is suspense in most of the
situations. The suspense is caused by the fear
lest the hero lose his money as a result of framing
done to him by the villain and his gang, also boot-
leggers ; as well as lest he be arrested by the au-
thorities on circumstantial evidence, for the theft
of some bonds, even though he was not guilty.
Suspense is caused also by the knowledge that the
heroine was carrying on a dangerous game when
she joined the bootlegger crowd in an effort to
recover the stolen bonds from the thief and thus
prove the innocence of the man she loved, who
had been sent up the river for the disappearance
of the bonds from the bank where he was working
as a clerk. There are some thrills, too, caused by
the hero’s uncoupling of a car from a railroad
train ; the car had backed up and speeded down
hill, endangering his life as well as that of the
heroine. Thrills are caused also in the scenes
where the hero and heroine are shown, after they
had brought the car to a stop, surrounded by the
villain and his gang and being shot at ; they are
rescued when the authorities arrive.
The love affair between Antonio Moreno and
Helene Costello is done well.
The plot has been founded on a story by Greg-
ory Rogers. It was directed by John Adolphi
well. William Russell, Tommy Dugan, Myrna
Loy, Pat Harrigan and others are in the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
November 3, 1928
175
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Varsity” (PT) with Charles Rogers, Mary
Brian and Chester Conklin
( Paramount , Oct. 27 ; 5,802 ft.; 67 to 82 min.)
In two or three of the situations the characters
talk; in the remainder, the picture is synchro-
nized. Here and there there is an attempt to
imitate sound effects.
The talking part of it is poor. Involuntarily one
strains his ears and eyes to see whether the words
and the lip movements are synchronized. This
proves that either the talk was put in afterwards,
or that the synchronization was poor. The tone
quality in that part is “frightful”; it indicates that
the studio sound-proofing was inadequate. An-
other defect is the fact that, in the scenes where
the cracters talk, the hissing sound made resem-
bles the running of mill machinery. Manifestly
the scored part was recorded on the film, whereas
the talk part on a disc. The tone quality of the
scored part is not so bad.
As to the story, which unfolds in a college, it is
very good, although there are too many drinking
scenes in it. There is much pathos in it, for the
reason that it concerns a father, who does not
make his identity known to his son, a young stu-
dent, but who pines for him and does everything
to prevent him from drinking. The father, a
drunkard, lost his wife, who died. His little son
was taken away from him and put in an orphan-
age. Years later the father is seen working in a
university as a janitor. He slaves, and whatever
he saves he sends it to the asylum, with instruc-
tions that it be used to educate his son. When of
age the son is sent to the college where the father
is a janitor. The father conquers his great desire
to tell the son that he is his father. The son be-
comes acquainted with the heroine and falls in
love with her. He falls in bad company and takes
to drinking. The father and the heroine try to save
him from ruining himself. The son had some col-
lege funds in his care. The villain plans to rob
him of them. The father tries to prevent it and is
injured. The son, after the impact of the car
against the wall, sobers up and grapples with the
villain, and has him arrested. The money is soon
recovered. The father is taken to the hospital.
The thought that the janitor had risked his life to
save his reputation awakens the son to the reali-
zation that he had not been leading a good life and
reforms. He marries the heroine.
The closing scenes, which show the son and the
heroine calling on the father to bid him good-by
before going on their honeymoon, are very touch-
ing. The father still forbids the heroine from dis-
closing his identity.
The plot has been founded on a story by Wells
Root. The picture was directed by Frank Tuttle.
Mary Brian does very well as the heroine, and
Charles Rogers as the hero. It is a question
whether Chester Conklin, as good an actor as he
is, was a good choice for so pathetic a part. Since
the mind associates him with comedy, perhaps
another actor would have proved better for this
serious part.
“Marked Money” with Junior Coghlan
( Pathe , Nov. 4; 5,506 ft.; 64 to 76 min.)
It is a wild melodrama, lacking in sound logic ;
nevertheless it is entertaining, because of the
thrills it offers, and because of the fact that it is
able to hold the spectator’s interest pretty alive all
the way through. It is a sort of serial story, in
that it has to do with the efforts of some crooks
to get hold of a tin box containing several thous-
and dollars in bills, left to the young hero by his
dead father. The box disappears once, but the
characters on the hero’s side are able to recover it.
The villains get their just desserts in the end, as
they always do in the moving pictures.
The plot has been founded on an original story
by Howard J. Green. It has been directed by
Spencer Bennet. Tom Kennedy, George Duryea,
Bert Woodruff, Virginia Bradford, Maurice
Black, and Jack Richardson are in the cast.
“Street of Illusion” with Ian Keith,
Virginia Valli and Kenneth Thompson
( Columbia , Se.pt. 3 ; 6,110 ft.; 71, to 87 min.) ,
What acting on the part of Ian Keith ! With the
exception of the acting of Mr. Jolson, no such
acting has been seen in pictures for sometime.
The closing scenes, where Mr. Keith, as the
jealous lover, plans the destruction of the hero,
whom the heroine loved, by putting real bullets
into the gun that was used in one part of the
stage drama, but is himself shot, are a great piece
of art. All the way through Mr. Keith does great
work ; he impersonates an egotistical actor, who
thinks he is the greatest actor in the world, but
whose acting ability the world had not recognized.
The story revolves around the hero, an actor,
who, with the heroine, also an actress, is down and
out. He cannot obtain a position. He is offered a
small part in a play, but he turns it down, because
he would not play any other than a leading part.
But the thought that he would go hungry unless
he got a job soon, makes him reconsider. He
recommends the heroine for the leading part. He
is asked to bring her to the office of the manager.
When the star of the play sees her he recognizes
in her the young woman he had once met in the
street accidentally and become attracted by her
beauty, and recommends that she be engaged. The
star falls in love with her and she with him. This
makes the hero jealous. As time goes on and the
heroine shows less interest in him and more in-
terest in the star, the hero becomes mad with
jealousy and plans the destruction of the star. He
puts real bullets in his own gun, which he substi-
tutes for the gun that was loaded with blank cart-
ridges, used in the play. During the last scene
the star trips and falls and the hero, who had been
understudying, is asked to take the part. He
manages to switch the guns again, but by coin-
cidence the loaded gun is put in the place of the
gun with the blank cartridges. The hero is thus
shot. The audience did not know that he had
been really shot, and took the hero’s acting as a
piece of art and acclaims him. As the curtain goes
down for the last time, he is invited to the after-
show supper in the theatre. He manages to at-
tend, and expires after presenting to the star and
to the heroine some mementoes, which he cher-
ished.
Channing Pollock wrote the story. Earle Ken-
ton directed it. Harry Myers, Harry Burkhardt
and Vadim Uraneff are in the cast.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
N ovember 3, 1928
176
RULE THREE OF THE TRADE PRACTICE
CONFERENCE
Rule Three, originally introduced at the Trade Practice
Conference by exhibitors as Resolution No. 9, reads as
follows : ,
RESOLVED. That the substitution by a producer or
distributor for any photoplay contracted for by any ex-
hibitor, as the photoplay of a specified star or of a specified
director, or as based upon a specified story, book, or play,
.of any photoplay in which such specified star does not ap-
pear, or which has not been directed by such specified
director, or which is not based upon such specified story,
book, or play, as the case may be, unless with the consent
of the exhibitor, is an unfair trade practice.”
In giving this Rule in its pamphlet, the Federal Trade
Commission appended the following:
"Example. — This resolution was adopted with the un-
derstanding that if the contract mentions neither star, cast,
director, nor author in the description of the story, which
in the Work Sheet is described as a play of college life,
but when delivered proves to be a story dealing with the
mining fields of Pennsylvania, it would be a substitution
within the meaning of this resolution.”
In other words, if the distributor attempted to force upon
an exhibitor a picture that was sold only by title and no
author or full story was given, but was described in the
Work Sheet or in any other literature put out by such pro-
ducer-distributor as a particular kind of picture, when in
reality the finished product did not bear any resemblance to
it. he, that is, the distributor, committed an unfair trade
practice under the meaning of this resolution.
Now, the Trade Practice Conference was called for the
purpose, as we all understand, of inducing the industry to
adopt fair trade practices. The Government had recognized
that certain unfair practices prevailed in the industry,
and, in order to correct them, called producers, distributors,
affiliated exhibitors, and unaffiliated exhibitors to a sort of
convention, to help them adopt rules that will prevent
abuses. The Government did not say that they feared that
unfair trade practices might be employed ; they said that
unfair trade practices did prevail, which they wanted cor-
rected at once. In other words, an unfair trade practice
was unfair not only if practiced under the 1928-29 contracts
but under all contracts.
The point that I desire to make is this : Many arbitra-
tion boards have been rendering decisions against exhibi-
tors on substitution disputes, even though the exhibitor
proved by documentary evidence that the pictures under
dispute were substitutes, thus violating, not only the spirit
of the Trade Practice Conference Rule, but also contractual
rights, guaranteed by law. When a person buys a certain
thing on certain specifications he is entitled to receive it ac-
cording to those specifications and no other.
AGAIN ABOUT GROUP CONTRACTS
Recently I stated in these columns that when the dis-
tributor rejects one contract out of a group of contracts
you signed on the same day all the contracts become null
and void at your option.
This provision, however, does not apply to United
Artists. By a special agreement, United Artists have been
allowed to insert the following provision :
“The Distributor’s right to approve or reject this ap-
plication or any other application signed by the Exhibitor
at the same time, or any other time, is not dependent upon
the approval or rejection of such other application or this
application.
“Agreed to
“Exhibitor.”
Preceding this provision, the following wording ap-
pears :
"Application will be rejected immediately if the ex-
hibitor does not sign as indicated.”
This provision nullifies Paragraph Three, of Clause 22.
So you had better remember it. If the salesman should
assure you that all the contracts will be approved or re-
jected together, then refuse to undersign the foregoing pro-
vision. Your refusal to sign it will test the salesman’s
sincerity. If he sends the contracts to his Home Office, he
will prove to you that he is sincere when he says that all
or none of the contracts will be accepted ; if he should still
insist that you sign the provision, it will be proof of his
insincerity and a “tip” for you not to sign it. No necessity
exists for you to undersign the provision in question if the
Home Office intends to accept or reject them all together.
Often you are induced to sign it because the film sales-
man has been your friend and has never failed you. But
depending on friendship in such a matter is unwise, for the
reason that your friend may be discharged. In such an
event, you will be holding the bag. Moreover, if the sales-
man is a real friend to you he will protect you by advising
you not to put your signature under any provision that
might work hardship on you. A real friend looks after the
interests of his friend.
JUST TO PREVENT CONFUSION
When in treating of non-synchronous instruments I men-
tion the Photophone as being the only instrument that is
fitted with the cone system of sound projection, I refer to
the instrument that is manufactured by RCA Photophone,
Inc., whose address is 411 Fifth Avenue.
When I mention Phototone, I refer to the instrument
that is manufactured by the Platter Cabinet Company, of
North Vernon, Indiana. They have offices in many parts
of the country. Their New York office is at 1531 Broad-
way.
The address of Electrical Research Products, Inc., the
selling organization for Western Electric, is at 250 West
57th Street, New York City. They, too, sell a non-syn-
chronous instrument. The prices of it were printed in the
second article about talking pictures on August 25.
FORCING SALE OF SHORT SUBJECTS
AN UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
My attention has been called to the fact that some film
salesmen, in order to force a sale of their short subjects,
refuse to take a contract for features. In the Trade Prac-
tice Conference rules, under the heading, “AGREED
STATEMENT OF POLICY PROPOSED BY PRO-
DUCER-DISTRIBUTORS AND ACCEPTED BY
EXHIBITORS,” the following agreement was made :
"6. News reels and short subjects will not be included in
any block with features, and the lease of news reels or
short subject blocks shall not be required as a condition of
being permitted to lease feature blocks or vice versa.”
If those of exhibitors that are being forced to accept
short subjects in order to get features will report the mat-
ter to this office, I shall make an effort to get justice for
them ; and if I cannot, I shall print the producer-distrib-
utors refusal in HARRISON’S REPORTS so that the
trade may know that that particular leopard has not
changed its spots.
LOOK OUT!
Companies offering to furnish you with cue sheets are
bound to spring up soon. These will no doubt ask you to
sign a contract with them, at a determined rental per week.
As my desire is to protect you from fly-by-night con-
cerns, I wish to caution you not to sign any contract with
any company before making a thorough investigation.
Refer all communications from such concerns to this
office. After receiving them, I shall write to the particular
concern asking it to furnish me with bank and other
reliable references as to their standing, and information
as to what has been the experience of the musician whom
they engaged to prepare the cue sheets. Any one can take
the cue sheets prepared by the producers and reprint
them, and then offer them to you for sale at high prices.
But that would not be service ; what you want is cue
sheets prepared by a musician that knows how to arrange
music with records.
POOR BUSINESS NO EXCUSE FOR
CANCELLING A CONTRACT
It has been repeatedly stated in these columns that clos-
ing a theatre because of poor business does not relieve an
exhibitor from a contract. The causes that relieve him
from it are enumerated in Clause 18. And poor business
is not one of them.
Why not buy pictures only for the good season, leaving
the summer months open ? Business gets poor chiefly dur-
ing the summer, and when your dates are open during that
time you may close your theatre down until August and
you will have no headaches thinking how you could get rid
of the pictures you have under contract.
Another suggestion I have made in these columns often
is that those of exhibitors that have their theatres in small
towns should close down for the summer. It is better for
their business, for it gives them a chance to renovate their
theatre, to go fishing, and to let their customers get a
rest, so that they may become hungry for pictures.
Those who find it a good policy to close down in the
summer should make up their plans now.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at tne post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions . . 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1928 No. 45
An Analysis of the Reformed Exhibition Contract
Since last May I have had occasions to criticize the
reformed Standard Contract, declaring it worse than
the contract that was in effect previously. This week
I am presenting you with a detailed analysis of it,
showing just where it is wrong, and suggesting
improvements.
The improvements that I suggest are only fair; but
I doubt whether the producer-distributors will accept
them, for their one purpose so far has been to pretend
that they are giving you concessions when in truth
what they have been doing is to take away with the
one hand more than they have been giving you with
the other. And they have been able to accomplish
this by political manipulation.
In the article “The Mysterious Meeting of the Con-
tract Committee,” I asked Mr. Hays, in the interest of
justice and fair play, why the meeting of the Contract
Committee was held secretly and certain other ques-
tions. Mr. Hays did not reply to them. Instead, Mr.
Nathan Yamins, one of the exhibitor-members of the
Contract Committee, wrote me a three-page letter
criticizing me for having criticized the secret meeting
of the Committee, and giving me a history of the
events that led up to that meeting. In one paragraph,
Mr. Yamins says:
“The Contract Committee as appointed at the Fed-
eral Trade Conference met in Chicago in February.
At the same time there gathered at the Congress
Hotel exhibitors from ever}' section of the country
apparently to watch and instruct the exhibitor group.
I personally made a report to this group and recom-
mended that the exhibitor members be instructed to
adopt the ‘unit rule’ in voting, and this was carried.
“Subsequently when a division of opinion occurred
among the exhibitor members an interpretation of the
meaning of the ‘unit rule’ was sought, and the ex-
hibitor group was of the opinion that it meant that
the vote of the exhibitor group would be what the
majority voted. This decision was arrived at without
even consulting the distributor members, although I
must confess that when I made the recommendation
I had in mind that in order to vote at all, our group
had to be unanimous. Unfortunately, the wrong word
was used, and thereafter the exhibitor group voted in
accordance with the ‘unit rule.’ ”
Notice that Mr. Yamins acknowledges that, as a
result of the use of the wrong word, the exhibitor-
members of the contract committee, instead of being
unanimous on every question, were compelled to act
as a unit as a result of some interpretation by an ex-
hibitor body that was manipulated into a position
where it had to give the interpretation the producer-
distributors wanted them to give. Mr. Yamins is, I
am sure, aware of the fact, or he ought to have been,
that C. C. Peettijohn, before the exhibitor-delegates
left for the Trade Practice Conference, received tele-
grams from C. C. Pettijohn asking them to register at
the Hotel Roosevelt. Some of them ignored that tele-
gram; others paid attention to it, with the result that
they were propaganded to accept the views of the
producer-distributors and of the affiliated exhibitors,
whose interests are never in harmony with the inter-
ests of the independent exhibitors. At Chicago, more
politics were played, as Mr. Yamins very well knows.
And yet, when he saw himself outnumbered and out-
voted, he did not protest demanding that the exhibi-
tor-members vote unanimously on every point; or bet-
ter yet, he did not resign as he ought to have done
in order better to protect the interests of the inde-
pendent exhibitors, who had so much faith in him. A
resignation tendered by him at that time would have
created a sensation, and would have compelled the
Federal Trade Commission to take cognizance of the
moves made by the Hays organization to thwart the
spirit of the Trade Practice Conference.
And yet we cannot condemn Mr. Yamins, for at
the time of the meeting of the Contract Committee in
Chicago some of his theatres burned down, as a result
of a calamity that befell Fall River, making it
necessary for him to leave the meetings for home.
The truth of the matter is, however, that no matter
what happened to him at that time, you have a worse
contract now than you had before!
Do you want the fact about it?
Here they are!
* *■ *
First Clause: The original intention was to make it
unnecessary for the exhibitor to read the standard
clauses by having their numbers printed in this clause,
and to make it easy for him to concentrate his atten-
tion on the added clauses and on the stamped provi-
sions. But as this clause now stands, there is no war-
ranty in it that there are no provisions other than
those contained in the contract that have been ap-
proved by the exhibitor-Hays committee, (a copy of
which contract now rests in the archives of the Fed-
eral Trade Commission), except those specifically
designated as being additional clauses. In other
words, the first clause should print the numbers of
the standard clauses, with a statement that they are
identical with those that have been approved; and
print also the numbers of the additional clauses.
While it is true that arbitrators that know their busi-
ness will never give a favorable verdict to an ex-
change that has inserted clauses that have not been
approved by the contract committee, yet when one
knows how much ignorance exists among the exhibi-
tor-arbitrators in some zones, nothing should be left
undone to make the contract clear. The exchange-
men-arbitrators in these zones interprete the clauses
to suit themselves and the exhibitors have no knowl-
edge by which they could give the right explanation
to them. If the producers mean to be honest with the
exhibitors and do not want to hoodwink them, they
should remedy this defect; it does them no harm, and
will help prevent unnecessary controversies with the
resultant hard feelings.
Second Clause (a): This clause defines the life of
the contract as one year from the play-date specified in
it, or from the play-date set in accordance with the
terms of Clause Nine. According to precedent estab-
lished in almost every film zone, when the contract
is for only one picture, without any play-date, the life
of such contract ends twelve months after the date on
which it was signed (not on the date it w'as approved).
Yet considerable confusion exists in the minds of the
arbitrators, both exhibitors and distributors, in some
zones. So it would be well if the clause made the
matter clear.
Second Clause (b) : This part of the clause gives
the exhibitor the right to require delivery on all pic-
tures not delivered during the life of the contract
upon giving notice within 30 days. The exhibitor is
thereby required to decide whether he will take a
number of plays which they may never produce, and
of which he knows nothing about. Inasmuch as the
( Continued on last page )
178
HARRISON’S REPORTS November 10, 1928
“Companionate Marriage” with Betty
Bronson, Alec B. Francis and
Richard Walling
( First National, Oct. 21; 6,132 ft.; 71 to 87 min.)
Pretty good. There is human interest all the way
through. Miss Bronson awakening most of it. The story
is, in fact, an education as to what really companionate
marriage is, and not what the popular idea of it is. Yet tire
thought is conveyed not altogether in the form of a
preachment. The action revolves around two families, the
one rich and the other poor. The heroine belongs to the
poor family, and the young hero to the rich family. The
heroine is secretary to the hero’s father. The hero falls
in love with her. She, too, loves him, but because she
has seen enough misery in her own family on account of
the fact that her father had deserted her mother, once,
letting her with many mouths to feed by slaving, she is
unwilling to marry. Besides, she believed that the old-
style marriage where young folk are tied for life before
they have a chance to learn the duties of parenthood was
all wrong, and she wanted a companionate marriage, a
marriage that kept the young couple apart until they
learned wrhat they ought to know. The hero’s sister falls
in bad company. She marries a good for nothing young
mait and she is deserted by him in a few days. She tries
to commit suicide; driving her car at high speed, she
crashes through the railing of a bridge and falls into the
river. Her body is dragged out and despite medical atten-
tion she dies. The young hero tries to find his father but
is unsuccessful, until the heroine gives him his address.
He rushes and finds him in the home of his mistress. The
shock of finding out that his father and his mother were
not the happy couple he had thought they were is too
much for him, and he turns against marriage. Eventu-
ally however, a judge friend of both hero and heroine
induces them to tie themselves by a companionate mar-
riage, until both learned the duties of parenthood.
There is some comedy, too, here and there, offering
relief, even though the theme is not of the too heavy sort.
Judge Ben B. Lindsey and Wainwright Evans wrote the
story. Erie C. Kenton directed it well. Wm. J. Welsh,
Edward Martindel, Hedda Hopper, Arthur Ranking and
others are in the cast.
It seems to be chiefly a woman’s picture. But it should
offer a satisfactory entertainment also to men.
“Ned McCobb’s Daughter” with Irene Rich,
and Robert Armstrong
( Pathe , Dec. 2; 6,070 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
It is hard to understand what prompted the producers
to put this play into a picture. The play was good, but
the picture is demoralizing. Most of the action represents
the dark side of life, and almost every bit of it is de-
moralizing. For example, the heroine, a fine woman, as
she is represented in the story, is forced, in order to feed
her children, to become an accomplice of a bootlegger
brother-in-law of hers. Her husband is good for nothing.
The brother-in-law makes love to her. After the heroine
is forced to become a partner of the bootlegger, her
husband strikes a revenue officer on the head with a club
and kills him, because the officer had discovered the place
where the liquor was hidden. The scenes that show the
body hidden in the pile of apples is gruesome to the point
of being sickening. The discovery of the blood on the
floor, too, is a gruesome sight. The only situation that is
worth-while mentioning as offering some entertainment is
where the hero and the heroine, who had been informed
that the revenue officers were guarding the bridge over
which the heroine’s husband was to cross with a load of
whisky, mount another truck and chase him in an effort
to overtake him. The husband, a coward, in order to
mislead the revenue officers, had taken his two children
along ostensibly on a ride. The scenes that show the two
trucks side by side running at top speed and the children
jumping from one truck to the other are suspensive. The
scene that shows the heroine’s worthless husband speeding
over the bridge and falling into the water, drowning
as a result, are thrilling.
The story ends with the marriage of hero and heroine
after the removal of the obstacle, the worthless husband.
The plot has been founded on Sidney Howard’s play.
William J. Cowen directed the picture. Theodore Roberts,
George Barraud, Edward Hearn, Louis Natheaux and
others are in the cast.
“Melody of Love” with Mildred Harris,
Walter Pigeon and Jane Winton
( Univ; release date not yet set; 6,700 ft.; 78 to 97 min.)
Universal’s first all-talking picture is nothing to brag
about either in story quality or acting. The whole thing
is so stilted and ancient that it does not hold the interest
and is even boresome, the action being slowed up too
much on account of the dialogue which is so simple. All
voices sound alike, and are not distinguishable to any
extent.
The story revolves around a song writer who left his
sweetheart in America to go overseas during the World
War. He meets a French girl (heroine) when he is
playing the piano in a cafe; she becomes infatuated with
him. When his arm is paralyzed after being shot, he finds
that he can use only one arm and he realizes that his
future is shattered. When he returns to America and
learns that his former sweetheart no longer cared for him,
too proud to look up his war buddies, he becomes a
tramp, wandering finally to the bowery where he hears
the familiar voice of the heroine, singing his favorite
song. He wanders into the dancehall and sits at the
piano, attempting to play, when all of a sudden his stiff
hand becomes well and he able to play. They sing a duet
and pledge their love.
Mildred Harris and Jane Winton are the girls in the
case, the former being the French girl and the latter be-
ing the girl who jilted her sweetheart. Walter Pidgeon
is likeable as the hero and his bass voice is very good.
Tom Dugan is the most natural. As the hero’s buddy
overseas and the owner of a gambling den and dancehall
in the bowery, he contributes a great deal of the comedy,
somewhat of a slapstick nature. Others in the cast are
Jack Richardson as the hero’s former employer, the man
who won his fiancee, after the hero had gone to war, and
Victor Potel, an old-timer, as a better gambler than
Dugan. The picture was direcled by A. B. Heath from a
story by Robert Arch.
Note: The tone quality is “frightful,” chiefly because
the raw stock was poor. The white flashes, due to the
imperfection of the emulsion, are so bad that the sound is
full of “static,” or a sort of crashes. It is also apparent
that the sound-proofing of the studio was inadequate. The
scenes on board the battleship where the hero and the
other sailors are seen singing is so bad that it is annoy-
ing. The reverberations caused by the hard surface of the
steel plates, almost the greatest sound-reflecting medium
known, is very bad. A few more pictures like this one
and the picture-goers are sure to run away from thea-
tres that show talking pictures.
“The Woman from Moscow” with
Pola Negri
( Paramount , Nov. 3; 6,938 ft.; 80 to 99 min.)
Not much to it. In fact, it tiresome, for the reason
that the heroine does nothing to arouse one’s sympathy.
The first part unfolds in Russia, and shows the terror the
aristocrats felt for Nihilists. The cousin of the heroine,
a Princess, is murdered and the Russian secret service
learns that the hero had committed the murder. But he
was beyond each, for he had fled to Paris. The heroine
decides to go to Paris and to get the evidence that would
prove his guilt. She meets him and they become acquain-
ted. The heroine falls in love with him. And expression
uttered by the hero condemning all Nihilists brings joy to
the heroine, who thus convinces herself that he is not a
Nihilist, and therefore not the murderer of her cousin.
But when she accepts his marriage proposal and asks him
to go to Russia with her, he tells her he cannot go. He
then reveals to her that he had killed her cousin, because
he had had wronged his sister and had refused to marry
her afterwards. The hero realizes that she had been
shadowing him, and takes it for granted that her pro-
fessions of love for his were sham. He leaves her. The
heroine, however, had learned to love him so passionately
that life no longer held any charms for her. So she
takes poison. The hero, after cooling down, returns
to her. But too late ; she dies in his arms.
The plot has been founded on Victorien Sardou’s
“Fedora.” It was directed by Ludwig Berger. The di-
rection is good. Norman Kerry is the hero. Paul Lukas,
Otto Matiesen, Lawrence Gray, and ohters are in the
cast.
November 10, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
179
“The Wind” with Dorothy Gish and
Lars Hansen
( Metro-Goldwyn , Sept. 27; 6,721 ft.; 78 to 96 min.)
With all the sound of wind, created mechanically, and
supposed to represent a powerful sand storm, and with
all the barkings of a dog, “heard and seen,” “The Wind”
is not a good picture. Sand, sand, sand everywhere,
driven by a windstorm, occupies nine-tenths of the pic-
ture, which, when it ends, leaves you a nervous wreck.
If you should happen to see it you would wish never to
see a sandstorm again, either in pictures or in life; you
have had enough at one sitting to last you a lifetime.
As to the story, it is hardly likely that it will please
other than those that attend the little theatres, “nuts” and
“crackaloos.” It is the story of a poor girl from Vir-
ginia, that is thrust into a desert region where the wind
is howling daily, and where those that are not accustomed
to it are driven mad by it. She visits her cousin. But
her cousin’s wife is jealous of her, because she thinks that
she loves her husband. So she forces her to marry one of
the two uncouth persons that wanted her as a wife ; she
had to marry one of them because she did not have an-
other living person in this world to go to, and she was
penniless. The villain, a married man who had once met
her accidentally and fallen in love with her, is found un-
conscious during a sand storm and brought by her hus-
band to their home. When he recovers he is asked to
help in a round-up of wild horses. He comes back sec-
retly and tries to induce the heroine to follow him and
thus get a chance to get away from the country that was
cursed with sand storms. She tells him to go away and
to leave her alone, threatening to shoot him. He does not
take her seriously. She shoots and kills him. She drags
him out and buries him in the sand, but the wind uncovers
him. Her husband returns and she, half-mad, tells him
that she had shot and killed the villain. She points
out to the place where she had buried him. The hus-
band looks at the spot but sees nothing; the wind had
covered up the body just as it had uncovered it. He
thinks that the monotony of the sand storm had affected
her brain. He wants to send her away but she tells him
that she did not want to go, because she learned to love
him.
In addition to being irritating to the nerves, “The
Wind” is also gruesome. Its plot has been founded on
Dorothy Scarborough’s novel. It was directed by Vic-
tor Seastrom. Montague Love, Dorothy Cummings,
Edward Earle, and William Orlamond are in the cast.
“Do Your Duty” with Charlie Murray
( First National, Oct. 14; 6,000 ft.; 58 to 85 min.)
A nice enough little comedy-drama of the double bill
program grade. The story revolves around a police ser-
geant who, after he is made lieutenant, is demoted because
he is found supposedly drunk by his superior officers,
when he had been knocked unconscious by crooks that had
decoyed him from the scene of a bank robbery. It has
pathos, too, as well as plenty of humor. And while the
first part is rather dull, merely being a lot of so-called
funny situations showing Charlie Murray (hero) as a
dutiful father of a pair of mischievous sons and an at-
tractive daughter who is engaged to the son of the cap-
tain, and trying to study in order that he might pass his
examinations, the last half is quite entertaining.
Charlie Murray gives his usual good performance as
the father who had become demoted through no fault of
his own and who won the chance to regain his lieutenancy
when he captures the band of crooks through the help of
his Scotch friend, a tailor, who accidentally learned of the
job to be pulled.
Doris Dawson is sweet and Charles Delaney, her fiance,
is likeable. Others in the cast are Aggie Herring as the
mother of the family and George Pierce as the police
captain. The picture was directed by William Beaudine.
Julian Josephson wrote the story. Lucien Littlefield is
good.
“Dry Martini” with Mary Astor, Matt
Moore, Albert Gran and others
( Fox , Oct. 7 ; 6,828 ft.; 79 to 97 min.)
Tiresome! It is a story of the “escapades” of a
wealthy old rue among women, in Paris, and his constant
“sprees.” They might have interested the average pic-
ture-goer if these escapades had concerned some young
man ; but who can become interested when they concern
an old fat man? The picture is supposed to be a high-
class comedy, but, although from the direction point of
view it is faultless, the story is so weak that no one can
keep himself from yawning. It is pretty “broad,” too,
and the kind that might prompt children to ask questions
they shouldn’t ask. The constant drinking of the char-
acters in it particularly of the fat hero, who prefers al-
ways a Dry Martini, at times stronger than at other
times, is not very edifying, and not helpful to the picture
theatres.
The story revolves around a wealthy man, spending his
money in Paris on wine and women, away from his
divorced wife in America. His grown-up daughter
eventually decides to visit him in Paris. He tries to put
up a respectable-looking appearance, but the daughter
seems not to mind a little drinking and smoking herself.
She has modern ideas about life. This leads her to a
near-tragedy, when a “lady-killer” induces her to go to
a lonely home of his. When she sees the maid fixing up
the bed and putting on it pajamas for both her and her
"beloved” it dawns on her what was in store for her.
She tries to escape but finds herself locked in the room.
But her father, who had found out that she had followed
the “lady-killer,” in company with the hero, a young
American who loved her, rushes to her rescue.
The plot has been founded on the novel by John
Thomas. Jocelyn Lee, Sally Eilers, Albert Conti, Tom
Ricketts and others are in the cast.
“The Crash” with Milton Sills
( First National, Oct. 7 ; 72 to 88 min.)
Not much to it. The action is so slow up to within the
last thousand feet that it bores one. There is hardly much
human interest in it. The hero does not awaken much
sympathy for the reason that he is so small-minded that
he turns his wife out of the house, because he thought
that she had had intimate relations with another man,
the truth of the matter being that the other man had tried
to force his attentions on her. In the last reel the action
becomes pretty lively. In that part, there is a railroad
wreck, in which the heroine with her baby runs the risk
of being burned alive.
The story opens in a small town, and shows how the
hero, a railroad man, had met the heroine, a chorus girl,
belonging to a travelling troupe, and fallen in love with
her, marrying her eventually. The manager of the troupe
was “stuck” on her and was doing everything to take her
away from the hero and from the “hick” town she lived
in. The hero threatens him with dire consequences if he
did not leave his wife alone. He goes away but several
months later returns and forces his way into the heroine’s
house while the hero is absent. The hero returns unex-
pectedly and finding the heroine in what he thought a
compromising situation evicts her, ordering her to follow
her “lover.” The heroine goes away. The hero’s chum
corresponds with the heroine, hoping eventually to bring
about reconciliation between her and the hero. The
heroine has a child. The hero’s chum sends for her and
arranges the hero accidentally to come upon her. The
hero by this time had realized what a noble woman the
heroine was and what a worthless fellow he was. This
makes him refuse to let the heroine come back to him.
The heroine sorrowfully goes away. The train is wrecked
because of a landslide. When the hero hears of it he
begs his former employer to give him a chance to rescue
the passengers. He is given the chance and saves the
heroine. For the first time he learns that he is a father.
He begs the heroine to forgive him.
The only part where there is deep human interest is
where the heroine and her baby meet the hro and he re-
fuses to take her back.
Thelma Todd is the heroine. Wade Boteler the hero’s
chum. Wm. Demarest, Fred Warren, Sylvia Ashton, and
DeWitt Jennings are in the cast. The plot has been
founded on the story by Frank L. Packard. It was di-
rected by Edward Cline.
UNBELIEVABLE BUT TRUE!
Mr. E. Fitzgerald, of Windsor Theatre, Grenfell, Sas-
katchewan, Canada, in sending his check in payment of his
subscription, wrote as follows :
“Great value so far. Almost too good to be true as to
keeping it up.”
180
HARRISON’S REPORTS
N ovember 10, 1928
distributor knows months before the expiration of the
contract whether he is going to make them or not, he
should be required to inform the exhibitor of it at
least sixty days before the expiration of the contract;
or the exhibitor should be given the right to accept
or reject these pictures within ten days after notice
of availability is sent to him. Thus the burden should
be made to rest, as it should, on the shoulders of the
producer-distributor, and not on those of the exhibi-
tor. As said before, the exhibitor hasn’t the facilities
of sending letters — at least not as many facilities as
the distributor. To the exhibitor, writing a letter is an
effort — it is a day’s work; whereas it is a relaxation to
the distributor, who has but to dictate it. Besides,
unless the distributor is made to send the notice of
non-production of a picture at least sixty days before
the life of the exhibitor’s contract expires, a chance
for fraud is given to the producer-distributor. If he
should make the picture towards the expiring days of
the bulk of his contracts, if the picture should turn
out to be excellent, the distributor could hold the
picture back and take a chance with the exhibitors’
forgetting to send their notices of either acceptance or
cancellation.
Similarly the clause that relieves the distributor
from the obligation of delivering pictures not released
within two years should be eliminated, giving the
exhibitor the right to accept or reject such pictures at
any time. Since the distributor does not guarantee
production or delivery of contracted pictures, the ex-
hibitor should at least have the right to require deli-
very if the picture should be produced.
Sixth Clause: This clause guarantees the exhibitor
his “protection” or “run,” but it does not provide with
penalty in case the distributor violated it. The dam-
ages are always uncertain and difficult of computa-
tion. I know of a case upstate (New York) where a
distributor violated the protection of an exhibitor,
who paid $750 for the picture, and the exchangemen-
arbitrators, although they acknowledged the breach
of the contract, offered to award the exhibitor one
dollar damages. The exhibitors, of course, dead-
locked the board, and the seventh arbitrator awarded
fair damages to the exhibitor. There should be a
provision in it to penalize the distributor three times
the amount of the rental.
This clause provides also that the protection period
shall run from the last day of the exhibition of the
previous run. Suppose that you play the pictures, say,
fifteen days after the first-run exhibitor, and a particu-
lar picture turned out to be so good that the first-run
exhibitor keeps running it three or four weeks. You
have no way to force the exchange to deliver that
picture to you until after the first-run exhibitor milked
your locality dry. The protection should be computed
from the first day of the run.
EDITOR’S NOTE: While the provisions of zone
protection are not unsatisfactory, you should be care-
ful to define the area of the protection by geograph-
ical limits instead of by theatres so as to avoid the
possibility of confusion. State, for example, “The
East side of Street,” or “The North,” or “The
South,” as the case may be; do not mention only the
name of the street, for an award may be decided
against you if a theatre should happen to be located
on the opposite side of the street, away from your
theatre, by making it possible for the distributor to
assert that that theatre is not included in the bound-
ary of your zone. Such a thing has happened in this
city.
Seventh Clause: This seems to be a satisfactory
clause, but exhibitors should be warned that in order
for them to take advantage of its provisions they
should (1) use the same carrier as is used by the ex-
change, and (2) to be sure to get a receipt so that in
case the print is lost while being returned to the ex-
change they may comply with the provisions of the
contract. Those that ship film by parcel post should
request for the green tags, which can be obtained for
one cent. Instructions will be given them by the post-
masters as to how to use them. They may obtain also
a receipt by insuring the parcel for the minimum in-
surance fee, which is five cents.
Eighth Clause: This clause provides for the manner
whereby pictures may be play-dated. The last sen-
tence of paragraph (1) reads as follows: “Such notice
[the play-date availability notice] shall be of no effect
unless prints of such photoplay are in the exchange
of the Distributor from which the exhibitor is served.”
The first paragraph of the 18th Clause has a prize
joker in the expression “delays in production.” A new
joker has now been added. It is acts such as these
that make one doubt the sincerity of the producers.
When they sell you pictures of certain run they cer-
tainly know whether they will have prints in the ex-
change or not. By telling you, then, “We shall deli-
ver the pictures we sell you provided we have prints
in the exchange” is insincere and even fraudulent.
Why are they not honest about it and frame the
clause to read something like: “We sell you these pic-
tures but we reserve the right to let you have them
whenever we please?” It would mean the same thing
and would tell what they really have in their mind.
This reservation should he eliminated.
There is another thing that is wrong with this
clause; it does not provide when the distributor shall
mail the notice of availability. There have been argu-
ments on both sides in this question but it is doubtful
if any hard and fast rule can be imposed on the dis-
tributors. The only fair way would he to let the arbi-
tration board determine when a “reasonable time" has
elapsed after a picture has been delivered to the ex-
change so that the exchange may be compelled to
give the exhibitor a play-date availability notice. If
the producer-distributors should think that arbitration
is a fine medium to settle disputes with, they should
not object to submitting this question to arbitration.
Another provision that this clause should contain is
the compelling of the exchange to give notice of avail-
ability simultaneously to all exhibitors that have
bought equal-run pictures. This will make it impossi-
ble for the exchange to favor one second-run exhibitor
over another.
Tenth Clause: This is a substitution clause,
which has been put into the contract as a result of the
Trade Practice Conference last year. It is clear and
protects the exhibitor, except in case where the dis-
tributor sells a picture merely by title and gives no
other descriptive matter. It has been the practice of
some distributors to sell mere titles, and when they
produced the pictures and these turned out to be good
withheld them and delivered something else in their
places. The exhibitor should be protected against
such fraud by providing that where the picture is sold
by title, that title is the whole thing; and that any
change of it to be considered a change is the story.
Twelfth Clause: Paragraph (2) of this clause obli-
gates the exhibitor to buy all advertising accessories
from or through the distributor. In view of the fact
that the producers combined to write this contract,
this provision is of doubtful legality. Remember that
a distributor has the right to impose any conditions
in the sale of his product when such conditions do not
break the laws of the land; but when two or more
producers combine to impose the same conditions on
the buyer, then the matter differs. The Sherman Anti-
Trust Law may say that they cannot do it without
conspiring in restraint of trade. I doubt if the pro-
ducers would dare enforce this provision.
Sixteenth Clause: The first paragraph of this clause
deals with the case in which an exhibitor is prevented
from performing the contract. The present provision
is that the time of the contract shall be extended un-
less the delay is of more than three months’ duration.
But in case the exhibitor has no picture booked be-
forehand for the time of the delay, he is not relieved
of any part of the contract. There should be a pro-
vision to entitle the exhibitor to a pro rata reduction in
the number of pictures which he is required to accept.
The second paragraph of this clause deals with dis-
tribution delays. The old contract provided that if
the delay was of more than three months’ duration
either party might cancel. This was found subject to
abuse by the distributors, who might purposely delay
a picture in order to cancel contracts. Since the
distributor is not obligated to produce and must deli-
ver only if he produces, the exhibitor should be given
the exclusive option to cancel in case of a delay of
more than three months beyond the life of the
contract.
Eighteenth Clause: This clause refers to arbitration
and it will be discussed in a forthcoming article.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at me post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
s
Yearly Subscription Rates :
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions.... 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a f opy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1928
No. 46
The Attitude of the Exchanges on Substitutions
My desk has been swamped lately with letters from ex-
hibitors that have been hailed before arbitration boards for
refusing to accept substitute pictures, asking my advice as
to What they should do to avoid playing these pictures.
What the rights of exhibitors in substitution questions
are, and how an exhibitor should proceed in case the ex-
changes insisted that the pictures in question are not substi-
tutes, in spite of the fact that the facts speak differently,
was covered so fully in the issues of Harrison’s Reports of
June 16, June 23 and July 21, and anything that may be
added to it will be merely a repetition.
The excuses offered by the exchanges are the same now
as they have been at other times, that a provision in the
Work Sheets or in the Annual Announcement Books gives
them the right to change title and cast.
This excuse is hypocritical, for no exhibitor has denied
them the right to do that in the 1927-28 contracts ; what
they deny them is the right to change the story and the
star. Such right they do not possess, either by what is said
in that provision or by what is contained in the contract.
Besides, a ruling accepted by the entire industry at the
Trade Practice Conference, as explained last week, makes
things clear in this matter: no exchange can force an
exhibitor to accept and pay for something he did not buy.
To do so would be committing an unfair trade practice.
And that is exactly what the exchanges, particularly the
Fox exchanges, are trying to do — force exhibitors to accept
something they did not contract for.
Let us now give a resume of the substitutions of all the
producer-distributors, detailed analyses of which were
printed in the issues of June 16, 23, 30, and August 11 :
Columbia
STORY SUBSTITUTION : “By Whose Hand?” “The
College Hero,” “Stage Kisses,” “The Opening Night,”
“The Warning,” “So This Is Love,” “A Woman’s Way,”
“The Sporting Age,” “The Desert Bride,” “Broadway
Daddies,” “Golf Widows,” “Modern Mothers,” “The Way
of the Strong,” “Beware of Blondes,” “Say It With Sables,”
and “Virgin Lips.”
STORY AND STAR SUBSTITUTION: “The Tig-
ress” and "Lady Raffles.”
None of these picturse have been founded on the stories
promised and therefore you are not obligated to accept any
of them.
STAR SUBSTITUTION: “The Siren.” You are not
obligated to accept this picture, for the reason that it was
promised with Priscilla Dean and is being delivered with
Dorothy Revier. And a star is not “cast,” as the provision
in question states. If it were, it would be possible for the
distributors to sell you a picture with Mary Pickford, or
Clara Bow, or Norma Shearer, and deliver a picture with
some fifty-dollar-a-week extra.
Fox
STORY SUBSTITUTION: “Gateway to the Moon,”
“Sharpshooters,” and “ A Girl in Every Port.”
THEME SUBSTITUTION: “Chicken a la King.”
STAR SUBSTITUTION: “Pajamas,” “Dressed to
Kill,” “The Escape,” and “Hangman’s House.”
STORY AND STAR SUBSTITUTION : “Love Hun-
gry,” “The News Parade,” “Roadhouse,” and “None but
the Brave.”
STORY, STAR, AND DIRECTOR SUBSTITU-
TION : “Honor Bound” and “The Farmer’s Daughter.”
STORY AND DIRECTOR SUBSTITUTION:
“Square Crooks.”
You are not obligated to accept any of these, because they
are not the pictures you bought originally.
The following pictures may be arbitrated : “High School
Hero,” because it was promised with Sally Phipps and
Richard Walling, and is being delivered with Nick Stuart;
"Ladies Must Dress,” because it was promised with James
Tingling and Mary Duncan, and it is being delivered with
Virginia Valli and Lawrence Cray; and “No Other
Woman,” because it was promised with Frank Borzage as
the director and is being delivered with Lou Tellegen. The
question that will be decided by the arbitratipn board will
be, in the case of “High School Hero,” whether Richard
Walling with Sally Phipps have greater box office value
than Nick Stuart; in the case of “Ladies Must Dress,”
whether James Tingling and Mary Duncan have greater
box office value than Virginia Valli and Lawrence Gray,
and in the case of “No Other Woman,” whether this pic-
ture is of a director series or not, and if it is whether it
comes under the category of that provision in the Work
Sheet and in the Announcement Book or not.
First National
STORY SUBSTITUTION: “Three’s a Crowd,” “The
Whip Woman,” “The Chaser,” “Flying Romeos,” “China-
town Charlie,” “The Yellow Lily,” “The Head Man,” and
“Heart Trouble.”
None of these are delivered as sold, and therefore you
are not obligated to accept them if you don’t want to.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
STORY SUBSTITUTION: “London After Mid-
night,” “Baby Mine,” “The Big City,” “The Smart Set,”
“The Patsy,” “Across to Singapore,” “Laugh, Clown,
Laugh 1” and “Diamond Handcuffs.”
None of these has been founded on the story promised,
and therefore are not obligated to accept any of them.
STAR SUBSTITUTION : “The Fair Co-Ed,” “Under
the Black Eagle,” and “The Mysterious Lady.”
You are not obligated to accept any of these because they
are not delivered with the stars that were promised when
you bought them.
NOT DELIVERED WHEN IT OUGHT TO: “A
Certain Young Man,” Those who bought it in their 1925-
26 contracts are not obligated to accept it, because it is not
being delivered within the life of those contracts, although
it was produced within that life.
Pathe
STAR SUBSTITUTION : “Midnight Madness” and
“The Leopard Lady.”
You are not obligated to accept these pictures, because
they are not being delivered with the stars that were origi-
nally promised.
Universal
STORY SUBSTITUTION: “Hot Heels,” “A Hero
For a Night,” “The Count of Ten,” and “Stop That Man.”
You don’t have to accept any of these if you don’t want
to, because they are not founded on the stories promised.
STAR SUBSTITUTION : “Midnight Rose.” Whether
Mary Philbin or Lya De Putti is a better box office attrac-
tion should determine your attitude in the matter. If you
cannot convince the exchange of your views, then you
may submit the dispute to arbitration.
{To be continued on last page)
182
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“The Woman Dlsputed”(S) with Norma
Talmadge
( United Artists , Oct. 20; 8,041 ft.; 93 to 1 14 min.)
The pivotal point of this drama is a “Mona Vana”
situation. In- ' Mona Vana," the heroine is forced to
surrender td a' conqueror in order to save her people
from a bloody massacre ; in “The Woman Disputed,” the
heroine is compelled to surrender her honor to a Rus-
sian officer, one whom she once admired and who loved
her with all his heart, so as to save four persons, one of
them a spy of the Austrian Government, from death and
to make -is possible for the spy to cross the front lines,
and to give to the Commander of the Austrian army in-
formation that would enable him to drive the Russians
out of Austrian territory. With the exception of a few
spots here and there, where the action is somewhat slow,
the picture is a worth-while dramatic entertainment.
There is suspense in most situations, and there are some
tears. The tears occur mostly in the closing scenes,
where the hero realizes what a mistake he had made to
condemn the heroine in his mind for having surrendered
her honor to the Russian officer, once a chum of his.
This realization came about when he heard the Comman-
der praise the heroine for her invaluable services to the
fatherland. There are some scenes where th suspense is
tense. The Austrian spy impersonates a Catholic priest.
It is a question whether Catholics will relish this, no mat-
ter how delicately is the situation handled.
The picture has been founded on the stage play by
Denison Clift. It was directed by Henry King and Sam
Taylor. Norma Talmadge does excellent work; she does
not seem to have lost her old acting ability. Gilbert
Roland is very good as the hero, and the late Arnold
Kent as the hero’s chum, who turns into a villain. The
locale is the Austrian city of Lemburg, and the time be-
fore and during the World War. Gladys Brockwell,
Gustave von Seyffertitz, Michael Vavitch and Boris de
Fas are in tne cast.
It is not a Sunday School picture but it ought to give
very good satisfaction to adults.
It is in sound.
“His Private Life” (S) with Adolphe Menjou
(Paramount, Nov. 17; 4,690 ft.; 54 to 67 min.)
An amusing high comedy, with bedroom farce situ-
ations in it. The comedy is of the sort that will appeal
to the high-brows; it is doubtful if the picture-goers of
the rank and file will appreciate it as well. Mr. Menjou
is presented in his usual role, of a chaser of beautiful
women. It is while in one of these pretty ankle chasing
expeditions that he meets the heroine and eventually
“lands” her. But his light ways about women land him
also into trouble, when he accidentally finds himself in
the same room with a former “flame.” She throws her
arms around him and everything seems to be going along
well when the flame’s husband appears. The hero then
has to put a newspaper on the face of his old flame so as
to prevent the husband from recognizing his wife. Just
at that moment, however, the hero’s fiancee appears and
everything goes wrong again. The fiancee is peeved and
decides to turn a cold shoulder to him. He tries to ex-
plain but she will not let him. He tries again, and again
he fails. But after many trials he succeeds.
The plot has been founded on a story by Ernest Vajda,
and Keene Thompson. Its locale is Paris. Frank Tuttle
directed it. Pretty Katherine Carver is the heroine.
Margaret Livingston is the old flame. Eugene Palette
is the irate husband.
A good entertainment for high-class patronage.
It is in sound.
“The Good-Bye Kiss” (S) with a special cast
( First National, July 8; 7,989 ft.; 93 to 114 min.)
There are good points in it, but there are also Some
bad points. The bad points consist of the lack of fast
action in most of the picture, starting from the beginning.
The good points are the fairly strong thrills now and
then, the comedy, and the suspense in several of the situ-
ations, particularly in a situation in the closing scenes,
in which is the tensest suspense. This is caused by the fact
that the young hero, a coward that had turned into a
brave young man because of the efforts of the young
heroine, who had inspired him, follows two German spies
into the German lines, and prevents one of them, the one
that had posed as an American officer, from connecting
the electrical wires that would have blown up the Ameri-
November 17, 1928
can front line trenches, and with them all Americans
found in them. The struggle lasts quite some time, and
ends just at the time when two other Germans had set
out to investigate the cause of the delay in the blowing
up of the trenches. (But the hero had delayed the Ger-
mans long enough to give the Americans a chance to go
over the top and to take the German trenches). While
most of the comedy is good, some of it is misplaced. For
example, one of the characters, chum of the hero, is
shown in a farcial situation, running away from German
bullets, and entering the dug-out where the American
Commander of that division was holding a consultation
with his staff. Instead of being frightened when the
Commander reprimands him, he talks back to the Com-
mander. This is bad in that the previous action is serious.
It destroys the mood.
Mack Sennett wrote the story and directed it. Johnny
Burke, Sally Eilers, Matty Kemp, Wheeler Oakman,
Irvin Bacon, Lionel Belmore, Alma Bennett, Carmelita
Geraghty, Eugene Palette, and others are in the cast.
It is in sound.
“Sinner’s Parade” — with Victor Varconi
and Dorothy Revier
( Columbia ; Sept. 14; 5,616 ft.; 65 to 80 min.)
Only fair. The story at first is too mixed up to be en-
tertaining. It jumps from one scene to another without
having connection. It is an expose of the bootlegging
traffic and also of the wreckless lives lived by young high
school students. They are in reality attending question-
able cabarets, drinking in the company of rounders in-
stead of attending to their studies.
The story revolves around the dual life of the heroine
(Miss Revier) who is a school teacher by day and a
cabaret performer at night. Miss Revier is pleasing as
the elderly sister who tries to hold two jobs in order
that she might support her younger sister and her baby.
Mr. Varconi (hero) is good enough as the cabaret owner
who is in love with the heroine and who reforms for her
sake after the cabaret is raided and she is arrested. John
Patrick is fair as the son of the well-to-do clubwoman
who has the club raided because she wanted to break the
attachment between him and the heroine; he is in reality
the bootlegger. Marjorie Bonner has lots of pep as the
younger sister who preferred a good time.
The picture was directed by John G. Adolfi from
David Lewis’s story.
“The Air Legion” — with Ben Lyon,
Antonio Moreno and Martha Sleeper
( FBO , Jan. 6, 1929; 6,351 ft.; 73 to 92 min.)
A pretty good drama. Its interest is centered mainly
around the heroic pilots of the U.S. air mail service who
fly in all kinds of weather, risking their lives in the per-
formance of their cherished duty. None of the actors
stand out particularly and the story would be very con-
ventional were it not for the dangers the spectator real-
izes air-piloting is accompanied with.
The story revolves around a young stunt flyer, (hero)
whose father was killed in the service, and joins his
father’s closest friend as airmail pilot. The mistress of
the post-office (heroine) falls in love with the young
hero but loses her interest in him when he shows a yellow
streak by pretending to have been hit when he struck a
hurricane whereas he was really afraid of the lightning.
He is naturally the butt of contempt and so to prove that
he is really not yellow, and encouraged by the heroine,
who was still in love with him, he takes a plane into the
teeth of a storm along with his friend so that they might
bring aid to a town which was wiped out by a broken
dam. When his pal’s plane is downed because of a
broken wing, the hero rescues him and brings the sup-
plies and his pal back to his post. He proved to all that
he had heroic stuff in him and so earned a permanent job
in the service. Hero and heroine are united.
The scenes of the storms are rather thrilling, and as
everyone admires the fine flying of the courageous mail
flyers it will no doubt make this an entertaining program
picture for the average audience.
The picture was directed by Bert Glennon from a story
by James Ashmore Creelman. Ben Lyon is fair as the
hero. Antonio Moreno is likeable as the pal who, too,
was in love with the heroine but he encouraged the ro-
mance between the hero and heroine and helped to bring
the hero out of his yellow streak and make a man of him.
Miss Sleeper is adequate.
November 1 7, 1928 HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Show People” (S) with Marion Davies and
William Haines
( Meiro-Goldzvyn , Oct. 20; 7,453 ft.; 86 to 106 min.)
This is a satire on Hollywood. And a good one.
While there are moments when the action slows up some,
there is so much comedy in it that these flitting weak-
nesses should be overlooked by the picture-goers. The
story is simple and not original ; it shows the heroine”
and her father driving from Georgia to Hollywood so
that the heroine might get a chance to become a movie
actress. But it is in the development that gets its chance
at fun making. The comedy is mostly of the slapstick
variety, the action showing Miss Davies getting a chance
at the movies by acting in short comedies, where pies and
other things were thrown by the actors at one another.
Charlie Chaplin, Douglas Fairbanks, John Gilbert, Lew
Cody, Aileen Pringle, Karl Dane, George G. Arthur and
others appear as extras in a few short scenes. In the
scene where Mr. Chaplin appears he is shown as having
been impressed so much by the acting of Peggy Pepper
(Peggy Pepper as Marion Davies is called), that he asks
her for her autograph. Peggy condescends and learns
the identity of the autograph collector after he had
entered his expensive car. This makes Miss Pepper nearly
faint.
In the development of the plot, William Haines, (the
hero) who had helped Peggy (the heroine) get a chance
at the movies, is shown as having fallen in love with her.
She, too, loved him. But when she became famous she
felt that she should make new friends. And so she for-
got the hero. She aspired to marry a star (villain).
Just as the wedding ceremony was to be performed the
hero entered the heroine’s boudoir and, after some effort,
made her see the folly of her step. She decided not to
marry the villain and to go back to the hero.
The plot has been founded on an original story by
Agnes Christine Johnstone and Lawrence Stallings: it
has been directed by King Vidor. Miss Davies does very
good work. William Haines is not the egotist he has
been in other pictures ; he acts with restraint, and arouses
and retains the spectator’s sympathy all the way to the
end. Polly Moran, as the heroine’s maid, causes some
laughs.
It is in sound.
FACTS ABOUT TALKING PICTURES
AND INSTRUMENTS — No. 8
The subject of interchangeability is still in the un-
solved problem class, as far as the manufacturer of in-
struments is concerned. I am referring to the Western
Electric Company, which has refrained so far from
making its attitude known clearly; RCA Photophone,
Inc., has already said that they do not object to seeing
films made by processes other than their own shown on a
Photophone instrument, and films made by their own pro-
cess shown on any other instrument, provided ihe tone
quality is reasonably good in the opinion of any fair-
minded person.
In order to learn the attitude of the producers, I have
addressed the following letter to Mr. Quigle, of the Vita-
phone Corporation :
“November 2, 1928.
“Mr. G. E. Quigley,
Warner Bros. Pictures Corp..
New York City.
“Dear Mr. Quigley :
“In conversing with you over the telephone yesterday,
you stated to me that in case a talking picture should give
as good a tone quality as is given by the Western Elec-
tric talking picture instrument, you would have no objec-
tion to leasing your talking pictures to an exhibitor
having such an instrument.
“Will you be kind enough to verify this in writing so
that there might be no misunderstanding?
“Sincerely yours,”
The following is the reply that I received:
“November 5th, 1928.
“Mr. P. S. Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
“Dear Mr. Harrison :
“Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of November
2. 1928 with regard to this Company and Warner Bros.
Pictures, Inc. serving exhibitors who have installed other
than Western Electric equipment with our product.
183
“The statement made in your letter is substantially cor-
rect, but it may perhaps better be restated as follows :”
'The Vitaphone Corporation and Warner Bros. Pic-
tures, Inc. will furnish their product to exhibitors who
have installed other machines for reproduction than the
Western Electric Sound Projector System, provided that
such machines as installed in the given theatres afie ade-
quate satisfactorily to reproduce our product with ampli-
fication and quality of reproduction equal to that ob-
tained by the use of the Western Electric machine and
provided, further, that necessary licenses in respect of
public performance have been obtained from copyright
proprietors for reproduction in such theatres and with
such machines.
“Very truly yours,
“G. E. Quigley
“Vice President & General Manager.”
The following is a second letter that I sent to Mr.
Quigley :
“November 7, 1928.
"Mr. G. E. Quigley,
The Vitaphone Corp.,
New York City.
“Dear Mr. Quigley :
"I thank you for your letter of November 5th which
was in answer to my letter of November 2nd..
"There is one other question that I should like to ask
you so that I may have the full information for the bene-
nt of the subscribers of Harrison’s Reports.”
“Who is to determine whether the instrument used by
an exhibitor gives as good tone quality as a Western
Electric instrument or not?
“I shall appreciate greatly the courtesy of a reply from
you at your earliest convenience because I intend to deal
with this matter in the next issue of Harrison’s Reports.”
“Sincerely yours,
P. S. Harrison.”
In reply to this I received the following letter:
“November 9th, 1928.
“Mr. P. S. Harrison,
1440 Broadway,
New York City.
“Dear Mr. Harrison :
“I have your letter of November 7th wherein you in-
quire who is to determine whether a given instrument
used by an exhibitor gives as good tone quality as the
Western Electric equipment.
“We assume, inasmuch as until the equipment is tested
no verdict can be given of the test that involves the fur-
nishing of product, the producer, in the first instance, will
have to make a decision as to quality. The decision so
made, however, would not be conclusive and would be
open to question later by the Western Electric Company
in the event that it should consider the reproduction on a
given machine was not of satisfactory quality. Con-
ceivably and in the event of dispute as between the pro-
ducer and its licensor on this point, it might be necessary
to refer the matter to arbitration for decision.
“Very truly yours,
“G. E. Quigley,
“Vice-President and General Manager.”
This correspondence clears, I believe, the subject of in-
terchangeability so far as Warner Bros, is concerned.
You may be interested to know that, according to re-
liable information, the other big producer-distributors
have instructed their sales forces to sell their talking and
sound pictures to any exhibitor, regardless of the kind
of instrument he has installed. I shall try to get them to
commit themselves on paper if possible. But whether
they so commit themselves or not, the subject of inter-
changeability is, as I said before, a problem of the pro-
ducers and not of the exhibitors. At this time, however,
I desire to warn those that contemplate installing an in-
strument that for them to invest money on an instrument
that can use only discs will be, in my opinion, unwise, for
they will not be able to show films that have recorded the
sound on the film.
Another thing that I desire to say is that I am inves-
tigating more non-svnchronous instruments. So those
that want to have more information about such instru-
ments and prices, and about cue sheets and prices of
records had better wait until I print the information. It
is possible that some brand of instrument may sell cheaper
and give as good a satisfaction as the expensive non-
synchronous instruments.
184
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Warner Bros.
STORY SUBSTITUTION: ‘Sailor Izzy Murphy,”
“Ginsberg the Great,” “The Little Snob,” and “The Crim-
son City."
You don’t have to accept these, because they have not
been founded on the theme indicated by the Work Sheet.
Paramount and FBO had no substitutions this year.
For the benefit of those that have not received copies of
the issues of June 16, June 23, and July 21, let me restate
the rights of exhibitors in substitution matters.
In the 1927-28 season, the distributors printed either on
their Work Sheets or in their Annual Announcement
Books the following provision :
“Due to causes we deem sufficient, we reserve the right,
without notice, to change the cast, or the director, or the
title of any photoplays described in this announcement.”
You have, no doubt, read this provision before. But I
am sure that, after reading it again, you will be won-
dering whether we are engaged in a shell game or in a
legitimate business, for that is what this provision leads
one to believe — that we are in a shell game ; for in no
legitimate business would a seller tell the buyer, after
the contract is signed, that he has the right to change
the conditions of the oontract when HE deems it neces-
sary, without consulting him, the buyer.
Yet, this provision has a definite meaning ; it says
that the distributors have the right to change the title,
director, and the cast of a picture, when they think it is
necessary for them to change it.
But, though its meaning is definite, some producer-
distributors are interpreting it their own way ; they give
it an interpretation that is really bewildering. For ex-
ample, in every instance, the exchanges tell the exhibitor
that he must accept the substitute pictures because, by
virtue of the provision in question, they have the rights
to change cast, director and title.
But who has disputed such right? Not the exhibitor,
by any means ! What the exhibitor refuses to concede
is that they have the right to change the story, or the
star, or the director, if the director happens to be the
main attraction, the selling point, such as he is when the
pictures belongs to this director’s series.
Let us be specific and give some concrete examples.
The Fox picture “Gateway to the Moon” is being de-
livered for “Luna Park,” the exchanges asserting that
it is the same picture. But “Luna Park” was described
in the Work Sheet as a “vivid, colorful story of carni-
val life,” whereas ‘Gateway to the Moon” is a jungle
story. How can any human being with even one half
ounce of brains insist that the two are the same picture?
And yet some arbitrators have said it is. They ought to
be sent to a lunatic asylum.
Here is another thing about this picture : “Luna Park”
was sold with Victor McLaglen, Greta Nissen and
Charles Farrell, whereas “Gateway to the Moon” has
Dolores Del Rio in the lead. By what stretch of im-
agination can a Fox exchangeman say that the exhibitor
must accept a picture with Dolores Del Rio when he
bought it with Charles Farrell, Victor McLaglen and
Greta Nissen?
Let us take another Fox case: “The Escape” was sold
with Janet Gaynor, Victor McLaglen, and Charles Far-
rell (how do we know that it is not the same picture as
“The Street Angel”? In “The Street Angel” Janet
Gaynor “escapes” from the hands of the police authori-
ties), and it was to have been directed by Raoul Walsh.
But what is Fox delivering in its place? Merely a pic-
ture with William Russell and Virginia Valli? If the
Fox exchanges haven’t shame left in them and say that
“The Escape” they are delivering is “The Escape” the
exhibitors had bought, it would take a man with a flex-
ible conscience, acting as an arbitrator, be he an ex-
hibitor or an exchangeman, to say that it is the same pic-
ture. And yet there have been such arbitrators, in St.
Louis! They told Mr. John Marlow, of Herrin Illinois,
that it is the same picture, and that he ought to play it.
“This arbitration board advises that there is no merit
to the claims put forth by John Marlow, .... and the
claim filed by the Exhibitor against the Fox Film Cor-
poration is hereby dismissed,” they decreed.
You can say just one thing about them, however; they
have shown a little kindness towards Mr. Marlow in the
case of another theatre of his ; they eliminated “Gateway
to the Moon,” “Love Hungry,” and “The News Parade.”
In the case of Brandt vs. Fox Film Corporation, in this
city, they feared to go through with the trial, for the
exchanges know that it is not so easy for them, to get
November 17, 1928
away with such “murder” here; Fox settled the dispute
out of court, by making Mr. Brandt a liberal allowance,
as I have been informed from other sources; Brandt
refused to let me have the facts.
I might bring in other Fox “exhibits,” as well as ex-
hibits from other producer-distributors ; but I don’t think
it is necessary, for it would serve no other purpose except
to fill up more pages. I feel constrained, however, to
mention just one more: Metro- Gold wyn-Mayer have at-
tempted to deliver that “cheese” “Across to Singapore”
for the late George Barr McCutcheon’s “The Prince of
Graustark.” That is some nerve !
* * *
In case the exchanges insist that you play substitute
pictures and they bring you before the arbitration board
when you refuse to do so, unless you want to take the
matter to the courts, proceed as follows : Secure from the
exchange a press-sheet for each of the pictures in dispute.
Put the facts about each picture on one column on a
piece of paper, and the facts that were given in the Work
Sheets in another column, opposite each picture, and
present them to the arbitration board. In case you have
no Work Sheets, you may obtain photostatic copies from
this office, at fifty cents each, which is the actual cost.
Or, demand that the arbitration board subpoena all the
Fox records. They have the right by law.
iour chances ot getting justice before some boards are
very slim, indeed ; but that is your only way out in case
you should be unwilling to resort to court proceedings ;
>ou have agreed to arbitrate all disputes that might arise
out of the contract, and you cannot get out of it, unless
you are willing to take the following steps:
Enter a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.
The Federal Trade Commission was created by Congress
to stop unfair practices. This matter comes under their
jurisdiction. There is one thing, however, you must bear
in mind, that an order from that body to the producer-
distributor to “cease and desist” will take a long time.
In the meantime, you will be compelled either to put up
deposits with the members of the Film Board, in accord-
ance with the provisions of the arbitration rules, or have
a dark house. You might apply to the courts for an in-
junction restraining the exchanges from imposing the
penalties on you on the grounds that their act is in re-
straint of trade.
There are other steps you might take; enter a com-
plaint with the post office authorities on the ground that
the distributor is using the mails to defraud ; for fraud
is his attempt to foist on you different pictures from those
you originally bought.
The Department of Justice, the Attorney-General of
your State, the District Attorney of your city, and the
Better Business Bureau, are other persons or bodies with
whom you might launch a protest.
These are the only means that I can suggest to you to
help you get justice. I might also suggest that you give
me the facts, in case an exchange “manhandles” you, to
print them in Harrison’s Reports. I am willing to go to
to the limit to see that justice is done to you.
If you are short of copies of the issues of June 16, 23,
30, July 21, and August II, send for duplicate copies.
These will be furnished you free of charge.
Don’t let them foist on you something you did not buy
and do not want !
INTERCHANGEABILITY ?— MAYBE!
The trade papers of two weeks ago displayed in big
headlines a statement issued by Mr. J. E. Otterson,
President of Electrical Research Products, Inc., a
subsidiary of Western Electric, manufacturers of the
Western Eelectric Talking picture instrument, regard-
ing interchangeability. “ALL INTERCHANGE-
ABLE!” was one headline. “INTERCHANGE-
ABILITY STAND REMOVES SALES RESIST-
ANCE!” was another.
I have read Mr. Otterson’s statement carefully and
I fail to find where he said anything of the kind. In
fact, things are as muddled now as they were before
he issued that statement.
As far as physical interchangeability is concerned,
no one disagrees with anyone; one film can be played
on any instrument. Whether, however, Mr. Otterson
will agree that films made by the Western Electric
process be played over other instruments, he did not
settle. In fact, he did not say anything about that, even
though he appeared as if he had said something.
More will be said of this matter in a forthcoming
issue.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s
Yearly Subscription Bates:
United States $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.. 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF ‘FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1928
No. 47
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments- -No. 9
In my previous article I stated that the cone system
of sound reproduction and projection is far superior to
the diaphragm-horn system. This is true of the non-
synchronous as well as of the synchronous instruments.
I have had an opportunity to verify this observation
by comparing the tone quality given by the new Photo-
tone sound projector with the old horn; the improve-
ment in the tone quality is noticeable even to un-
trained ears. The music is not muffled, as it is when the
horn is used. So in deciding what non-synchronous
instrument to buy you should be guided solely by the
sound projecting system used by a particular instru-
ment.
R. C. A. Photophone
As said before, the non-synchronous instrument that
is manufactured by the R. C. A. Photophone, Inc., em-
ployes the cone system of sound reproduction and pro-
jection. Four cones will be furnished with each instru-
ment. These will give ample volume in addition to the
excellent tone quality. The price of this instrument has
not yet been determined and in all probability will not
be determined before the first of January. Nor is it yet
known whether an exhibitor that will buy this instru-
ment will have the right to use other than the Bruns-
wick libary of records. It has been stated in these col-
umns before that the Brunswick Phonograph Company
has been requested by the R. C. A. Photophone. Inc.,
under whose patents the Brunswick Company makes
records, to figure putting out a library of records spe-
cially produced for moving picture work. The yearly
rental charge of such library also has not yet been de-
termined, and will probably not be determined before
the first of January. But an exhibitor will have the
right to use the commercial records of any company.
This non-synchronous instrument is, in my opinion,
the best in the market so far, in that it gives the best
tone quality and the greatest volume. The price may
be too big for the reach of the small exhibitor. This
matter, however, will be known in month or so.
Columbia
Last week I had an opportunity to examine the non-
synchronous instrument that has just been put in the
market by the Columbia Phonograph Company. This
instrument, too, uses the cone system of sound repro-
ducing and projecting. Only that a single cone is sup-
plied with it. But the single cone gives sufficient vol-
ume for theatres up to six hundred seats, in addition
to the good tone quality. For theatres that have more
than six hundred seats Columbia is working on another
model, which will employ two cones.
The price of the one-cone model is $800. It is equipped
with two amplifier units, so that if one tube should blow-
out, the other unit could be used by the mere turning
of a switch. The tw-o-cone model will sell for about
$1,100. Columbia has a few one-cone instruments made,
and will have some more made in about seven weeks.
As far as the two-cone instrument is concerned, it will
not be ready for delivery before the first of March. But
from that date on Columbia will be able to take care of
every exhibitor that wants the big instrument.
Columbia has about three hundred records that are
suitable for picture purposes. These you may obtain
from your local dealer, no doubt at a discount, whether
you have installed a Columbia instrument or not. In
case you cannot obtain from your local dealer what you
want, you may write to Mr. Werner Doetch, in care of
Columbia Phonograph Company, 1819 Broadw-ay, New
York City. Mr. Doetch has charge of this work as
well as of the non-synchronous instruments. You may
w-rite to him for any information on these subjects. I
may also say that Columbia is contemplating the put-
ting out of a record libary service, for which it will
make a weekly charge. But this has not yet been
decided finally.
Phototone
This instrument is, as said before, manufactured by
the Platter Cabinet Company, of North Vernon, In-
diana. It has been discussed in these columns before,
so you know- what it is. Lately they have discarded the
horn in favor of a cone dynamic speaker. The cone is
equipped with a rectifier and is attached to a double wall
baffle board with a concave bell, which, as this company
asserts, gives a better sound distribution than the
straight baffle board. I have had an opportunity to hear
records played with the new speaker unit and to com-
pare it with the tone quality given by the old unit, the
horn, and have found that the new unit gives far better
results. While this system is not, in my opinion, fully
as good as the pure cone system, which is used by the
R. C. A. Photophone and the Columbia non-synchron-
ous instruments, it is a nearest approach to it. The price
of the Photophone is, as said before, $500. The charge
for the new speaker unit is $100. But $25 credit is
given for the small horn that used to go with this in-
strument, making the price, with the new speaker unit,
$575.
This company now- puts out records that give various
effects, from steam-boat siren to bells and railroad en-
gine, the sound of horses’ hoofs included.
Ampliphone
This instrument is manufactured by Mr. W. A. Thim-
mig, of DuQuoin, Illinois, a city near St. Louis, Mis-
souri. I have not examined it personally, but I have
received so many favorable letters from exhibitors that
have installed one that I feel it deserves favorable men-
tion in this article. One of the letters came from Mr.
Fred Wehrenberg, President of M. P. T. O. of Mis-
souri, who has had an Ampliphone for some time and
assures me that there is nothing like it in the market.
Mr. Thimmig writes me that he is using a special
amplifier to match the dynamic speakers he has fitted his
instrument with, and assures me that it can outclass
anything in the market. The speaker is mounted on a
40" baffle board. From this description, I have come to
the conclusion that the loud speaker unit of the Ampli-
phone is similar to the unit used by the Phototone.
The price of the instrument is $525 with one dynamic
speaker, and $550 with two such speakers, F. O. B. fac-
tory. He has started building instruments also in St.
Louis. He guarantees for one year any part against de-
fect. And his guarantee is not of the loose type, he says,
but of the honest-to-goodness kind. This is the manner
by which he proceeds: Suppose the pick-up would go
dead! The buyer would not have to send it in first to
find out if it is really defective before he gets another
pick-up, and then be told that it has to be sent to the
factory. He would get a new- pick-up immediately by
the first train and after replacement he could send the
defective pick-up back. The same is true of any other
part.
The prices quoted for the instrument apply to all
theatres up to one thousand seats. Since larger
amplifiers must be used in larger theatres, the cost is
slightly higher for such theatres.
Good-All Orchestrola
This instrument is manufactured by the Good-All
Electric Manufacturing Company, of Ogallala, Nebr.
( Continued on last page )
186
N ovember 24, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
“Interference*’ (AT) — with Special Cast
( Paramount , Jan. 19; Synchronised; 7,480 ft.)
That a late comer into the talking picture field, such as
Paramount-Famous Laskv Corporation is, should have
made a picture that is far superior to anything that has so
far been produced is, indeed, surprising. But such are the
facts. “Interference" is a finished product from every angle.
Its tone quality is the best that has been heard in pictures of
this kind. The characters at no time yell or scream like
longshoremen, as is usually the case with talking pictures ;
they speak just as they do in life, in a tone of voice re-
quired by the occasion. The voices of the characters carry
well, and are intelligible at all times. On can distinguish
the little mannerisms that characterize voices in life. The
recording has been done exceedingly well, and the repro-
duction is good, in spite of the fact that the Movietone sys-
tem of sound recording and reproducing is being used at
the Criterion, where the picture is now being shown. All
the players do good work, and the direction is as good as
it could be desired. The photography, too, is first class.
As to the action, it holds one in tense suspense at all times.
“Interference” is a reproduction of the stage play by
Roland Pertwee and Harold Rearden, which played in New
York last year and is playing in Chicago now. It made a
great success in London. It deals with a man (hero), who,
in order -to save the reputation of his ex-wife, whom he
still loved, poisoned an ex-sweetheart of his, whom he had
discarded, but who was still infatuated with him. The ex-
wife (heroine) had married a member of the British
nobility, who had gained fame as a physician. The ex-
sweetheart wanted to bring disgrace upon the nobleman and
upon the heroine, because she had thought that the heroine
was still in love with her ex-sweetheart. When the hero
presents to the heroine the letters she had written him years
before, which letters the dead woman wanted published, and
when he informs the police authorities that it was he that
had committed the murder and not the heroine, whom they
suspected, the doctor realizes what a noble man the hero
was.
The cast consists of the excellent players, Clive Brook,
Evelyn Brent, Doris Kenyon, William Powell, Brandon
Hurst, Louis Payne, Wilfred Noy, Donald Stuart, Ray-
mond Lawrence and others. The picture was directed by
Mr. Roy J. Pomeroy.
“Interference” is a credit to talking pictures.
“Sinners in Love” — with Olive Borden
(FBO, Nov. 4; 6,310 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
Only a mediocre program picture. The story is neither
new nor interesting. Miss Borden, to be sure, gives her
usual vivacious performance. There are no thrills and
very little suspense to hold the spectator’s interest. Seena
Owner, as the mistress of the hero, and Huntley Gordon as
the hero, give adequate performances.
The story revolves around the oldest child of a poor
family with many children who rebels at the dirty and
lowly condition of her home and who goes to the city to
seek her fortune. After wandering around for a job she
finally obtains one in a restaurant through her fellow-
roomer who introduced her to some gay old sports who
take her to a cabaret. Her escort makes love to her and
she escapes into the hero’s office. After telling him her
story, he gives her a job as maid to his mistress and later,
when he discovers how beautiful she is, and having fallen
in love with her, she becomes a “come-on” in the gambling
rooms. She entices a millionaire to play roulette and after
he had lost all his money she learns what her job really
is and runs away. But the hero seeks her out and promises
to marry her and reform. His mistress, learning of the
affair, plans with a former henchman of the hero, a dope
fiend, to have the girl come to his apartment where he
would murder her. Instead she kills him in an effort to
save her honor. The hero finds out that his mistress had
lured the girl away and goes to the apartment where he
puts the revolver in the murdered man’s hand to make it
appear as if he had committed suicide. He takes her away
and they are shown later as happily married.
It was directed by George Melford from the T rue Story
Magazine story “The Law You Can’t Forget.” Others in
the cast are Ernest Hilliard, as the dope fiend and hench-
man, who, too, is good ; Daphne Pollard as the heroine’s
girl friend who contributes a little comedy, and Phillips
Smalley as the millionaire who fell for a pretty face.
“Alias Jimmy Valentine” (PT) — William
Haines, Lionel Barrymore and Leila Hyams
( Metro-Goldwyn , Jan. 26; 8,000 ft.; 93 to 114 min.)
Very good ! The interest is held tight by what is un-
folded. The scenes that show Jimmy Valentine, after he
had successfully made the detective believe that he was not
Jimmy Valentine, sacrificing everything in order to save
the child that had been imprisoned accidentally in the bank
vault, are suspensive. These scenes show all the characters
talk They grip the spectator until it is all over. The tone
quality is good, and the synchronization perfect. It is
plainly evident that the talk adds to the entertainment values
of the picture.
It is Paul Armstrong’s old stage play, in which a clever
crook is shown regenerated by his love for a girl, who did
not know he had been a crook ; she, too, had fallen des-
parately in love with him. But the detective would not
leave him alone. With a clue, he is able to pin an Express
Office robbery on Jimmy Valentine. He follows him td the
country, where he had been working in a bank, of which his
sweetheart’s father was president. He appears at the bank
and accuses the hero to the president as being Jimmy Val-
entine, the famous crook. But the hero is able to prove to
the detective that he is not Jimmy Valentine. Just as the
detective was ready to leave after making profuse apologies
for the “mistake” he had made, the heroine enters and with
tears in her eyes informs he father that her little sister had
been accidentally locked into the new vault. As no one had
the combiation of the safe and as the child had but a short
time to live, the hero discards his pose and opens the safe,
saving the child. The detective, however, instead of ar-
resting him, goes away, assuring him, the hero, that to him
Jimmy Valentine was dead.
There is a great deal of comedy throughout the picture,
caused by Mr. Haines and by his pals, Karl Dane and
Tully Marshall. The picture was directed skillfully by
Jack Conway.
“The Farmer’s Daughter” — with Marjorie
Beebe and Warren Burke
{Fox; July 2; 5,148 ft.; 69 to 73 min.)
A good slapstick farce comedy. At itmes it makes the
spectator howl with laughter. It is refreshingly acted
by a newcomer, Miss Beebe, who is a splendid comedienne.
Arthur Stone, as the villain, too, contributed not a little
to the hilarious fun as the city slicker who learned that
the farm girl had some money and who tried to annex
it by wooing her. Lincoln Steadman as the heroine’s
country sweetheart, and an inventor of a machine for
wrapping the cheese which is manufactured by the girl’s
father, adds his bit of fun. Warren Burke, though an-
nounced as the hero, has little to do. He is merely picked
up by the villain in his car in the beginning of the picture
and at the end appears in time to save the country people
from losing their money when they learned that they
were being “gypped” by the villain. A well-trained don-
key. pet of the heroine, is also laugh-provoking.
The story, not particularly original, revolves around
the strong farm girl in love with her inventor-sweetheart,
who plays with her boy friends in a decidedly rough man-
ner and thus is able to protect herself. She falls for the
soft talk of the villain. She is ready to give her money
to him at the fair where the machine was on display, for
the purpose of raising funds to promote its manufacture,
when she finds out that he is a crook. The hero tells his
father, a cheese manufacturer, that the machine is a won-
der and so, of course, he buys it and the country folk do
not lose their money.
The picture was directed by Arthur Rosson from a
story by Harry Brand and Henry Johnson, adapted by
Frederica Sagor. Sam DeGrasse is the farmer.
It should please all classes of audiences who like broad
comedies because of its wholesome clean fun.
November 24, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
187
“The Home Coming” — German Cast
( Paramount-Ufa , rel. dale not yet set; 8,104 ft.)
This is not a picture for the regular theatres ; it is rather
suitable for theatres that cater to a special kind of custom,
such as attend Little theatres. The story is that of two
Germans, friends, who, while fighting at the Russian front,
are made prisoners of war and sent to Siberia. They decide
to escape. One of them is unable to proceed any iurther
from exhaustion, and, while the other hunted for water the
soldiers find and take away the exhausted friend. The
other eventually succeeds in reaching Germany. There he
finds his friend's wife and as he had no other home he is
invited to stay. Soon they fall in love. The husband re-
turns after the end of the war, and, finding his wife in the
anus of his friend, thinks the worst. The friend assures
him that there is nothing wrong between them, and that
that was the first kiss he had taken from his wife. The
husband, realizing that his wife loved his friend, goes away,
leaving her to his friend.
The theme is demoralizing, in that it sanctions a hus-
band’s delivering his wife to another man without the
formalities of divorce. Some scenes are very “hot,” in-
deed, such that may be objected to by family custom. At
one time the wife is shown uncovering her body beyond
to what an American director would have permitted under
similar circumances. In other scenes it is plainly evident
that both the man and the woman were thinking of each
other in the terms of sex. In short, the picture appeals
almost wholly to the sexual passions ; there is nothing in it
for the mind. Xo fault can be found with the acting and
the direction.
The plot has been founded on the novel "Karl and Anna,”
by Leonard Frank. Joe May has directed it. Lars Hansen,
Dita Parlo, Gustave Froelich and others are in the cast.
“Honeymoon Flats” — with George Lewis
and Dorothy Culliver
( Universal , Dec. 30; 6,057 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
A good program picture. It is a domestic story, in which
misunderstandings lead husband and wife to a point where
they are to part. But eventually each realizes that he loved
the other and they make up. The trouble had been brought
about chiefly by the heroine's mother, who had always been
meddling in their affairs.
The jealousy is on the part of the young husband this
time ; he suspected his wife of infidelity, because he had
seen a rounder pay too much attention to her. The truth
of the matter was that the rounder had illicit relations with
the wife of the hero’s friend, but the friend all the while
thought that the rounder was after the heroine.
George Lewis is the young hero, Dorothy Gulliver the
young heroine, Kathlyn Williams the heroine’s mother,
Ward Crane the rounder, Bryant Washburn the blind hus-
band, Jane Winton the faithless wife. Eddie Phillips, Phil-
lips Smalley, Fisher Caron, and others are in the cast.
The story is by Earl Derr Biggers, which was published
in the Saturday Evening Post. It was directed well by
Millard Webb.
“Driftwood” — wiht Don Alvardo and
and Marceline Day
( Columbia , Oct. 15, 6,267 ft.; 72 to 89 min.)
A fair picture of neighborhood caliber. Its action is
rather slow on account of the type of story. Miss Day is
quite good as the heroine (a demi-monde) who was willing
to be any man’s girl but not any man’s wife. Don Alvardo
(hero) is likeable as the lazy beachcomber who at first dis-
liked the heroine but who finally fell in love with her.
The picture, an adaptation of the Richarding Davis story,
revolves around the derelicts who drift to the South Sea
Islands because of difficulties they had in their own country.
(It is full of native girls doing their famous hula dances and
is slightly sexy.) The owner of the islnad (villain) covets
the white girl, who had escaped by swimming from the boat
of a man who had played a trick on hef by wanting her for
himself instead of getting her a promised job. The villain
wants to marry her but she does not want him. In order
that she might remain on the island she buys the hero when
drunk for $10 and induces him to marry her. When the
villain goes to the shack to get the heroine, he is given a
sound beating by the hero. The villain then kidnaps the
hero and locks him in his rooms planning to send him to a
leper colony so that he might have the girl. His native
girl warns the heroine, who goes to the villain and pretends
that she wants to live with him so that she might learn
where the hero had been hidden. After their escape, they
both leave the island, prepared to live a new life.
The picture was directed by Christy Cabanne. Others
in the cast are Alan Roscoe as the villain, Fritzi Brunette
as the native girl ar.d J. W. Johnson as the owner of the
boat.
“On Trial” (AT) — with an All Star Cast
(IV arners-V itaphone , Dec. 29; Synchronized ; 8,693 ft.)
A great play, greatly acted and directed. But the tone
quality of the sound is the worst that has so far been heard
in talking pictures. In some of the scenes it is difficult to
understand what Pauline Frederick is saying. The voices
of the characters, with the exception of those of Lois Wil-
son and of little Vondell Darr, sound muffled ; they lack
the crisp quality that charactized the voices of the actors
in other Warner Bros, productions. At times the rev-’
erberation of the sound is so prolonged that one almost
can distinguish the different “layers.” These defects seem
to have been caused by inadequate sound-proofing of the
studio and by the lack of understanding of the action of
sound by the director. It is evident that the microphone was
not placed in direct line with the speaking actor.
As far as the story is concerned, it is great ; so great, in
fact, that the lines spoken by the child and those spoken
by Miss Wilson will stick in one’s memory for long after
one has seen the picture. The acting of little Miss Darr is
superb ; it is almost unbelievable that a child of her age
could be so natural in portraying a part. The scenes in the
court room where Miss Wilson appears with the intention
of testifying so as to save her husband, who was unwilling
to testify for himself, and thus save his life are very pow-
erful, indeed. There is suspense throughout.
The story revolves around a husband (hero) who sus-
pects his wife (heroine), whom he loves devotedly, of in-
discretion with a friend of his. The wife’s acts had made
him suspect her, because she could not explain them satis-
factorily. The hero goes to the other man’s home, and
shoots and kills him. He is arrested for murder. During
his trial he is unwilling to take the stand and testify for
himself. His lawyer puts the hero’s child on the stand
against the protests of the hero. By clever cross-examina-
tion the hero’s defense counsel is able to bring out part
of the facts that had led to the murder. The heroine, who
had disappeared, was very ill at a hospital. She overheard
two nurses discussing the trial and learns that her husband
was being tried for murder. She rushes to the court room,
takes the stand, and tells the court how the dead man had
wronged her when she was an innocent little girl, how she
had found happiness in her marriage to the hero, particu-
larly after the coming of their child, and how the dead man
had threatened to destroy her happiness by telling the
hero of their past, and how the hero had misunderstood her
motive in going to the dead man’s home, where she had
gone to plead with him not to destroy her happiness, re-
sulting in the murder. The jury retire and all except one
were for acquittal. The case is reopened and by some new
clues it is found that the dead man had been killed by his
secretary who had robbed the safe of the twenty thousand
dollars, which the hero had given the dead man in payment
of a debt. The dead man had given the hero a card on the
back of which there were the numbers of the combination
of his safe. The secretary had taken the card out of the
hero’s pocket and had opened the safe, and at the trial had
made it appear as if the hero had gone to the house to rob
the safe.
The defects in the tone quality mentioned are noticeable
only in the first half of the picture, where the interest is
not so tense ; in the second half they are not so noticeable
because one’s attention is absorbed completely by the un-
folding of the events.
The play is by Elmer Rice. It was directed by Archie
Mayo. Others in the cast, are Bert Lvtell, Holmes Her-
bert, Richard Tucker, Jason Robards, John Arthur, Frank-
lin Pangbom, Fred Kelsey, Edmund Breese, and Edward
Martindel.
188
HARRISON’S REPORTS
November 24, 1928
It sells for $495. It is equipped with three speakers.
No. 1 is a 12 foot air column speaker. Nos. 2 and 3 are
either balanced armature cones, or dynamic cones, of
the Magnavox type. The exhibitor may have either
kind. I have not examined this instrument but several
of those exhibitors that have installed it praise it highly.
Among such exhibitors is Air. Chas. W. Picquet, of the
Carolina Theatre, Pinehurst, North Carolina, President
of the M. P. T. O. of North Carolina. He suggests that
1 advise all those of exhibitors that are interested in
non-synchronous instruments that if they have not
heard the Good-All Orchestrola they “Ain’t heard any-
thing yet." These testimonials, particularly the testi-
monial from Air. Picquet, is what has prompted me to
give this instrument a position in this article.
Orchestraphone
This instrument is sold by National Theatre Supply
Company. The Junior Alodel sells for $750, $200 down
and balance in easy monthly payments. The turntables
are in an all-steel cabinet. From what I have learned
it gives good satisfaction. The horn type of sound pro-
jection is used.
Cueing Services
There are two cueing services functioning at present,
Exhibitors Cueing Service, 845 South Wabash Ave-
nue, Chicago, Illinois, and Q-Service, 988 Rupley Drive,
N. E., Atlanta, Georgia.
I sent a letter to the Atlanta concern asking for in-
formation on several things, including particulars about
the musicians that compile the cue sheets and what
experience they have had. They answered every ques-
tion except about their musicians.
The Chicago concern answered every question satis-
factorily.
The Atlanta concern leases each cue sheet at one
dollar each, on a weekly service basis. In other words,
you cannot get a cue sheet occasionally; you must get
them regularly.
The Chicago concern charges $1.00 for each cue, and
$5.00 a week on a weekly charge of not more than seven
cue sheets a week.
There is also the National Record Cue Service of
America, at 1600 Broadway, this city, but the owners
of it have failed to give me the information that I
asked of them as to who cue the pictures and what
experience they have had.
In addition to these services, the Platter Cabinet
Company has decided to put out a cue service of its
own, engaging Mr. Bradford, a first class musician, to
do the compiling of the cue sheets.
LET THE MOVING PICTURES BE DRY !
In order for you to conduct your theatre profitably it
is essential that you appeal to one hundred per cent, of
the picture-going public. If you were to alienate, say,
even twenty per cent, of such public, you could not con-
duct it profitably; your profit would be gone.
At the last election over twenty million people voted
dry, if we are to assume that those who voted for Air.
Hoover voted for the maintaining and the enforcement
of prohibition. No matter what our personal beliefs may
be in the question of prohibtion, if we are to be real
Americans we must abide by the will of the majority.
Most theatres are located in dry territory. You will
realize, therefore, how essential it is for you to avoid
giving the slightest offense to any of your customers
and to possible customers.
Unfortunately, the nature of pictures in the matter
of prohibition have been such that you offended many
of your customers, for the reason that many of the pic-
tures depicted drinking and debauchery scenes, such as
would give offense even to persons opposed to prohibi-
tion.
I have had many letters stating how injurious
this feature has proved to their business, and how de-
sirous they are to see an end put to it. One of them told
me that he has had a mother call on him and tell him
that the reason why she would not allow her children
to attend the performances at his theatre, even though
she was well aware of the fact that he conducted it
very properly, was her fear lest they take to drinking
by seeing how other people become intoxicated.
Since the verdict of the people at the last election was
for the continuance of prohibition, why not have pro-
hibition also in pictures? There is no question that the
disregard of the producers of the sentiment of the
people in this question has hurt the business. In fact,
this feature has done more to hurt the theatre business
than even business depression itself. People will not
allow their children to attend picture theatre perform-
ances. And when they keep their children away, they
stay away themselves, either because they are not
“lured" to the theatres by the young folk, or because
they do not want to arouse a desire for pictures in their
children. And you are made to suffer, although you
have nothing to do with this condition.
Air. Hays has assured such organizations as desire
the betterment of the moral quality of pifctures — not
professional reformers but real friends of motion pic-
tures— that the members of his organization have de-
cided to discontinue depicting drinking and debauchery
scenes in pictures except when it is absolutely necessary
for the development of the plot. In my observations as
a reviewer I have found that the statement of Mr. Hays
is not correct, for often I have seen drinking scenes
unnecessary to the plot included in the picture only
because the producer on the coast thought that life is
nothing else but one cocktail party after another. It
is hardly necessary for me to give titles of such pic-
tures; every one of you knows that neither Air. Hays
nor any of the members of his organization can con-
tradict this statement.
Another excuse given to these good persons by Mr.
Hays has been that pictures must be internationally-
minded. This excuse, too, is untenable, for the harm
done to the reputation of this nation by the inclusion
of drinking and debauchery scenes in pictures is irre-
parable. Millions upon millions of people throughout
the world have no chance to visit this country. They
are compelled to form their opinion of us, therefore,
by what they see us do in moving pictures. And the
moving pictures, as they are produced now, do not con-
vey the true character of the American people. What
will -they think of us when they see us drinking and
carousing even though we are supposed to have a law
making it a criminal offense to possess liquor, not to
say to sell liquor? They will surely think that we are
a nation of hypocrites.
There is no question in my mind that ninety per cent,
of you agree with those of exhibitors who have written
me the letters protesting against this condition, and who
believe that drinking should be eliminated from pic-
tures; but you are helpless to bring about a change for
the reason that, because of the selling system now pre-
vailing, you are compelled to buy your pictures before
they are made, and to contract for them in a block.
You cannot reject such pictures as you know they will
offend your custom. Air. Hays cannot shut drinking
scenes out of pictures either, for the reason that the
members of his organization will not accept his sugges-
tions. This has been demonstrated repeatedly by their
having put into pictures books and plays he has
banned. Yet there must be some way to bring this
reform about.
How can it be brought about?
In my opinion only the Brookhart Bill can bring re-
lief to you in this matter, — that same bill that the pro-
ducer-distributors so savagely fought last year.
The Brookhart Bill may not be perfect. The method
of its enforcement, which Senator Brookhart has pro-
vided, may not be just right. But the principle of it is
right. As far as the mechanics of its enforcement is con-
cerned, let me say that Senator Brookhart has assured
me that he is willing to amend it so as to prevent any
harm to the interests of the independent exhibitors.
Senator Brookhart framed and introduced his bill in
Congress with but one object in view — to help the inde-
pendent exhibitors. And that is the spirit that animates
him today. If you want relief, then, you must lend him
your support in his efforts to have this bill enacted into
law. With the Brookhart Bill made into law, not only
will you not be compelled to play pictures that contain
drinking and debauchery scenes, but you will have a
chance to bid for product in the open market, instead of
having to wait until the affiliated circuits milk it dry.
This bill will be an insurance to your business. In the
meantime, I suggest that, if you desire to avoid playing
pictures that play up drinking, take your complaint to
the board of arbitration. And don’t forget to take your
minister, rabbi or priest along so as to impress upon the
arbitrators that they shall not render an award that
will offend the sentiment of the people of your com-
munity.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at tbe post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1873.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates: 1440 BROADWAY Published Weekly by
United States ..310.00 ,r . _t P- S- HARRISON
U. S. Insular Posses- New York, N. Y. Editor and Publisher
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico.^ 12.00 ^ Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor Established July 1, 1919
zffid 14.50 Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors Tel. : Pen^wlnia 7649
Other Foreign Coun- Cable Address :
tries 16.50 its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Harreports
25c. a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. (Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X SATURDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1928 No748
YOUR RIGHTS IN CANCELLATION
NOTICES
I have been told that many exhibitors do not
know that they have as much right to send in a
notice cancelling an application for a contract
before the producer-distributor approved it as
has the producer-distributor within the time limit
specified in the contracts for a particular zone.
If so, then they should know that, if they should
send a notice of cancellation either by letter, or
by telegraph or by note, delivered by special mes-
senger, before the producer approved their appli-
cation, that application stands canceled. A tele-
phone cancellation is equally effective. But if
any one takes such means to cancel an applica-
tion, it will be necessary for one to have witnesses
to prove it.
The precedent that has been established is that
when both the exhibitor and the distributor send
in their notices, the one notice cancelling and the
other approving, priority of time determines
which one is valid. If, for example, the postmark
on your envelope, or the time you delivered your
letter to the registry department of the post office,
is earlier than the time denoted by the post mark
on the envelope that carried the approved con-
tract to you, then the contract remains cancelled.
If the time on the distributor’s envelope shows
priority, then the contract remains in effect. The
same is true if the notices of both are sent by
telegraph; priority of times determines the stand-
ing of the contract.
When the distributor fails to approve your ap-
plication within the time limit specified in your
contract for your zone, such application is null
and void at your option, even though you have
received it. In other words, if the distributor ap-
proved the application outside the time limit and
sent it to you, if you want the contract, no one
can prevent you from accepting it. Once the con-
tract is in your hands, the exchange cannot recall
it, unless it recalls it through the post office chan-
nels. And then only before it has reached you.
But you can notify it that you don’t want it.
I suggest that you save the envelopes of all
important correspondence you receive from ex-
changes. An envelope saved at so little trouble
may save you much trouble later on. You might
also mark on the envelope what was in it, and
the exact time you received it.
In sending cancellation notices or other impor-
tant mail, register the letter. The burden of proof
that you sent a cancellation notice rests upon you,
just as it rests on the distributor when there is
any argument as to whether you received or not
the approved contract; if he lacks a registry re-
ceipt or other proof, he is out of luck.
FAKING
Some companies photograph the sound on the
film, and after they edit the picture they run it
through the talking machine and record the talk
on discs. While the synchronization by such a
manner of recording is perfect, the tone quality
can in no way compare with that given when the
talk is recorded on the disc directly.
Since we are talking about tone quality it would
not be a bad idea for you to mark on your con-
tract that the talk, whether recorded on the film
or on the disc, must not be “second-hand,” or, it
must not be recorded from other than the actor’s
voices directly at the time of taking the picture ;
and it must not be “superimposed.” You ought
to do this not only for your own protection, but
also for the protection of your public. Superim-
posing “talk” on a film is a form of cheating.
And when you show to your customers such film,
you aid in the cheating, regardless of the fact that
you are an innocent party.
The excuse for this form of cheating given by
some producer-distributors is their desire to sup-
ply the exhibitor, and consequently the public,
demand for talking pictures. But this should not
prompt them to adopt means that are unethical
and even fraudulent; if talking pictures are to
remain a permanent attraction, the public should
be treated honestly.
ABOUT OUTLAWED CONTRACTS
I have read in the bulletin sent by M. P. T. O.
of Indiana the following under the heading, “Out-
lawing of Contracts on Account of Age.”
“Many of the exchanges are now cleaning their
records and are demanding play-dates on old con-
tracts. If your contract is over one year old or
if one year has elapsed since you played any sub-
jects from such contract or any play-date thereon
was arbitrarily set for you by the exchange, then
such contract is outlawed by reason of its age
and you cannot be forced to play the remaining
pictures on it. . . . ”
As said before, the age of your contract starts
from the play-date contained in the second clause
or in any other provision. If there is no play-date
mentioned, then the one-year life of your contract
starts from the first play-date set in accordance
with the provisions of the play-date clause.
If the contract is for one or more unplay-dated
pictures and no picture was played within twelve
months from the date it was signed and no date
was set arbitrarily by the exchange during that
time, such contract becomes automatically out-
lawed.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 1, 1928
190
“Manhattan Cocktail” (S) — with Nancy
Carroll and Richard Arlen
(Paramount, Nov. 24; 6,051 ft.; 70 to 86 min.)
Indifferent ' Money has been expended lavishly
on it, but the story lacks appealing qualities. It is
the old, old story of a girl that wanted to enter
Broadway as an actress, because she thought she
had talent. She had taken part in college plays and
she thought that, with her experience at acting, she
could set Broadway afire.
In the development of the plot the girl (heroine)
is shown as disregarding the advice of the young
man (hero) she loved, and as going to New York
with another student, who, too, had similar aspira-
tions. Her partner proves to be a selfish person;
when the wife of a producer, who always sought
young “talent,” “finds” him and induces her hus-
band to give him a place in the chorus, he gets
such a big head that he lets the heroine drift for
herself, until the heroine, on the advice of an old
stage watchman, succeeds in inducing the producer
to engage her. The producer becomes fascinated
by her beauty and offers her a position. But he
soon finds out that she wasn’t “that kind of girl.”
The hero comes to town to induce the heroine to
go back home with him but she will not go, because
fortune began to smile on her. The producer’s
wife chances to come upon the hero and realizes
what a “talent” he had. She recommends him to
her husband. The husband becomes so tired of his
wife’s talent discoveries that he instructs his lawyer
to start divorce proceedings. He frames the hero
and has him jailed for check forgery. The heroine
goes to his apartment and pleads with him to save
the hero. He promises to do so provided she cap-
itulates to him. She promises to do so but not until
after he had bailed him out and had withdrawn
the false charges against him. He agrees, and has
him bailed out. But the heroine reneges. It all ends
with the hero and heroine returning home.
There are hardly any situations that hold the
spectator’s interest very tense. It is just one of
those pictures that one may see and either enjoy or
not enjoy, this depending on one’s mood. There
is nothing in it that will impress one.
The story was written by Ernest Vajda. It was
directed by Dorothy Arzner. Nancy Carroll and
Richard Arlen do good work well enough. Paul
Lukas, Lilyan Tashman, Danny O’Shea and others
are in the cast.
The only voice heard in it is that of Nancy Car-
roll ; she sings two songs. And she does it well.
The remainder of the picture is synchronized with
music only.
“The Masks of the Devil” (S) — with
John Gilbert
( M-G-M , Nov. 17 ; 6,575 /6; 76 to 94 min.)
The part Mr. Gilbert plays is so unsympathetic
that while he holds the attention of the spectator
by what he does fairly well half of the time, he
never arouses his sympathetic interest. He is pre-
sented as a man with a fascinating face, but with
the heart of a devil. He is a “terror” with women,
and when his school-days chum visits him and pre-
sents to him the girl he was to marry, he fixes his
gaze upon her and frightens her. With a scheme
conceived by his devilish mind, he sends his chum
away to Central America, on an oceanographic ex-
pedition, so that he might find an opportunity to
capture his chum’s sweetheart (heroine). He suc-
ceeds, even though the heroine had tried to resist
him. When the young man returns from his trip
and learns that his sweetheart loved the hero, he
gives her up to him.
The action is monotonous, because of the fact
that the hero goes through the same thing over and
over again. He does nothing but follow the heroine
and try to charm her so that she might love him and
not his chum. At times one is bored.
The plot has been founded on Jacob Wasser-
mann’s novel “The Masks of Erwin Reiner.” It
is supposed to be the story of the painting of
“Michael and the Devil,” which hangs in a church
in Vienna. This Reiner is supposed to be a count
whose morals were very lax, but who had been se-
lected by a famous artist to pose as the angel. The
picture was directed by Victor Seastrom well. Mr.
Gilbert did the best he could in an inpleasant part.
Eva Von Berne is not much either as a screen
beauty or as an actress ; she is too stiff. Theodore
Roberts does well as the artist. Ralph Forbes is the
sweetheart. Ethel Wales contributes some comedy,
she takes the part of a selfish aunt, who did not
mind what happened to the heroine so long as she
fared well.
“The Power of the Press” — with Jobyna
Ralston and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.
(Columbia, Oct. 31 ; 6,465 ft.; 75 to 92 min. )
A good entertainment. The spectator is held in
pretty tense suspense all the way through, and his
sympathies are appealed to. There is some comedy
here and there, too, and some thrills. The thrills
occur toward the end, and although they are of the
“hokum” variety, they are effective, just the same.
They are caused by the villains in an automobile
trying to capture the hero, a cub reporter, who had
captured their leader and had been taking him to
the office of his newspaper for a big story. This
villain had killed the district attorney at the orders
of a candidate for mayor, who was fighting the
heroine’s father, who, too, was running for mayor.
This all happened a few days before the election,
the object of the villainous candidate being to kill
the chances of the heroine’s father for his election ;
he had made it appear as if the heroine had illicit
relations with the dead man. The hero, thought of
as a “dumbbell,” had become very popular wtih
his editor for having scooped all other reporters on
his paper as well as the reporters on the other
papers, and secured a story connecting the heroine
with the district attorney. But afterwards he had
fallen into bad graces with him for having de-
manded the retraction of the story, because the
heroine had convinced him that she was innocent,
and that his story had brought disgrace upon her
and upon her innocent family. The hero is dis-
charged. But soon afterwards he follows a clue and
gets the real murderers. The big story he obtained
as the result of his having followed up his “hunch”
re-instates him in the graces of the editor and he is
given his job back. He wins also the heroine.
The story was written by Frederick A. Thomp-
son. It was directed by Frank Capra. Mildred
Harris, Philo McCullough, Wheeler Oakman, Rob-
ert Edeson, Charles Clary, Del Henderson and
others are in the cast.
December 1, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
191
“Outcast” (S) — with Corinne Griffith
(F. N., Nov. ii ; Synch., 6,854; silent, 6,622 ft.)
Artificial ! Therefore it does not arouse much in-
terest in the spectator. Besides, some of the action
is not sympathy arousing. For instance, the hero
loses the woman he loves ; she had married for
money. Later on he meets the heroine, who had
been supposedly thrown out of her home in the
underworld by her sweetheart ; they become
chummy, so chummy, in fact, that the hero sets up
an apartment for her. Some months later the ex-
fiancee meets the hero and renews their friendship ;
she makes him believe that she still cared for him.
As a result, the hero grows cold towards the heroine
and prepares to run away to South America with
his ex-sweetheart. But the ex-sweetheart does not
want to go to South America, preferring to remain
in the United States, and close to her wealthy hus-
band’s purse, intimating that she would not be
averse to the idea of having secret relations with
him. The hero is shocked at the idea. The heroine,
in order to expose the ex-sweetheart, calls on the
hero and demands a big sum of money for her
silence (a peculiar way for a woman to show her
love), intimating that she could get twice as much
from his ex-sweetheart’s husband. The ex-sweet-
heart, fearing lest the heroine reveal her conduct
to her dollar-loaded husband, leaves the hero and
runs to her husband before the heroine could reach
him. The hero now wakes up to the fact that the
ex-sweetheart did not love him and that the heroine
was true to him.
Such an unfolding of the events in a drama is
somewhat contrary to our moral standards. And
this is the reason why the spectator’s emotions of
sympathy are not appealed to.
The plot has been founded on a story by Hubert
Henry Davis. The picture has been directed by
William Steiter. Edmund Lowe supports Miss
Griffith, as the hero. Kathryn Carver is the woman
that had married the moneyed man. James Ford,
Huntly Gordon, Louise Fazenda, Sam Hardy, Lee
Moran and others are in the cast.
“Sisters of Eve” — with Anita Stewart and
Betty Blythe
(Rayart; Sept.; 5,675 ft.; 65 to 81 min.)
The picture started out with all the appearance
of being a thrilling mystery drama, such as the
author of the story, E. Phillips Oppenheim, is
known to write mostly. But the spectator’s interest
is lost half way through when the action falls flat.
The ending is dull. Miss Stewart (heroine) is ade-
quate as the girl that preferred poverty to riches,
which were obtained at the sacrifice of happiness.
Miss Blythe is the adventuress that prefers riches
at the sacrifice of others’ happiness, including that
of her husband, whom she had driven insane.
Creighton Hale (hero), a trifle stout, is rather well
fitted to the role of the arrogant, conceited man,
whose one aim was to become very wealthy ; he ig-
nored women as being unnecessary in his scheme of
life but finally succumbed to both the heroine and
the adventuress. There are one or two exciting
scenes such as the one where the adventuress’ in-
sane husband is shown under guard of a strong
man, being forced to sign checks for his mercenary
wife ; the one of his subsequent escape, after he had
killed his guard, and the one of his return to his
wife’s apartment where the hero was visiting her.
The story revolves around two sisters, formerly
in a vaudeville act in New York with their father.
The adventuress marries one of the twin sons of a
wealthy family. They go to Europe and the hus-
band disappears supposedly murdered or a suicide.
A detective is hired to locate him. The hero, in
the meantime has rescued the heroine after she had
taken poison when she became disgusted with life.
She consents to become his housekeeper if he will
promise not to disclose her whereabouts to her sister
who was anxious to find her. The adventuress lures
the hero to her home and makes him fall in love
with her. But when her husband appears, and he
learns what she really was, he realizes that money,
which was his god, was not everything in life and
so he goes away and later is united with the heroine.
The picture was directed by Scott Pembroke
from Mr. Oppenheim’s novel “The Tempting of
Tavernake.” Francis Ford is good as the detective,
as is Charles King, who plays the dual role of the
twin brothers. Harold Nelson is the father who
aided his adventuress daughter fleece her husband.
“Silks and Saddles” — with Marion Nixon
and Richard Walling
( Universal; Jan. 20; 5,809 ft.; 6 7 to 83 min.)
A good enough race-track melodrama suitable
for smaller theatres. There is a nice love story in-
terwoven and lovers of the sport will enjoy the two
races, in which the hero is shown as having thrown
one and won the other. Richard Walling is likeable
as the jockey whose devotion to the heroine and to
her mother, who had raised him, was temporarily
forgotten when he fell into the clutches of a racing
combine, which used a beautiful girl to win the con-
fidence of the jockey so that he would do whatever
she asked him. Mary Nolan is the beautiful blonde.
Marion Nixon is sweet as the girl who had faith
in the hero, even after he had become a tramp, when
he learned what he had really done. Claire Mc-
Dowell is good, too, as the owner of the champion
horse, who would not allow anyone but the hero to
ride her.
The story is familiar; it revolves around the
country boy, who gets a chance to go to New York
to ride in the big races, and who meets the wrong
crowd, as a result of which he throws a race and
is disgraced until he gets a chance to try again, be-
cause the heroine still had faith in him.
The picture was directed by Robert F. Hill from
a story by Gerald Beaumont. Others in the cast
are Sam De Grasse, Montague Love and David
Torrence.
ABOUT TALKING PICTURE
INSTRUMENTS
It seems as if many of you think that the syn-
chronous instruments that are offered to you by
independent manufacturers can play also talking
pictures that have the sound on the films. This
is erroneous ; it is only the Western Electric, the
Photophone and the Power’s Cinephone that can
play such film. All others are only disc instruments.
I am preparing an article on the independent
talking picture instruments, which I hope to present
in two weeks. Before contracting for one of such
instruments, wait for this article. It will give you
the information you want.
192
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 1, 1928
MY SYMPATHIES GO TO
ARTHUR JAMES!
Our good friend Arthur James is in distress;
in the November 19 issue of “Daily Review,” thus
writes under a heading, “The Unholy Three” :
“Said a trade paper editor to an advertiser in
the film business :
“ 'There are too many trade papers and I sug-
gest you play with just three of them, one daily
and two weeklies.
“ ‘The idea is to let the others die of? through
nonsupport and that will solve a great problem
for the producer and distributor.’
“Heh ! Heh ! And solve a problem also for
Quigley, Ali coate and Johnston who are most
favorable to this unholy idea. The Divine Right
of Kings was a good gag while it lasted — good
for the kings — but the divine right of trade paper
status must be earned by service to the industry
from which the bread and salt is derived.
“When the Brookhart bill, subjecting the in-
dustry to Federal control, was up before the Con-
gress joint committee, the Unholy Three stood this
way —
“Film Daily — absolutely for the measure that
would have crippled the business.
“Motion Picture News — straddled the issue
completely, seeking vainly to serve both sides.
“Herald-World — ignoring the issue as though
it were unimportant.
“Should this course be rewarded by the sup-
port of the industry in order that they kill off
their competition ? By what sleek effrontery is
this accomplished? This newspaper serves notice
on all concerned that the desperate and sneaking
course shall not go unresisted and it is prepared
to pull the lid off if the whispering campaign con-
tinues.
“No foolin’, neighbors, no foolin’!’ ”
* * >1=
You can’t realize how sad I felt when I read
this article in the “Daily Review.” Arthur James’
distress distressed me, too, for none knows better
than I how loyal he has been to the producers, and
how staunchly he has fought for their interests.
There is not one amongst them that has fought
the Brookhart Bill fiercer than Arthur James. The
services he has rendered them in the question of
substitutions is, indeed, invaluable; when you
found out that some of the pictures you bought
on the 1927-28 contracts were substitutes and re-
fused to accept them, it was Arthur James that
condemned you for it, — for trying to ruin the
industry. When our good friend Charlie Petti-
john sent for that other good friend of ours,
Pete Woodhull and instructed him to send a tele-
gram to Mr. Herriot, French Minister of Educa-
tion, in an effort to outmanouevre Aaron Sapiro,
who telegraphed to him that his, the Sapiro, or-
ganization would welcome French films of good
quality, it was Arthur James that edited that
telegram of Pete’s to make it more effective. In
fact, Arthur James has for a long time been the
consultant of the Hays organization. He has
always devoted the pages of his paper to the pro-
tection of Mr. Hays and all those connected with
him. This policy he adopted immediately after
he realized how wrong he was in caricaturing Mr.
Hays and in attacking Messrs. Zukor, Schenck
and others of the producer-distributor clan. This
happened about three months after he started one
of his papers. At that time the Metro-Goldwyn
advertisement appeared in it. To think, then, that
after these loyal services he should be compelled
to issue a warning to these same producers to
the effect that unless they advertise in his two
papers he is going to kick the bucket is, indeed,
discouraging. It shows how ungrateful some peo-
ple are. We are compelled to bring to our minds
the German saying : “Ingratitude is the reward
of the world.” And Arthur James has certainly
had his share of it.
Motion Picture News, Film Daily, and Herald-
World have been receiving tons of advertising
lately. Herald-World, in particular, had to turn
most of it away since the consolidation for inabil-
ity to handle it. Why shouldn’t the ungrateful
producer-distributors take part of it away from
these three papers and give it to Arthur’s two
papers? It would be no more than just, to a man
who has fought for their interests more unselfish-
ly than have these three papers combined.
At this occasion, I might just mention another
ungrateful thing these producers did to Arthur.
Arthur had one white elephant on his hands. Un-
der the promise of seas of radium in advertising,
they induced him to take over another white ele-
phant. He now has two white elephants.
Now that Arthur has found out all these things,
we should like to have him back into our fold.
We are not resentful. Though few of us has had
a father minister, yet I am sure that every one
of us has learned to forgive. Let us send him
a telegram and tell him, like the father to his way-
ward daughter, “Come home ! all is forgiven !”
THE VALUE OF THE BLUE SECTION
The usefulness of the information given in the
Blue Section is so great to the subscribers of
HARRISON’S REPORTS, particularly to ex-
hibitor-subscribers, that I have taken extreme
care to avoid errors. I have even referred the
proofs to the distributing departments of the pro-
ducer-distributors for a careful checking up of
the release schedules.
I have always tried to have the Blue Section
correct in all particulars. There have been errors,
however. But nine-tenths of such errors have been
of the producer-distributors, who either do not
give me a correct schedule or alter their schedule
after it is printed.
I wish to call your particular attention also to the
news weekly release chart, by aid of which you
are placed in a position to know whether your
newsweekly reaches you at the age your contract
calls for. It required much hard work to con-
ceive and prepare this chart ; but I shall deem it
worth the effort if you will take advantage of it.
If any of you cannot understand it thoroughly,
send me the facts and I shall be only too glad
to help you out. Give me the age at which you
are supposed to play your News, the serial num-
ber of the News you want me to test for you, and
the zone from which you are served. With this
information in my possession, I shall be able to
answer your query by return mail.
The information about the release days has
been obtained from the distributors themselves.
The chart this week has been amended ; some
of the companies have made some corrections in
their release days.
IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION TWO
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Vol. X SATURDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1928 No, 48
(Partial Index — No. 6 — Pages 165 to 188)
Air Legion, The — FBO 182
Alias Jimmy Valentine — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer ..186
Battle of the Sexes — United Artists 167
Companionate Marriage — First National 178
Court Martial — Columbia 166
Crash, The — First National 179
Do Your Duty — First National 179
Driftwood — Columbia 187
Dry Martini — Fox 179
Farmer’s Daughter, The — Fox 186
Good-Bye Kiss, The — First National 182
His Private Life — Paramount 182
Home Coming, The — Paramount-UFA 187
Home Towners, The — Warner Bros 174
Honeymoon Flats — Universal 187
Interference — Paramount 186
Marked Money — Pathe 175
Marriage by Contract — Tiffany-Stahl 166
Me Gangster — Fox 170
Melody of Love — Universal 178
Midnight Taxi, The — Warner Bros 174
Moran of the Marines — Paramount 166
Naughty Duchess — Tiffany-Stahl 170
Ned McCobb’s Daughter — Pathe ..178
On Trial — Warner Bros 187
Power of Silence — Tiffany-Stahl 166
Red Lips — Universal 170
Runaway Girls — Columbia 174
Sal of Singapore — Pathe 171
Show People — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 183
Stool Pigeon — Columbia 174
Street of Illusion — Columbia 175
Sinner’s Parade — Columbia 182
Sinners in Love — FBO 186
Take Me Home — Paramount 170
Varsity — Paramount 175
Wedding March, The — Paramount 167
While the City Sleeps — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. . . .170
Wind, The — Metro-Goldwyn 179
Woman Disputed, The — United Artists 182
Woman from Moscow, The — Paramount 178
FIRST NATIONAL EXHIBITION VALUES
446 French Dressing — Jan. 15... 900.000B 900.000P
459 Sailor’s Wives— Jan. 22 800.000B 800.000P
437 The Noose— Jan. 29 1,300.000B 1,300,000P
445 The Whip Woman— Feb. 5.. 900,000B 900.000P
426 The Chaser— Feb. 12 l.OOO.OOOB l,000,00OP
464 The Wagon Show— Feb. 19 . 700.000B 700.000P
455 Flying Romeos — Feb. 26 1, 100, 000 B 1, 100, 000 P
447 Mad Hour— Mar. 4 900.000B 900.000P
440 Burning Daylight — Mar. 11. 950.000 B 950.000P
434 Heart Follies Girl— Mar. 18.1, 100, 000 B 1,100.000P
448 The Big Noise— Mar. 25.... 9OO,OO0B 900.000P
451 Ladies’ Night— Apr. 1 l.OOO.OOOB 1.000.000P
436 Little Shepherd— Apr. 8. .. .1,300, 000 B l,3O0,OOOP
461 Chinatown Charlie — Apr. 15 . 800.000B 800.000P
468Canyon of Adventure — Apr. 22.700.000 B 700.000P
444 Harold Teen— Apr. 29 900.000B .900.000P
449 Lady Be Good — May 6 900.000B
456 Vamping Venus — May 13 1.100.000B
435 The Yellow Lily— May 20 1,100.000B
442 The Hawk’s Nest — May 27 950.000B
467 The Upland Rider — June 3 700.000B
460 Three Ring Marriage — June 10 800.000B
438 Wheel of Chance— June 17 1,300,000B
429 Happiness Ahead — June 24 1,300.000B
466 Code of the Scarlet — July 1 700.000B
539 Good-Bye Kiss (S) — July 8 Special
454 The Head Man— July 15 1,100.000B
458 Heart to Heart — July 22 800.000B
513 Strange Case of Capt. Ramper — July 29 . 900.000B
463 The Wright Idea — Aug. 5 800.000B
427 Heart Trouble— Aug. 12 l.OOO.OOOB
439 Out of the Ruins — Aug 19 l,30O,000B
430 Oh Kay— Aug. 26 1,300,000B
(1928-29 Season)
551 Butter and Egg Man — Sept. 2 Special
490 The Night Watch (S)— Sept. 9 1,100,00QB
496 Waterfront (S) — Sept. 16 900.000B
502 Show Girl (S) — Sept. 23 1,000,000b
552 The Whip (S) — Sept. 30 Special
495 The Crash— Oct. 7 950.000B
507 Do Your Duty — Oct. 14 900.000B
538 Companinate Marriage — Oct. 21 Special
514 Glorious Trail — Oct. 28 700.000B
482 The Haunted House (S) — Nov. 4 800.000B
478 Outcast (S) — Nov. 11 l,30O,00OB
541 Lilac Time (S)— Nov. 18 ..Special
512 The Ware Case— Nov. 25 600.000B
489 Adoration (S) — Dec. 2 .. .1,000,000B
484 Scarlet Seas (S) — Dec. 9 .- .1,300,000B
504 Naughty Baby — Dec. 16 900.000B
515 Phantom City — Dec. 23 700.000B
543 The Barker (PT) — Dec. 30 Special
FEATURE RELEASE SCHEDULE
(Note: “S” by the side of a title means that the sub-
ject is synchronized with music only; “PT,” that the
characters talk in some of the scenes, the remainder
being synchronized with music; and “AT” that the
characters talk all the way through.”
Columbia Features
(1928-29 Season)
The Scarlet Lady — Lya de Putti-Don Alvardo Aug. X
Court-Martial — Jack Holt-B. Compson Aug. 12
Runaway Girls — S. Mason-A. Rankin (reset) . . . .Aug. 23
Street of Illusion — V. Valli-I. Keith Sept. 3
Sinner’s Parade — D. Revier-V. Varconi Sept. 14
Driftwood — M. Day-D. Alvardo Oct. 15
Stool Pigeon — O. Borden-C. Delaney Oct. 25
Power of the Press — J. Ralston-D. Fairbanks, Jr.. .Oct. 31
Nothing to Wear — J. Logan-T. Von Elts Nov. 5
Submarine (Into the Depths) — Holt-Revier. .Nov. 12
The Apache — M. Livingston-D. Alvardo Nov. 19
The Lone Wolf’s Daughter — B. Lytell-G.Olmstead.Nov. 30
Restless Youth — Day-Forbes Dec. 11
The Younger Generation — Hersholt-Basquette . Dec. 22
Excellent Features
Manhattan Knights — Bedford-Miller (reset) Aug. 15
Life’s Crossroads — G. Hulette-Wm. Conklin Aug. 25
Power of the Press Sept. 10
Dream Melody Sept. 20
Confessions of a Wife Sept. 30
Life’s Crossroads — G. Hulette-W. Conklin (reset) .Oct. 15
The Passion Song — N. Beery-G. Olmstead Oct. 20
Broken Barriers Nov. ?
Power of the Press Nov. 10
Dream Melody Nov. 20
Confessions of a Wife Nov. 30
FBO Features
(1928-29 Season)
9221 Terror Mountain — Tom Tyler Aug. 19
9211 The Perfect Crime (PT)— C. Brooks Aug. 19
9201 Danger Street — W. Baxter-M. Sleeper Aug. 26
9233 Captain Careless — Bob Steele Aug. 26
9215 Gang War (PT) — O. Borden-J. Pickford. . .Sept. 2
9291 Dog Law — Ranger Sept. 2
9202 Stocks and Blondes — Logan-Gallagher Sept. 9
9203 Charge of the Gauchos — Logan -Bushman . . Sept. 16
9241 The Young Whirlwind — Buzz Barton Sept. 16
9213 Hit of the Show (PT)- — Olmstead-Brown. Sept. 23
9251 Son of the Golden West — Tom Mix Oct. 1
9222 The Avenging Rider — Tom Tyler Oct. 7
9214 The Circus Kid (PT) — Darro-Hanneford. . .Oct. 7
9205 Sally’s Shoulders — Wilson-Hackathorne Oct. 7
9209 Singapore Mutiny — E. Taylor-R. Ince Oct. 14
9232 Lightning Speed — Bob Steele Oct. 21
9242 Rough Ridn’ Red — Buzz Barton Nov. 4
9293 Tracked — Ranger Nov. 4
9206 Sinners in Love — O. Borden-H. Gordon. .. .Nov. 4
9207 His Last Haul — S. Owen-T. Moore Nov. 11
0 Continued on other Side)
Partial Index Ne. § HARRISON’
9212 Taxi 13 (PT)— Cdnkiin-Sleeper . ; .Nov. 18
9 222 Tyrant ot Red Guich — Tom Tyler Nov. 25
92s2 King Cowboy — Tom Mix Nov. 26
9208 Stolen Love — M- Day-O. Moore Dee. 2
9204 Tropic Madness — A. Q. Nilsson Dec. 9
9216 Blockade (PT)— A. Q. Nilsson Dec. 16
9231 Heading for Danger — Bob Steele Dec. 16
9243 Orphan of the Sage — Buzz Barton Dec. 23
92017 Hey Rube- — Trevor-Olmstead Dec. 23
Fox Features
(1928-29 Season)
Street Angel (S) — Gaynor-Farrell (reset) Aug. 19
The River Pirate (S) — McLaglen-Moran (reset) Aug. 26
Four Sons (S) — Mann-Collyer-Hall (reset) ....Sept 2
Fazil (S) — Farrell-Nissen (reset) Sept. 9
Win That Girl (S) — Rollins-Carol Sept. 16
Plastered in Paris (S) — Cohen-Pennick Sept. 23
The Air Circus (PT) — Rollins-Carol Sept. 30
Dry Martini (S) — Astor-Moore-Gran Oct. 7
Me, Gangster (S) — Terry-Collyer (reset) Oct. 14
Mother Machree (S) — Bennett-McLaglen Oct. 21
Mother Knows Best (PT) — Bellamy-Dresser Oct. 28
Sunrise (S) — Gaynor-O’Brien Nov. 4
Deadwood Coach — Tom Mix (re-issue) Nov. 4
Romance of the Underworld (S) — Astor Nov. 11
Prep and Pep (S) — Rollins-Drexel (reset) ... .Nov. 18
Taking a Chance — Rex Bell- Lola Todd Nov. 18
Riley, die Cop (S) — McDonald-Drexel-Rollins. . .Nov. 25
The Red Dance (S) — Del Rio-Farrell Dec. 2
Just Tony — Tom Mix (re-issue) Dec. 2
Blindfold (The Case of Mary Brown) — Moran. Dec. 9
Homesick — Sammy Cohen Dec. 16
Red Wine (Husbands are Liars) — Collyer Dec. 23
The Great White North (Lost in the Arctic) . . . Dec. 30
Metro-Gold wyn-Mayer Features
(1928-29 Season)
835 Four Walls — Gilbert-Crawford Aug. 11
829 The Cardboard Lover — Davies-Goudal Aug. 25
907 Our Dancing Daughters (S)Crawford-Brown-Sept. 1
914 Excess Baggage (S) — Wm. Haines-J. Dunn .Sept. 8
942 Beyond the Sierras — Tim McCoy Sept IS
918 The Cameraman — B. Keaton (reset) Sept. 15
902 Beau Broadway — L. Cody (reset) Sept. 22
938 While the City Sleeps (S) — Chapey (reset) . Sept. 29
949 Shadows of the Night — Flash Oct. 6
911 Brotherly Love (S) — Dane-Arthur Oct. 13
935 Show People (S) — M. Davies Oct. 20
936 The Wind (S)— L. Gish Oct. 27
811 Napoleon — French cast (reset) Oct. 27
901 The Baby Cyclone — Cody-Pringle Nov. 3
821 White Shadows of the South Seas (S)....Nov. 10
930 Masks of the Devil (S) — J. Gilbert (reset). Nov. 17
943 The Bushranger — Tim McCoy (reset) .... Nov. 17
939 West of Zanzibar (S) — Lon Chaney Nov. 24
645 Dream of Love — J. Crawford Dec. 1
951 Spies (German Prod) — Willy Fritsch Dec. 8
937 A Woman of Affairs (S) — Gilbert-Garbo. .Dec. 15
826 A Lady of Chance (S) — N. Shearer ».Dec. 22
950 Honeymoon — Flash Dec. 29
915 Alias Jimmy Valentine (PT) (reset) Jan. 26
Paramount Features
(1928-29 Season)
2801 Warming Up (S) — Dix-Arthur (reset) .. .Aug. 4
2874 Forgotten Faces — Brook-Brian (reset) Aug. 11
2819 Loves of an Actress (S) Negri (reset) Aug. 18
2835 Just Married — Hall-Taylor (reset) Aug. 18
2870 The Water Hole — J. Holt-Carroll (reset) . .Aug. 25
2804 The First Kiss — Cooper-Wray Aug. 25
2829 Sawdust Paradise (S) — Ralston-Bosworth.Sept. 1
2852 The Patriot (S) — E. Jannings-L. Stone Sept. 1
2855 The Fleet’s In — Clara Bow Sept. 15
2862 Beggars of Life (S) — Beery (reset) Sept. 22
2839 Model from Montmartre — Petrovich (reset) .Sept. 22
2807 The Docks of N. Y. — Bancroft-Compson . . . .Sept. 29
2853 Wedding March (S) — Von Stroheim Oct. 6
2810 Take Me Home — Bebe Daniels Oct. 13
2802 Moran of the Marines — R. Dix (reset) . . . .Oct. 13
2814 Varsity (PT) — C. Rogers — (“Sophomore”) .Oct. 27
2820 Woman from Moscow (S) — Negri-Kerry. . .Nov. 3
2838 Huntingtower (BRIT) — Sir Harry Lauder.. Nov. 3
2824 Avalanche — Jack Holt-Hill-Baclanova Nov. 10
2821 His Private Life — A. Menjou Nov. 17
2866 Manhattan Cocktail (S) — Arlen-Carroll Nov. 24
2815 Someone to Love — Rogers-Brian Dec. 1
REPORTS December 7, 1928
2856 Three Weeks Ends— Clara Bow Dec. 8
2811 W hat a Night — Bebe Daniels Dec. 22
2859 Sins of the Fathers (PT) — E. Jannings. . .Dec. 29
Pathe Features
( 1 928-29 Season )
963 Saddle Mates — W. Wales Aug. 5
9522 Tenth Avenue — Phyllis Haver Aug. 5
9520 The Cop — William Boyd Aug. 19
9521 The Red Mark Aug. 26
9671 The Black Ace Don Coleman Sept. 2
9544 Man-Made Women — L. Joy-H. B. Warner. .Sept 9
9519 Craig’s Wife — I. Rich (reset) Sept. 16
9513 Power — Wm. Boyd Sept. 23
9621 Burning Bridges — Haryr Carey Sept. 30
9511 The King of Kings (S) — Warner (reset) . .Sept. 30
9515 Celebrity — Robt. Armstrong Oct. 7
9545 Captain Swagger (S) — Rod La Rocque Oct. 14
9516 Show Folks (PT) — E. Quillan Oct. 21
9546 Forbidden Love — L. Damita Oct. 28
9661 Yellow Contraband — Leo Maloney Oct. 28
9532 Marked Money (S) — Jr. Coghlan (reset). Nov. 4
9531 Sal of Singapore (PT) — P. Haver (re).. Nov. 11
9514 Annapolis (PT) — Loff-Brown Nov.18
9512 Love Over Night — R. La Roque (reset) Nov. 25
9518 Ned McCobb’s Daughter (S) — I. Rich... Dec. 2
9538 The Shady Lady (PT)— P. Haver Dec. 16
9622 The Border Patrol — Harry Carey Dec. 23
9517 The Spieler (PT) — A. Hale-R. Adoree. . .Dec. 30
Rayart Features
(1928-29 Season)
The Divine Sinner — V. Reynolds-E. Hilliard July
Man From Headquarters — E. Roberts-C. Keefe. Aug. —
Sweet Sixteen — Helen Foster-Gertrude Olmsted. Aug. —
Sisters of Eve — B. Blythe-A. Stewart Sept. —
The City of Purple Dreams — Fraser-Bedford. .Sept. —
Isle of Lost Men — T. Santschi-P. O’Leary Oct.
Should a Girl Marry? — Helen Foster-D. Keith. . . .Nov.
Ships of the Night — J. Logan-A. Rankin Nov.
The Black Pearl — L. Lee-Ray Hallor Dec.
Tiffany-Stahl Features
( 1 928-29 Season )
The Toilers (S) — D. Fairbanks, Jr.-J. Ralston. .Oct. 1
The Naughty Dutchess — E. Southern Oct. 10
The Power of Silence — B. Bennett-J. Westwood. Oct. 20
The Cavalier (S) — R. Talmadge-B. Bedford. . Nov. 1
The Floating College — S. O’Neill-B. Collier. . .Nov. 10
The Gun Runners — R. Cortez-N. Lane Nov. 20
Marriage by Contract — Patsy Ruth Miller Dec. 1
George Washington Cohen — Geo. Jessel Dec. 20
United Artists Features
(1928-29 Season)
Tempest (S) — Barrymore-Horn (reset) Aug. 25
Two Lovers (S) — Colman-Banky (reset) Sept. 7
Battle of the Sexes (S) — Hersholt-Haver (reset) . .Oct. 12
Woman Disputed (S) — N. Talmadge Oct. 20
Masquerade (Love Song) (PT) — Gondal-Velez. . Nov.
The Rescue (PT) — Colman-Damita Nov.
Revenge (S) — Dolores Del Rio (reset) Dec.
Hell’s Angels (S) — Lyon-Nissen Roadshow
The Awakening (S) — Banky (song film) .... (Not Set)
Universal Features
(1928-29 Season)
A5730 Uncle Tom’s Cabin (S) — All Star Sept. 2
A5732 Home, James — L. LaPlante Sept. 2
A5734 Anybody Here Seen Kelly — T. Moore. .. .Sept. 9
A5735 The Night Bird — Denny Sept. 16
A359 Guardians of the Wild — Rex-J. Perrin. . .Sept. 16
A5733 Foreign Legion — L. Stone-N. Kerry Sept 23
A5744 Grip of the Yukon — Marlowe-Bushman. Sept. 30
A360 The Cloud Dodger — Al. Wilson Sept. 30
A5754 Clearing the Trail — Gibson Oct. 7
A5738 How to Handle Women — Tryon Oct. 14
A365 Crimson Canyon — Wells Oct. 14
A5739 The Michigan Kid — Adoree-Nagel Oct. 21
A5740 Freedom of the Press — Lewis Stone ..Oct. 28
A378 The Price of Fear — Cody Thompson. . . .Oct. 28
A5741 Man Who Laughs (S) — Philbin-Veidt. . . .Nov. 4
A5736 Jazz Mad — Hersholt-Nixon Nov. 11
A5743 The Danger Rider — Gibson Nov. 18
A363 Two Outlaws — Rex-Perrin Nov.18
A5742 Phyllis of the Follies — M. Moore Nov. 25
December 1, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
Partial Inde>: No. 6
A5750 The Gate Crasher — G. T ryon Dec. 9
A5774 Melody of Love (AT) — Pigeon-Harris.Dec. 2
A369 The Hero of the Circus — Maciste Dec. 2
A5745 Give and Take — Sidney-Hersholt Dec. 9
A361 Beauty and Bullets — Wells Dec. 16
A5745 Give and Take (PT) — Sidney-Hersholt. . .Dec. 23
A57S6 Honeymoon Flats — Lewis-Gulliver ....Dec. 30
Warner Bros. Features
(1928-29 Season)
Lights of New York (PT) — All Star July 21
218 State Street Sadie (PT) Nagel Aug. 25
228 Women They Talk About (PT) — Rich Sept. 8
227 Caught in the Fog (PT) — McAvoy-Nagel. .Sept. 22
223 The Midnight Taxi (PT) — Moreno-Costello. Oct. 6
The Terror (AT) — McAvoy-E. E. Horton. Oct. 20
235 Land of the Silver Fox (PT) — Rin-Tin-Tin.Nov. 10
225 Beware of Bachelors (PT) — A. Ferris Dec. 1
The Home Towners (AT) — R. Bennett. . .Dec. 15
On Trial (AT) — P. Frederick-B. Lytell. . . Dec. 29
The Singing Fool (AT) — A1 Jolson Jan. 1
230 The Little Wild Cat (PT) — Audrey Ferris. Jan. 5
-82 The Jazz Singer (PT) — A1 Jolson Not Set
186 Tenderloin (PT) — Dolores Costello Not Set
183 The Lion and the Mouse (PT) — McAvoy.Not Set
185 Glorious Betsy (PT) — Dolores Costello. . .Not Set
ONE AND TWO REEL COMEDY
RELEASE SCHEDULE
Educational — One Reel
(1928-29 Season)
Troubles Galore — Collins-Ruby McCoy Aug. 26
Cook, Papa, Cook — Murdock-Hutton-Cameo Sept. 9
Wife Trouble — Graves-Cameo Sept. 23
The Lucky Duck — Dale-Cameo Oct. 7
All in Fun — Mandy-Cameo Oct. 21
Hay Wire — Stone-Dale-Cameo Nov. 4
Bumping Along — Stone-Marshall-Cameo Nov. 18
Playful Papas — Cameo-Mandy Dec. 2
Murder Will Out — Dent-Cameo Dec. 16
In the Morning — Dent-Cameo Dec. 30
Educational — Two Reels
Wedded Blisters — Lupino-Boyd-Tuxedo Aug. 26
Hot Luck — Big Boy- Juvenile Sept 2
Pirates Beware — Lupino Lane Sept. 9
Girlies Behave — Drew-Ideal Sept 9
Call Your Shots — A1 St. John-Mermaid Sept. 16
Polar Perils — Monty Collins-Mermaid Sept. 30
Companionate Service — Devore Oct. 7
Come to Papa — Big Boy-Juvenile Oct. 14
Stage Frights — Davis-Mermaid Oct. 21
Making Whoopee — Tuxedo Comedy Oct. 28
Fisticuffs — Lupino Lane Oct. 28
The Quiet Worker — Drew-Ideal Nov. 4
Hold That Monkey — Collins-Mermaid Nov. 11
Misplaced Husbands — Dorothy Devore Nov. 25
Hot or Cold — A1 St. John-Mermaid Dec. 2
Be My King — Lupino Lane Dec. 9
Follow Teacher — Big Boy-Juvenile Dec. 16
Wives Won’t Weaken — Drew-Bradley-Ideal. . .Dec. 16
Social Prestige — Collins-Mermaid Dec. 23
What a Wife — Hill-Duncan Oct. 14
What a Wife — Hill-Duncan. Otc. 14
That Wild Irish Pose — Vaughn-Cooke Oct. 21
The Six Best Fellows — Vaughn-Cooke. .Oct, 27
Mickey’s Detective — Mickey McGuire.... ..Oct. 28
The Naughty Forties — Vaughn-Cooke Nov. 4
T-Bone Handicap — Barney Google Nov. 4
Broadway Ladies — Vaughn-Cooke .Nov. 11
The Family Meal Ticket — Hill-Duncan Nov. 11
Mickey’s Athletes — Mickey McGuire Nov. 25
Money Balks — Barney Google Dec. 2
Casper’s Week-End — Toots and Casper Dec. 9
Mickey’s Big Game Hunt — Mickey McGuire. . .Dec. 23
The Beef Steaks — Barney Google Dec. 30
Fox — One Reel
(1928-29 Season)
Snowbound — Varieties Aug. 19
Neapolitan Days — Varieties Sept. 2
Through Forest Aisles — Varieties Sept. 16
Spanish Craftsmen — Varieties Sept. 30
Northwest Corner Oct. 14
Drifting Through Gascony Oct. 28
Glories of the Evening Nov. 11
Monument Valley Nov. 25
Blue Grass and Blue Blood Dec. 9
Storied Palestine Dec. 23
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — One Reel
(1928-29 Season)
The Eagle’s Nest — Oddity Aug. 18
The Sacred Baboon — Oddity Sept. 1
Bits of Africa — Oddity Sept. 15
Murder — Oddity Sept. 29
World’s Playground — Oddity Oct. 13
Wives For Sale — Oddity Oct. 27
Lonely Lapland — Oddity Nov. 10
Savage Customs — Oddity Nov. 24
Kisses Come High Dec. 12
Strange Prayers ....Dec. 22
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer — Two Reels
Imagine My Embarrassment (S) — Chase Sept. 1
Should Married Men Go Home — Laurel-Hardy .. Sept. 8
That Night — Davidson-Morgan Sept. 15
Growing Pains ( S ) — Gang Sept. 22
Heart of Gen. Lee — Events Sept. 22
Is Everybody Happy? — Charley Chase Sept. 29
Early to Bed — Laurel-Hardy Oct. 6
Do Gentlemen Snore — Stars Oct. 13
The 01’ Gray House (S) — Gang Oct. 20
All Parts — Chase Oct. 27
Two Tars — Laurel-Hardy Nov. 3
The Boy Friend — Stars Nov. 10
Madame Dubarry — Events Nov. 17
School Begins — Gang Nov. 17
The Booster (S) — Gang Nov. 24
Habeas Corpus (S) — Laurel-Hardy Dec. 1
/ Feed Em and Weep — Bryon-Garvin Dec. 8
The Spanking Age (S) — Gang Dec. 15
Chasing Husbands — Charley Chase Dec. 22
We Faw Down (S) — Laurel-Hardy Dec. 29
FBO — One Reel
(1928-29 Season)
Believe It or Not — Curiosities Sept. 26
Fishing and How — Curiosities Oct. 10
Pets — Curiosities Oct. 24
Facts or Fancies — Curiosities Nov. 7
Cash & Carry — Curiosities Nov. 21
Grab-Bay — Curiosities Dec. 5
FBO — Two Reels
Jessie’s James — Vaughn-Cooke Aug. 26
The Wages of Synthetic — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 2
Mickey’s Movies — Micky McGuire Sept. 2
You Just Know She Dares ’Em — Vaughn-Cooke. . Sept. 9
Horsefeathers — Barney Google-Davis-Hallum Sept. 9
Fooling Casper — Toots and Casper-Hill-Duncan. .Sept. 16
The Arabian Fights — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 16
Ruth Is Stranger Than Fiction — Vaughn-Cooke. .Sept. 23
The Sweet Buy and Buy — Vaughn-Cooke Sept. 30
Mickey’s Rivals — Mickey McGuire Sept. 30
Watch Your Pep — Vaughn-Cooke Oct. 7
OK MNX — Barney Google Oct. 7
Mild But She Satisfies — Caughn-Cooke Oct. 14
Paramount — One Reel
(1928-29 Season)
News Reeling — Krazy Kat Aug 4
Koko’s Chase — Inkwell Imps Aug. 11
Baby Feud — Krazy Kat Aug. 18
Koko Heaves Ho — Inkwell Imps Aug. 25
Sea Sword — Krazy Kat Sept. 1
Koko’s Big Pull — Inkwell Imps Sept. 8
Show Vote — Krazy Kat Sept. 15
Koko Kleans Up— Inkwell Imps Sept. 22
The Phantom T rail — Krazy Kat Sept. 29
Koko’s Parade — Inkwell Imps Oct. 6
Come Easy, Go Slow — Krazy Kat Oct. 13
Koko’s Dog Gone — Inkwell Imps Oct. 20
Beaches and Scream — Krazy Kat Oct. 27
Koko in the Rough — Inkwell Imps Nov. 3
Nicked Nags — Krazy Kat Nov. 10
Koko’s Magic — Inkwell Imps Nov. 17
The Liar Bird — Krazy Kat Nov. 24
Koko on the Track — Inkwell Imps Dec. 1
Still Waters — Krazy Kat Dec. 8
Koko’s Act — Inkwell Imps Dec. 15
Night Howls — Krazy Kat Dec. 22
Koko’s Courtship — Inkwell Imps Dec. 29
Paramount—^Two Reels
Walls Tell Tales— Stars and Authors <;...Aug. 4
Dizzy Diver (S)— Dooley (reset) Aug. n
Hot Scotch (S) — MacDuff (reset) Aug. 18
Stop Kidding (S) — Vernon (reset) Aug. 25
Skating Home — Chorus Girl Sept. 1
Two Masters — Stars & Authors (reset) Sept. 8
Vacation Waves — Horton Sept. 15
The Sock Exchange (S) — Vernon (set) Sept. 22
Oriental Hugs — Dooley Sept. 29
Loose Change — MacDuff Oct. 6
Picture My Astonishment — Chorus Girl Oct. 13
Call Again — Horton (Reset) Oct. 20
The Dancing Town — Stars and Authors Oct. 27
Hot Sparks — Vernon Nov. 3
A She-Going Sailor — Dooley Nov. 10
Lay on MacDuff — MacDuff Nov. 17
Believe It or Not — Chorus Girl Nov. 24
The Home Girl — Stars and Authors Dec. 1
Footloose Wimmen — Vernon Dec. 8
Gobs of Love — Dooley Dec. 15
Should Scotchmen Marry? — MacDuff Dec. 22
Nifty Numbers — Chorus Girl Dec. 29
Pathe — Two Reels
(1928-29 Season)
Girl from Nowhere — Sennett Girls Aug. 5
His Unlucky Night — Sennett Aug. 12
Smith’s Restaurant — Smith Family Aug. 19
The Chicken — Sennett Aug. 26
His Royal Slyness — Harold Lloyd (re-issue) Sept. 2
Taxi for Two — Sennett-J. Cooper Sept. 2
Caught in the Kitchen — Sennett-B. Bevan Sept. 9
A Dumb Waiter — Sennett-J. Burke Sept. 16
The Campus Carmen — Sennett Girls Sept. 23
Soldier Man (3 reels) — Harry Langdon-Special. . Sept. 30
Motor Boat Mamas — Sennett Sept. 3o
No Picnic — Smitty-Dempsey Oct. 7
The Bargain Hunt — Sennett De Luxe Oct. 14
Smith’s Catalina Rowboat Race. . Sennett-Smith . . .Oct. 21
Taxi Scandal — Sennett- Cooper Oct. 28
Hubby’s Latest Alibi — Sennett-Bevan. . i . Nov. 4
A Jim Jam Janitor — Sennett-Burke Nov. 11
No Sale — Smitty-Hamilton. Nov. 18
The Campus Vamp — Sennett Girls Nov. 25
Hubby’s Week End Trip — Sennett Dec. 2
The Burglar — Sennett-DeLuxe ..Dec. 9
Camping Out — Smitty Dec. 16
Taxi Beauties — Sennett-Cooper Dec. 23
His New Stenographer — Sennett-Bevan Dec. 30
Universal — One Reel
(1928-29 Season)
Hollywood or Bust — Horace in Hollywood Sept. 10
Mississippi Mud — Oswald Cartoon Sept. 17
Panicky Pancakes — Oswald Cartoon Oct. 1
Come on, Horace — Horace in Hollywood Oct.’ 8
The Fiery Fireman — Oswald Cartoon Oct. 15
Bull-Oney — Oswald Cartoon Oct.29
Fun in the Clouds — Horace in Hollywood Nov. 5
Rocks and Socks — Oswald Cartoon Nov. 12
A South Pole Flight — Oswald Cartoon ..Nov. 26
A Woman’s Man — Horace in Hollywood Dec. 3
Universal — Two Reels
Newlyweds’ Hard Luck — Jr. Jewel Sept. 5
Rubber Necks — Stern Bros Sept. 12
Half Back Buster, Stern Bros Sept. 19
Just Wait — Stern Bros Sept. 26
Newlywed’s Unwelcome — Jr. Jewel Oct. 3
Look Pleasant — Stern Bros Oct. 10
Buster Trims Up — Stern Bros Oct. 17
Shooting the Bull — Stern Bros Oct. 17
Newlywed’s Court Trouble — Jr. Jewel Oct. 31
Cross Country Bunion Race — Stern Bros Nov. 7
Teacher’s Pest — Stem Bros Nov. 14
Fish Stories — Stern Bros Nov. 21
Newlyweds Lose Snookums — Jh. Jewel Nov. 28
All for Geraldine — Let George Do It Dec. 5
Watch the Birdie — Buster Brown Dec. 12
And Morning Came — Stern Bros Dec. 19
CHART OF RELEASE DAYS FOR ALL NEWS WEEKLIES
Internat’l News
Pathe News
Fox News
Kinograms
Paramount News
M-G-M
New*
Even
Odd
Odd
Even
Even
Odd
Odd
Even
Odd
Even
Even
Odd
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Rel.
Albany
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Atlanta
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Boston
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sim. 1
Wed. 0
Buffalo
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sim. 1
Thur. 1
Sat 0
Wed. 0
Butte
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
-
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Charleston
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Charlotte
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Chicago
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Cincinnati
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Cleveland
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Columbus
—
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Dallas
. . Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Denver
. . Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Des Moines
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Detroit
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
El Paso
—
—
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
—
—
—
—
Indianapolis
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Jacksonville
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Kansas City
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Los Angeles
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Memphis
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Milwaukee
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Minneapolis
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Sat. 3
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
New Haven
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
New Orleans
Thur. 1
Thur. 5
Fri. 2
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon.
2
Fri. 2
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
New York
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Oklahoma City..
. . Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Omaha
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun.
1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Peoria
—
—
—
—
Philadelphia . . . .
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sat 0
Wed. 0
Pittsburgh
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Portland, Ore
. . Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Mon. 5
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
—
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Portland, Me
Thur. 1
—
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
St. Louis
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Salt Lake City..
. . Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat 3
San Antonio
. .
—
—
Wed. 4
Sat 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
San Francisco. . .
..Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sat. 7
Sun. 4
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Seattle
..Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Mon. 2
Sat. 3
Tues. 3
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Wed. 4
Sat. 3
Sioux Falls
Thur. 1
Mon, 2
Thur. 1
—
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
—
—
Vancouver
Wed. 0
—
—
—
—
—
Washington . . . .
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat.
0
Wed. 0
Sun. 1
Thur. 1
Sat. 0
Wed. 0
Wichita, Kans. . .
. . Mon. 2
Thur. 1
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur. 1
Wilkes Barre. . .
, ,
—
-
—
—
—
Mon. 2
Thur. I
Winnipeg
. . Mon. 2
—
—
—
—
Mon. 5
—
—
—
—
— —
—
Entered aa second-daw matter jMtuary 4. 1021, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879,
Harrison's Reports
Yearly Subscription Bates:
United States. $19.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
26c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HABBISON
Editor and Publisher
Established duly 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol, X
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1928
No. 49
An Analysis of the Reformed Standard Contract — No. 2
The first article on the reformed contract was
printed in the issue of November 10.
Before proceeding with the analysis of the re-
mainder, however, let me make some additional
comment on the clauses that have already been
analyzed.
Qause 2 : Under the terms and provisions of
this clause, all contracted pictures must be deli-
vered to the exhibitor within one year from the
date fixed in this clause, or from the date deter-
mined by the play-date availability clause or by
any other provision in the contract, subject, how-
ever, to the causes mentioned in Clause 16, and to
the provisions about “roadshowing” a certain
number of pictures on that contract, and of pic-
tures not “generally released,” as defined in sub-
division “b” of this clause.
Accordingly, in case there is a definite play-
date in Clause 2, or a play-date has been confirmed
by the distributor after a request by the exhibitor,
but such distributor failed to deliver the picture
on such a play-date through an error on the part
of some employe of his, he breaches the contract.
In such an event, the exhibitor may (1) reject the
picture and demand a refund of the monies he
paid for it, and (2) may summon the distributor
before the arbitration board, demanding damages.
In the latter case, the arbitration board will decide,
as is usual in such cases, what shall be done with
the picture after determining the damage the ex-
hibitor is entitled to.
The amount of damages an exhibitor is granted
in such cases varies in the different zones. In
Washington, D. C., the exhibitor is awarded three
times the rental of the film.
The next question is: Is a breach on one pic-
ture a breach on the entire contract?
This question has depended on circumstances.
If the picture so missed in the shipment happens
to be of first importance and was the first one to
be played from that contract, the exhibitor may
raise the question that the entire contract has been
breached. In case the exhibitor played several
pictures of varied importance before the “miss-
out,” the practice of many arbitration boards has
been to consider the contract breached only as
regards to that particular picture, unless the
breach was deliberate. In such an event, the ex-
hibitor again may raise the question that the entire
contract has been breached.
If a picture is dated but the distributor is not
able to deliver it on such date on account of the
fact that he did not make it, then the distributor
will evoke the provisions in Clause 16 and in
Qause 2, subdivision “b.” These provisions ab-
solve the distributor but permit the exhibitor to
demand that picture if made within two years.
The exhibitor, however, is required to give to the
distributor a written notice within thirty days
after the expiration of the contract whether he
wants such a picture or pictures when made or
not. As said in the first article of this analysis,
this is unjust, for the exhibitor is required to tell
the distributor whether he wants or does not want
pictures the distributor has not made, may not
make before two years have expired, and perhaps
will never make. The exhibitor should at least be
given the option within a certain number of days
after an availability notice has been sent to him
when the pictures are made to notify the distribu-
tor whether he wants those pictures or not.
In connection with this, allow me to make
one more observation. It has been the habit of the
exchanges to sell their pictures to an exhibitor at
a “lump” sum, and allocate the prices afterwards.
The question often arises, when a picture has not
been produced, whether the rental price, as allo-
cated by the exchange, is the only charge that
should be expunged from the distributor’s books.
Suppose, for example an exhibitor bought ten
pictures at, say, $2,000, or at an average of $200
a picture, but the exchange allocated, say, $50 on
the picture that has not been and will not be pro-
duced, and $350 on another, which has been pro-
duced. It has been the practice of many arbitra-
tion boards, in such cases, to expunge $200, or
one-tenth of the total price of the films, instead of
only $50.
Clause 6 : This clause deals with “run” and
“protection.” In the past, when a new theatre
was opened in an exhibitor’s neighborhood, within
the exhibitor’s protection zone, the exchanges
considered such theatre as not included in his
“protection.” Such exhibitor saw, therefore, films
he bought as first run become second run because
the new theatre offered more money and secured
the films. This is now an impossibility, for the
clause has been made to include any theatre that
may be erected during the life of an exhibitor’s
contract in his “zone,” or any theatre in that zone
that was closed when the exhibitor signed his
contract and was opened afterwards.
Qause 16: The first paragraph of this clause
deals with the causes that may prevent an ex-
hibitor’s performance of the contract, for which
he is absolved. One of the frequent causes is
the entire destruction of his theatre by fire. In
such an event, all the contracts are automatically
canceled.
( Continued on last page )
194
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 8, 1928
“Craig’s Wife’’ with Irene Rich
(Pathe; Sept. 16 ; 6,679 fl-> 66 to 95 min. )
A well directed and acted picture; it neverthe-
less becomes boring as the action is somewhat
slow; the spectator becomes tired of watching
Miss Rich continuously straightening up the fur-
niture and draperies even though she had several
maids to do her work. Henpecked husbands may
get a kick out of it and some housewives may
learn the lesson that it is better to make a home
more cheerful and livable if they wish to keep
their family’s love than to be too fussy. Warner
Baxter (hero) is good as the henpecked husband
who submits to his wife’s tyranny until she un-
wittingly gets him into jail by her interfering and
her lies. Miss Rich is exceedingly good as the
nagging wife. Virginia Bradford and Carroll Nye
supply the thin love interest.
The story revolves around a cold-hearted and
mercenary wife of a wealthy man. Her passion
was to have everyone do her bidding so that she
could rule their lives. She dominated her husband
and forced her young sister to give up her sweet-
heart because he was poor. When his wife had
gone to the college to bring her sister back, her
husband gets a night off and goes to play cards
at a neighbor’s house. He was the last one seen
leaving the house and when the couple were found
dead, the husband having killed his wife and him-
self because she was having an affair with another
man, the hero is suspected, because his wife, in
checking up his whereabouts, gave the clue to the
police which led them to her home. She denied
calling the number and her husband was forced
by her to hide. He is found and put in jail for
twenty- four hours and when the murder is cleared
up, he returns home. He at last learns to hate
his wife and her tyranny and so leaves her as did
all the friends of the family and their servants.
The picture, adapted from George Kelly’s suc-
cessful stage play, was directed by William De-
Mille.
“Someone to Love” with Buddy Rogers
and Mary Brian
(Paramount, Dec. 1 ; 6,323 ft.; 73 to 90 min.)
A nice little story but nothing extraordinary.
Its chief asset is the youthfulness of the principal
players, which make the romance realistic, more
than it would have been had these parts been
given to a “grandfather” and to a “grandmother,”
as is often the case in moving pictures. It is about
a nice-looking poor boy, who falls in love with a
nicer-looking girl, daughter of a wealthy father.
He did not know that she was rich. Later on, how-
ever, there is an estrangement between them, be-
cause the heroine and her father had thought that
the hero was a fortune hunter. The truth of the
matter was that the fortune hunter was one of his
pals, who had entered into an agreement with
another pal of theirs to split the “profits” should
pal No. 2 succeed in finding a wealthy woman for
a wife to pal No. 1. The notes pal No. 2 had kept
fell into the hands of their employer, who turned
them over to the heroine’s father when the latter
told him that he was going to make the hero his
son-in-law. For a while things were kept that
way until the heroine overhears a conversation
that convinces her of the hero’s innocence of any
fortune-hunting ideas. Then everything is settled
satisfactorily. But not before there is an auto-
mobile accident, in which the hero, the heroine,
and her father are injured, though not seriously.
Mary Brian and Charles Rogers do good work.
William Austin again contributes his share of
comedy. James Kirkwood is the heroine’s father.
Mary Alden, Jack Oakie, and Frank Reicher are
in the cast. The story is by Alice Duer Miller;
it was directed by F. Richard Jones.
“The Floating College” with Sally O’Neill
and Buster Collier, Jr.
(Tiff any -Stahl; Nov. 10; 5,477 ft.; 63 to 78 min.)
Not much ! In fact, it is rather a silly picture,
which may have an appeal only for flappers who
may enjoy the contest between two sisters in their
efforts to get their man, both being in love with
the same fellow. Sally O’Neill (heroine) has pep
but is miscast as a comedienne. Georgia Hale is
good enough as the jealous elder sister, who does
everything she can to take the hero away from
her sister. She persuades her father to send the
heroine away to a floating college and after she
learns that the hero is to be swimming instructor
on the same boat, she makes him hire a seaplane
and send her to the college too, so that she might
keep her sister out of mischief.
The hero, pursued by the two girls, rescues the
heroine from being stranded in China when her
sister locked her in the closet. He marries her.
Others in the cast are Harvey Clark and
Georgie Harris. The picture was directed by
George Crone from a story by Stuart Anthony.
You might get by with another good picture to
bolster up the program.
“Avalanche” with Jack Holt
(Paramount ; Nov. 10; 6,099 ft-', 70 to 87 min.)
Fair ! With the exception of the last reel, which
contains a little hard riding on the part of Mr.
Holt to save his wounded brother from being
buried in the avalanche, it is rather dull. Based
on a Zane Grey story, the plot revolves around
the strong love an older brother has for his much
younger brother and for whose sake he cheats
at cards to raise money to send him to college.
The only person who knew of his cheating was
a dance-hall girl, who loved the gambler very
much but who was jealous of the younger brother
because the gambler threw her aside when the boy
came back from school. In revenge she vamps
him and causes trouble between them by running
away with the boy and telling him that his brother
was not the idol he thought he was, but really a
crooked gambler. In the end, however, she admits
that it was her love for the gambler and her con-
sequent jealousy that made her tell such a lie.
Jack Holt gives his usual strong-man perform-
ance as the gambler who is honest until he needs
the money very badly for the brother. Doris Hill
is sweet as the postmistress who loved the young
brother, with whom she was finally united. Bac-
lanova makes a good dance hall vamp.
The picture was directed by Otto Brower.
December 8, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
195
“Domestic Meddlers” with Claire Windsor,
and Lawrence Gray
( Tiffany-Stahl ; Aug. 15 ; 5,362 ft.; 62 to 72 min.)
Pretty good ! It is well acted, and authough the
theme is old, it holds the spectator’s interest be-
cause of the good work done by Lawrence Gray
as the hero and Roy D’Arcy as the villain.
The story deals with a happily married couple,
the husband very much in love with his beautiful
wife, and a philandering batchelor (villain), who
had become infatuated with the hero’s wife. Un-
der the influence of a few drinks, the hero is put
to sleep when they are invited to dinner at the vil-
lain’s apartment, and the villain and heroine go
to a roof garden to dance, where they are seen by
another fellow worker, who innocently enough
tells the hero that he had seen his friend with a
beautiful blonde and had intimated that their re-
lations had been illicit. The husband’s jealousy
inflamed, he accepts another invitation to dine at
the villain’s home and pretends to get drunk
again. He learns, however, that it is the villain
who had made the advances to his wife and gives
him a sound beating.
Mr. Gray does very good work in the situation
when he is shown that his mind became so in-
flamed that he almost chokes his wife while she
is asleep. The picture was directed by James
Flood from the story by Welly n Totman. Miss
Windsor is charming and wears beautiful clothes.
Jed Prouty is the fellow-worker.
Note : This picture was originally titled “Do-
mestic Relations” and is the last picture on the
1927-1928 program.
“Caught in the Fog” (PT) with May
McAvoy, Mack Swain and Conrad Nagel
(Warner Bros., Sept. 22; Synchr. 6,270 ft.; sil.
5428 ft.)
Fairly good. There is a comedy situation here
and there, which sets everybody to laughing, and
the spectator is held in fairly tense suspense; but
there is nothing in it that will stand out, or that
one will remember after leaving the theatre. Most
of the comedy is contributed by that good actor
Mack Swain ; he takes the part of a “dumb” de-
tective, who had been engaged to watch a yacht
from being robbed by thieves; valuable jewels
were locked in the safe.
The picture opens showing May McAvoy as a
crook confederate, and Charles Gerrard, as a crook,
boarding a yacht and entering the room where
the safe was. The crook opens the safe, but they
hear noises and are frightened. They make a get-
away. The heroine, however, remains behind ; and
when the hero, really the son of the woman that
owned the boat, opens the safe and finds the jew-
els there, she holds him up and takes them away
from him. Before making a getaway, another
pair of crooks enter and, posing as invited guests,
remain. The hero pretends to be a butler, and
the heroine a maid. The heroine had thought that
the hero was a burglar.
From this point on things become complicated
by the entry into the picture of Mack Swain and
of Hugh Herbert, who pose as detectives. The
jewels appear and disappear, the spectator being
made at times to lose track of who had them. In
the end, however, things are disentangled by the
appearance of the hero’s mother and with the arrest
by the detectives of the heroine’s confederate, who
was supposed to be a famous crook. It is revealed
then who the hero is. The hero saves the heroine
from embarrassment by assuring the police that
she had been engaged by him to help him catch
the crooks; the hero had fallen so deeply in love
with her that he could not help doing who he did.
He proposes and she accepts.
Miss McAvoy’s voice registers very well this
time. She acts and talks with grace. The talking
situations are few and far between. Mr. Swain,
too, talks in a few situations in addition to Mr.
Nagel.
Jerome Kingston wrote the story. Howard
Bretherton directed it.
“The Danger Rider” with Hoot Gibson
(Universal; Nov. 18; 5,367 ft.; 62 to 78 min. )
A good Western ; it is a mixture of comedy and
thrills, and though the usual hard riding and hap-
py ending are present, it is nevertheless enter-
taining for those who still like their Westerns.
Hoot Gibson gives a good-natured breezy per-
formance as the son of the prison warden, who
liked scrapes and so posed as a desperate bandit
on the ranch of the heroine. Eugenia Gilbert is
pleasing as the heroine who trusted the worst
looking bandits in her efforts to try to reform
them, only to learn that they cannot be depended
upon to do anything but rob and injure their vic-
tims. Reeves Eason is good as the bad man who
exposed the hero when he came to the ranch and
attempted to rob the heroine.
The picture was directed by Henry McRae
from a story by Wynn James. Others in the cast
are Monte Montague and King Zany.
LOOK OUT!
The demand for talking picture instruments and
for non-synchronous instruments has caused
many a fly-by-night concern to spring up.
This is no time for mistakes. Do not invest any
money with any concern unless you are sure of
its financial standing. No matter how eager you
are to obtain an instrument, you should not do so
unless you know that the instrument will do what
its sellers say it will, and that the sellers will live up
to their obligations with you.
In order to prevent any of the subscribers of
Harrison's Reports from losing money, I have
been making a thorough investigation of the
claims of those who offer you such instruments.
It takes time to get all the facts. But I am getting
them little by little, and hope to be able to write
another article very soon. In the meantime, wait.
This paper will not mention any instrument on
these pages unless it is satisfied that its backers are
responsible persons. And do not take stock in any
rumors as to what this, that or the other company
will do. This paper will print the facts in all
cases. And do not buy any stock in any of such
concerns, unless you first investigate them.
196
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 8, 1928
That an exhibitor’s contracts are canceled in
case of the destruction of his theatre by fire is so
plain that there should be no misunderstanding in
this. And yet cases have come to the attention of
this paper where exchanges brought exhibitors
before the arbitration board and obtained judg-
ments against them. I have one such case in my
hands right now, which I have brought to the at-
tention of the exchange’s Home Office.
In case a theatre is destroyed by fire, the lease
on the building is automatically canceled. If there
had been no provision in the contract about the
cancellation of all outstanding contracts in such a
contingency, then the exhibitor would have been
tied up with pictures he would have no place in
which to show them. When a new theatre is
erected on the same spot by the same exhibitor, it
is the same as if the theatre were erected by a dif-
ferent man, for such theatre is built under an en-
tirely new lease, on entirely new terms, even
though the owner of the property is the same.
There should be no difference of opinion on
this question. Yet, as said, there is, because the
exchanges try to take advantage of every situa-
tion. And they do, when the exhibitor is ignorant
of his rights in such matters, or when he has no
one to advise him properly.
{To be continued)
A GEM ON SUBSTITUTIONS
David Barrist’s Menkis again comes forward
with a gem in “Brevity,” an adjunct to all the
publications of Messrs. Barrist & Goodwin. It is
on substitutions. Here it is — a conversation be-
tween Menkis and an exchangeman :
Menkis: “Are you the manager?”
Manager : “Yes ; what can I do for you ?”
Menkis: “I got here a letter from your com-
pany telling me that ‘Loved and Lost’ has been
changed to ‘Western Hate’ and that instead of
John Berrymore the star will be Rin-Tin-Tin. Is
that a matinee idol — Rin-Tin-Tin?”
Manager : “I am sorry, Mr. Menkis, but it is
an unavoilable substitution.”
Menkis: “That’s what you told me last week
when you changed ‘Lazy Love’ to ‘Machine Gun.’
How about ‘The Cossack’s Revenge?’”
Manager : “We are not releasing that this year,
but we’ve substituted instead ‘Passion, Preferred.’ ”
Menkis : “But the contract says ‘a sweeping
drama of the Russian steppes.’ How can you
sweep the steppes with a title like ‘Passion, Pre-
ferred?’ Well, anyhow, book me ‘When Knights
Were Bold.’ ”
Manager : “Er — there has been a slight sub-
titution there.”
Menkis ( sarcastically ) : “Of course! Natural!”
Manager: “The title is now ‘Ten Knights In a
Barroom.’ ”
Menkis: “But I played that five years ago!”
Manager: “Not this. That’s another picture.”
Menkis: “Well — Mary Miller is the star, so I
guess I’ll —
Manager : “Oh, Mary Miller didn’t make this
one.”
Menkis: “Oh! Another substitution? And who
is taking the place of Mary Miller?”
Manager: “Bull Montana.”
Menkis : “Mm ! You ain’t got maybe a nice
Harold Lloyd picture acted by Little Farina? Or a
Gloria Swanson made by Felix the cat? Tell me,
did I buy from you pictures or did I buy subtitu-
tions ? At the beginning of the season I signed up
for your Famous Forty with titles, and stars, and
directors, and scenery writers — ”
Manager: “What?”
Menkis: “Scenery writers.”
Manager : “Oh, scenario writers.”
Menkis: “Yes — scenery writers — and the only
thing which ain’t been changed on that contract is
the name of the printer.”
Manager: “Substitutions are unavoidable, Mr.
Menkis. You know that.”
Menkis: “Oh, is that so? Then I, too, would
like to make some substitutions.”
Manager: “What do you mean?”
Menkis: “I would like to substitute for the
price of $200 on ‘Single Wives,’ which my con-
tract calls for, a price of $20. All the trade jour-
nals say it’s a flop and we shouldn’t play it.”
Manager: “Now you are joking, Mr. Menkis
fj
Menkis: “I am, is it? I would also like to sub-
stitute for the week stand which my contract calls
for on ‘Maid or Mystery’ a run of one day. The
Strand broke all records for rotten business with
it and pulled it off in the middle of the week.”
Manager: “But you know — ”
Menkis: “And there is one other substitution
I wish you should make. I wish you substitute for
my theatre that of my competitor to play your
pictures. The only time he fills his theatre is when
I play one of your pictures. Substitutions is a
good thing, but it should work both ways. What’s
applesauce for the goose is the same thing for his
wife !”
CRUEL AND INHUMAN
Harry Richenback has been sending anonymous
letters to exhibitors, warning them that they must
call at 565 Fifth Avenue, Room 1019, New York
City, implying that dire consequences will visit
them unless they call at that address, using the
key, which they usually find enclosed in the en-
velope. This is an advertising scheme for a cer-
tain picture.
The exploitation scheme Harry Richenback is
using is the most cruel, most inhuman that I have
ever heard of. While he has succeeded in fright-
ening the exhibitors, he does not realize that at
the same time he has frightened out of their
minds the recipient’s wife and children. One case
came to my attention in which the exhibitor’s wife
fainted from fear lest her husband meet with foul
play, and his children were kept hudled into the
house for days until he was informed by this
office that this was one of Harry Richenback’s
bright ideas. Only an unbalanced mind could have
carried out such a fiendish exploitation scheme.
Unless the company that employs him orders
him to stop this kind of exploitation, Harrison’s
Reports will find itself compelled to make a per-
sonal appeal to the exhibitors not to book the
picture in question.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Yearly Subscription Kates :
United StateB $10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.60
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
s
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X SATURDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1928 NoTTq
An Analysis of the Reformed Standard Contract — No. 3
Clause 18: This clause deals with arbitration.
The system of arbitration now in force in the
moving picture industry is so lopsided, so unfair,
that it is incomprehensible why you should have tol-
erated it at all. It robs you of your rights of trial
by jury, the cornerstone of your liberties, and you
nav no recourse, for the reason that arbitration is
not voluntary • vou are being forced to accept it, if
you want him. It is one of the things that made
me lose confidence in the sincerity of Mr. Hays
when he was delivering his fine speeches to the ex-
hibitor gatherings, either in person or by proxy.
He knows the system is wrong, for he is a lawyer.
And he knows that it is unjust, tor he is supposed
to be wise enough to reason it out for himself. Yet
he has never done anything to make it just and fair.
“The Golden Rule should be written at the top
of every contract and it should be the most valuable
clause in it ! It is a clause that must be obeyed !
It is non-cancellable ! To live and let live is not
enough ! We must live and help live !”
These are the words of Mr. Hays himself. How
heartily he must have laughed when he saw you
take this slogan of his seriously ! What he really
had in mind is : “The Producer Rule should be
written at the top of every contract and it should be
the most valuable clause in it ! It is a clause that
you must obey ! It is non-cancellable !” How else
can we explain his refusal to heed the demand for
arbitration reforms?
Attempts have been made to induce him to accept
a fair arbitration procedure by permitting each liti-
gant to chose his own arbitrator, and the two so
selected to chose a third to preside over the trial,
who will have the deciding vote. It is the system in
force in other industries. But Mr. Hays would
not listen to it, because it would put arbitration be-
yond his reach. He could not manipulate it then.
How can the present arbitration system deal jus-
tice? On the exchange’s side, either the one or all
the three arbitrators may have contractual relations
with the exhibitor. They may fear to vote in ac-
cordance with their conscience lest they find them-
selves entangled with the same exhibitor later on ;
and if they should vote for the exhibitor, the ex-
changeman may get “even” with them at some other
time by voting against them should any of them
happen to have a case before the board. When an
important precedent is to be established, a precedent
that may cost the producers millions of dollars a
year, they are bound to vote against the exhibitor,
for the reason that there are only a few producers
from whom they could get a job. Cases have been
known where an exchangeman voted for the ex-
hibitor and not only lost his job but he could not get
another job from a distributor.
Even the exhibitor-arbitrators themselves often
fear to vote for the exhibitor lest they be penalized
by the exchanges. In an industry where a buyer
finds it so difficult to get product at reasonable
prices, even under the best of conditions, it is not
surprising to see these buyers fear to vote against a
seller.
That the exchangemen cannot vote in accordance
with their consciences, with an exception here and
there, was put clearly by Mr. H. M. Richey, at the
time Michigan withdrew (in 1926) from arbitra-
tion when the exchangeman arbitrators voted
against Charles Q. Carlise, of Saginaw, Michigan,
who had brought Metro-Gold wyn before the board,
demanding delivery of “The Big Parade,” and af-
terwards, in private conversation with exhibitors,
admitted that they could not vote for the exhibitor,
even though they knew that he was right, because a
big question was involved, and they feared lest they
lose their jobs should they have voted in accordance
with their consciences. Mr. Richey, in answer to a
statement from the Hays organization, said the
following among other things :
“There is a question in the minds of Michigan
theatre owners whether the system of having three
interested parties and three somewhat interested
parties to controversies will ever constitute a thor-
oughly impartial arbitration board. For the fact
cannot be denied that when Exchange Managers
are called on to decide cases involving points which
sooner or later will apply to themselves, there is a
question whether they are not human and won’t at-
tempt to decide against the theatre owner. For
they are a small compact group with all of the arbi-
trable problems, common problems to them, while
the Exhibitor members, while still interested par-
ties to, are part of a large unwieldly mass, with far
less in common with the exhibitor who is a part of
the controversy.”
Mr. Steffes, President of the Exhibitors of the
Northwest, too, put the matter clearly when he sent
a letter to Mr. Hays, right after Michigan with-
drew from arbitration, protesting against the prac-
tice of his office of sending instructions to the ex-
changemen arbitrators as to how they should vote
in the cases that came up before them for considera-
tion. In one paragraph, Mr. Steffes said :
“With three members of each board paid em-
ployes of a few closely knit distributing companies,
whose interests are identical, you will readily under-
stand that it is very difficult even under the best of
conditions for them to give an unbiased decision.
Such a decision becomes impossible when pressure
or criticism is brought to bear upon them from their
own ranks.”
(Continued on last page)
198
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 15, 1928
“The Gate Crasher”- — Vrith Glenn Tryon
and Patsy Ruth Miller
( Universal ; Dec. 23; 5,597 ft.; 65 to 79 min.)
A good comedy. The situations are farcial and the ac-
tion is fast due to the good direction of William Craft.
The hero, a country boy, one of those smart-alecks that are
very annoying at times, is impersonated well by Mr. Tryon.
This time Mr. Tryon is an embryo detective when he is
not working at his job of billposter. With the aid of his
own invention, he is able to trace lost or stolen jewelry.
He meets the heroine when her car collides with his ; he
had been hanging a billpost advertisement of her where she
was to act. She was with her press agent and a maid, who
had stolen her jewels. But the hero recovers them and the
press agent pretends it was a publicity stunt. So that she
might get her train in time, the hero takes her in his dilapi-
dated car to the train after a hair-raising race with the
locomotive. Later the hero learns that the heroine’s jewels
had been stolen and he crashes his way into her apartment
where he poses as a doctor when he had been put out by the
press agent. He learns that the jewels, which the heroine
had thought safe, were really gone. He crashes his way
into the theatre where she is performing, and, disguised as
a Roman soldier, causes a laugh-provoking disturbance by
appearing in the show.
The picture winds up with a thrill when the hero, learn-
ing that the heroine was to go to a certain cabaret with
$25,000, where she would recover her jewels, disguises
himself as a monkey man, as part of a circus act. After
beating up the gang of crooks, when he had been trapped
in a basement, he is almost licked when the heroine, who
had summoned the police, rescues him.
Both Mr. Tryon and Miss Miller are excellent in the
situation where Mr. Tryon breaks into the show. He is
good also when he becomes a tight-rope walker and acro-
bat in his efforts to keep away the gang that had found
out he had the jewels instead of the real crook. Miss
Miller is good as the upstage star, who at first despised
the hero on account of his impertinence and then fell in
love with him. The picture is based on a story by Jack
Foley.
“Phyllis of the Follies” — with Alice Day,
Matt Moore, Lillyan Tashman
and Edmund Burns
( Universal , Nov. 25 ; 5,907 ft.; 68 to 84 min.)
Pretty good for those who like this sort of pictures. It
is a comedy-drama, revolving around the efforts of one
friend (Edmund Burns), a bachelor, to win away from
his friend (Matt Moore), a lawyer, his wife (Lillyan Tash-
man. There is comedy here and there, and the interest is
kept fairly alive all the way through. The direction and
acting are very good.
Matt Moore, a lawyer, had just secured a settlement for
his wealthy client and friend (Edmund Burns) from a wo-
man, who had brought a suit against him for breach of
promise. He was lecturing him to be careful in the fu-
ture, when the telephone rings. Burns answers it and,
learning that it was Matt Moore’s wife (LiNyan Tashman),
carries on a “sweet” conversation with her. Matt Moore
thinks that it was another of his friend’s “sweethearts.”
Lillyan Tashman asks Burns to accept her dinner invitation
for that night and to tell her husband about it. Burns, in-
stead of telling Matt Moore about it, conceals it from him
and sends him to Boston, ostensibly on a business deal, but
really to have him out of the way. Lillyan Tashman, hav-
ing seen through the scheme, invites Alice Day, her friend,
single yet, to impersonate her identity, with the under-
standing that she, Lillyan Tashman, impersonate her, Alice
Day. Things go along well until Matt Moore returns from
Boston. Then the plot thickens, for the mix-up in iden-
tities causes much suspicion, until towards the end when
everything is explained. When Edmund Burns finds him-
self outwitted, he is glad to propose to Alice Day, whom
he had learned to love, and who, as he found out, loved
him.
The story is by Arthur Greger. It was directed by Er-
nest Laemmle well.
“Behind the German Lines”
( Paramount-Uja , rel. date not yet set; 8,254 ft.)
The chief feature of this film is the fact that it has been
compiled by Germans, and that it shows the German side
of the World war. As far as the picture itself is concerned,
there are no incidents in it that have not been shown in
America before, either in Newsweeklies, or in other films.
Most of the picture is authentic, the scenes having been
taken during the war. But a great deal of it is an after-the-
war reproduction, either at the studio, or in the streets of
the cities in Germany. There is nothing extraordinary
about the fighting scenes themselves, except when they are
viewed with patriotic eyes.
The most interesting part of the picture generally is the
showing of the German strategy ; by means of diagrams,
troops are shown moved by the German Command at cru-
cial moments. They give a clear idea as to the troop move-
ments and as to the results. The battle in Poland between
the Germans and the Russians, where General Von Hin-
denburg had delivered a crushing defeat to the Russians, is
shown very clearly. The first battle between the Ger-
mans and the French; the overrunning of Belgium by the
Germans and the brave resistance the Belgians put up at
Liege, are shown interestingly. The diagrams depict al-
most every important battle during the war. The picture
is, in fact, one of diagrams, illustrated by actual or “re-
enacted” war scenes.
Because of the fact that no picture has been presented
from the German point of view so far, “Behind the Ger-
man Lines” may take well. Even those not in sympathy
with the German side of the war may wish to see it out of
curiosity.
“The Border Patrol” — with Harry Carey
( Pathe , Dec. 23; 4,958 ft.; 57 to 79 min.) ll l
A fair program picture. This time Mr. Carey, a Texas
Ranger, is detailed to detect at El Paso a band of counter-
feiters. He succeeds, although the means the producer
made him adopt looked childish at times. There is some
suspense, and some human interest.
Finis Fox wrote the story; James P. Hogan directed
it. Kathlyn Collins, Richard Tucker, James Neil, Phillip
Smalley, and James Marcus are in the cast.
Note: In this age of talking pictures, it is a surprise
that no producer has thought of putting Mr. Carey in talk-
ing pictures. He has had wide stage experience as an
actor and as an author, and has fine delivery. The pro-
ducer that will engage him will not have to waste his
time training him for talking pictures; he is already
trained.
“The Barker” (PT) — with Milton Sills
( First Nat., Dec. 30; Synchr. 8,500 ft; Sil. 7,095 ft.).
Very good, but not a Sunday-School picture. The two
heroines are of lax morals, and the hero was living with
one of them. Matters are complicated when the son of the
hero (barker) induces his father to permit him to get a
job in the circus, and falls in love with one of the heroines.
The picture has been done exceedingly well. One, in fact,
is made to feel as if seeing real people and not mere
shadows. The characters talk here and there, in the im-
portant situations, and although the words are distinct
and the talk good the reproduction is poor, manifestly be-
cause of poor recording. At times one can hardly catch
what is said. This destroys the illusion somewhat, because
one cannot conceive of strong and healthy persons speak-
ing in so low a voice. The greatest interest is aroused
when the father finds out that his son, whom he was wor-
shipping had fallen in love with one of the circus girls
(Dorothy Mackaill) ; she had been hired by the hero’s
“girl” (Betty Compson) to make love to him and to cause
him to fall in love with her so that he might cause his
father to turn against him (the son) and send him away ;
she (Betty Compson) thought that Milton Sills was de-
priving her of the attention she deserved because of his
son. There is a scene between father and son when the
father tells the son that the woman he had fallen in love
with was a prostitute that grips the spectator. Dorothy
Mackaill wins the spectator’s sympathy when she falls in
real love with Douglas Fairbanks. Jr., who does excellent
work as the hero’s young son. His voice registers well,
although it is not brought out so clearly because, as said,
of poor recording. It is manifest that the microphone was
not placed opposite him while he was speaking.
The entertaining qualities “The Barker” possesses have
been imparted to it by good direction, and by good acting
as well as good talking. The story itself is not too strong,
and the atmosphere not so cheering. The plot has been
founded on the Kenyon Nicholson stage drama; it was
directed by George Fitzmaurice most skillfully. Sylvia
Ashton, George Cooper, John Irwin, S. S. Simon, and
One-Eye Connolly are in the cast.
It is a very good entertainment for adults.
199
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 15, 1928
“The Viking” with a Special Cast
(M-G-M .,no rel.date set ; 8,508 ft.; 98 to 121 min.)
This is all in technicolor. It is the most beauti-
ful picture that has ever been seen on the screen.
And the direction is up to the standard of its
beauty. So is the acting. Whether, however, it
will appeal to the rank and file of picturegoers, is
another question. It seems to be rather doubtful.
The story depicts the pre-Columbus discovery of
America by the Vikings, a race of people that
hailed from Scandinavia. It gives the history of
this people, and how they came about to undertake
a trip to the West for the purpose of discovering
land. Up to that time people thought that several
miles West of Greenland there was the edge of
the world, where the water was pouring down into
space, and that near it there were fierce creatures.
The story starts showing the sturdy race of the
Viking raiding coast towns in Northern Europe
and carrying away women and booty. In one of
the expeditions the young hero, living peacefully
with his mother and other relatives, is carried
away North and made a slave. The heroine, ward
of the chief of the Viking, sees him and is at-
tracted by his manliness. At first she humiliates
him. But when she sees him mistreated by one of
her guardian’s lieutenants, she intervenes and
saves him from punishment. The lieutenant (vil-
lain) bears malice against the hero, because the
heroine had been showing him favors.
The Viking leader decides to take his followers
and pay a visit to his father in Greenland. There
is a fight between the men of the Viking leader
and his father and his men, because the, Viking
leader and many of his followers had accepted the
Christian religion. The leader takes grain and
other provisions forcibly from his father and
loads his ship, and then starts West in search of
new land. The heroine masquerades as a man and
enters the ship so as to be near the hero, despite
the leader’s orders to the contrary. On the way
the superstitious crew is incited to revolt by the
villain, who was jealous of the hero, with tales of
fearful beings inhabiting the region further west,
aiid the danger of being trown over the edge of
the world. But the leader subdues them, until
they reach new land, where they settle.
The screen play by Jack Cunningham has been
founded on the novel, “Leif the Lucky,” by Ot-
tilie A. Liljencrantz. It has been directed most
artistically by R. William Neil. Donald Crisp,
Pauline Starke, LeRoy Mason, Anders Randolph,
Roy Stewart, Julia Swyne Gordon and others are
in the cast.
As a historical document, “The Viking” stands
supreme; as an entertainment, it should appeal
chiefly to the cultured picturegoers.
“Riley the Cop” — with Farrell McDonald
(Fox; Nov. 25; synchr. 6,132 ft.; sil. 5,993 ft.)
It is too bad that such good acting on the part of Mr.
McDonald and Louise Fazenda and such good directing by
John Ford should be wasted on a piece of nonsense that
is not fit even for neighborhood programs. The picture
is synchronized with music. Occasionally children at play
are heard to shout and yodelers as cabaret entertainers in
Germany are heard to sing. The picture is centered around
“one of the finest,’’ as the police in New York are often
called. But he is a sorry example of one if the way he
performs his duties are any criterion. It is unlikely that
a cop, twenty years on the force, would play baseball in
the city streets with a gang of youngsters, or would sneak
into a basement of a home to eat, and when he would see
that his sergeant had been there first, would break a win-
dow to get him outside. His good quality seemed to be
his kindness and gentleness with the children and older
residents whose love and affections he had won. But
his contmous state of intoxication while he was abroad to
bring back a prisoner is anything but elevating.
Miss fazenda and Mr. McDonald contriDute a laugh
here and there in their efforts to find each other when
they are separated. David Roliins (hero), as the sup-
posed embezzler, is likeable though he has very little to
do. Neither has Nancy Drexel, the heroine, sweetheart
of the hero, who was abroad, and whom he followed.
The story revolves around the efforts of a cop who had
been given a special job to do as a reward for his fine
service, to bring back from Germany the hero, whom he
had known from childhood, had been accused of having
robbed the bakery where he worked, when the books
were found short. While in Germany the cop meets a
waitress. Each falls in love with the other. Because he
was recognized as a cop wherever he went by his big
feet, he was entertained magnificently by the police of
Germany and France so much that he was hardly ever
sober. His prisoner had to help him get back to France
in time to get the boat home and the waitress pursued him.
Before they sailed, the hero learned that they had found
the real thief and he met his sweetheart on board re-
turning home. When the cop returned, he married the
waitress who turned out to be the sister of his side-
partner, a German-American cop, with whom he had been
continually having arguments.
Not a substitution.
“Revenge” (S) — with Dolores Del Rio
(U. Art. Nov. 3; sil., 6,460; synchr., 6.541 ft.)
The hero, a gypsy bandit, whose specialty was to swoop
down upon bridal celebrations and to carry away the
brides, giving them to his men, once in a while keeping
one for himself, cuts the heroine’s que off and carries it
away with him; he had become fascinated with her. The
heroine, feeling disgraced, as all gypsy girls feel when any
one dares touch their precious hair, decides on revenge ;
she w'asn't that kind of girl to stand for such a humili-
ation. Two or three times she makes an attempt to stab
the hero with a stilletto, but the hero disarms her with
his smile, and with his strong dutch. She then begins to
realize that she loves him ; her nature despises men that
would do her bidding, and as the hero wasn’t that kind of
man, she naturally fell in love with him.
If you can feel interest in this sort of story, or, better
yet, if you think your customers will feel interest in it,
book it ; at the Rivoli, where it is now playing, people
giggled at the nonsense shown. Many of them walked out
of the theatre before the picture was over. It is too bore-
some for any one to bear it. The sound effects are “terrible.”
The story is by Konrad Bercovici. It unfolds in a
town on the border between Austria and Hungary. The
direction is by Edwin Carewe. James Marcus, Rita
Carewe, Sose Crespo and Sam Appel are in the cast.
“Three Week Ends” — with Clara Bow
( Paramount ; Dec. 8; 5,962 ft.; 69 to 85 min.)
Fair. The story, is too thin, despite the good acting of
Miss Bow and the good directing of Clarence Badger, to
be very entertaining although Miss Bow’s fans will like
her as she appears in more or less dress and undress
while she is trying to get her man. Neil Hamilton is
attractive as the poor insurance agent that posed as a
wealthy man, misleading the heroine; she was shocked
and disappointed when she learned that he wasn’t rich.
Harrison Ford is good as a philandering millionaire who
was engaged to a sedate society girl but who threw parties
for chorus girls when he happened to become infatuated
with one of them. The titles as well as a few of the
situations cause some scattered laughs. Miss Bow is the
whole picture and she is excellent when she is the madcap
chorine out for a good time, and when she is crying as
the misunderstood sweetheart, who despite her hatred for
poverty was willing to marry the hero and live in a
humble home with him.
Others in the cast are Lucille Powers, Jack Raymond,
Guy Oliver and Edythe Chapman. The story was written
by Elinor Glyn and was adapted by Sam Mintz, Percy
Heath and Louis Long.
THE ARTICLE ON INDEPENDENT
TALKING PICTURE INSTRUMENTS
The article on independent talking picture instruments
will be printed next week.
200
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 15, 1928
The conditions that existed in Michigan and in
Minnesota in the Fall of 1926 still exist all over the
country. Michigan and Minnesota were placated
by certain reforms, but those reforms did not apply
to other parts of the country. And even if they had
been applied over the rest of the country, the results
would not have been better, for the system of choos-
ing as arbitrators persons that are interested in the
case, directly or indirectly, is fundamentally wrong,
and no reforms can correct it. What is needed is a
radical change, a change that will make it possible
for each party to select his own arbitrator, the two
arbitrators thus selected to choose a third one, to
preside over the trial. Only then may we hope to
have arbitration proceedings that will be free from
bias.
But in spite of the fact that arbitration in this in-
dustry is lopsided, it is in the contract and, unless
you are willing to take legal steps to protect your-
self against its injustices, you have to submit to it,
if you should want to keep running your theatre.
For this reason I shall endeavor to make clear to
you the few rights you have under its rules.
RULE 1
Paragraph 1 : The exhibitor-arbitrators must
not be connected either directly or indirectly with
producers or distributors in any business enterprise.
When you learn that they are so connected you
have the right to challenge them. When you find
that a decision has been rendered against you by a
board which had one exhibitor, or more, interested
with a producer or distributor in some business en-
terprise, you can apply to the courts for an order
vacating the award.
Paragraph 2 : The exhibitor-arbitrators are to
be selected by the organization of exhibitors. In
case there is no organization in that zone, or the
organization fails to appoint such arbitrators, then
the President of the Film Board of Trade shall re-
quest the President of the Chamber of Commerce,
or the Mayor, or other executive of that city, or the
President of the American arbitration Association,
to appoint among the independent exhibitors of that
zone arbitrators and alternates.
I understand that in Atlanta, Georgia, where
there is no exhibitor organization, this procedure is
not followed. Instead, the President of the Film
Board of Trade appoints the exhibitor-arbitrators
himself, and his organization pays them ten dollars
for every sitting. If my information is accurate,
then this makes the entire proceedings illegal. Any
awards rendered with a board the exhibitor-mem-
bers of which have been paid a stipend can be va-
cated by the courts, no matter how long ago they
were rendered, so long as they are within the statute
of limitations. It is a disgraceful condition, made
possible only by the “rottenness” of the procedure
that is now in force.
Paragraph 3 : This paragraph specifies that the
arbitrators shall serve for one month only, or until
relieved of their duties. In Connecticut, before
the expose of the Hadelman case, there were exhibi-
tor arbitrators on the board that had served for
three years or more. The organization during those
days was in the hands of exhibitors who were so-
licitous not of the exhibitor interests but of the pro-
ducer interests. An exhibitor-arbitrator that sits
on the board for an unreasonable length of time be-
comes so set in his ideas that he cannot deal justice
impartially, particularly when one bears in mind
that such exhibitor must deal with the exchangemen
year in and year out, buying their product. The
only explanation that we can give as to the act of
seeing an exhibitor-arbitrator sitting for years and
years as an arbitrator is his desire to get favors
from the exchanges, in return for favors he grants
them while trying their cases. And this thing is
possible only because each litigant is not permitted
to chose his own arbitrator, as is the logical thing
to do.
Paragraph 5 : This gives the right to a litigant
to challenge no more than two of the arbitrators on
each side. But let this not stop you from challeng-
ing all the exhibitor-arbitrators, if you should hap-
pen to have documentary or other convincing evi-
dence that they are connected with distributors or
producers, directly or indirectly. Should your
challenge be disregarded, you can apply to the
courts for relief. Any judge will vacate an award
so rendered.
{To be continued )
1928-29 SUBSTITUTIONS— ARTICLE 1
In the previous seasons, you found it neces-
sary to fight a hard battle to get rid of substi-
tute pictures, for the exchanges could find one mil-
lion and one excuses in an effort to convince you
either that the pictures they were offering you were
not substitutions, or that they had the right to
change the story, or the star, or the director.
Some of you succeeded in escaping the punish-
ment of being forced to play pictures you had not
contracted for ; others of you were compelled to
play them, just because your arbitration board,
which is supposed to render decisions in accordance
with equity and justice, so decreed.
But there is no fear that you will be compelled to
accept substitutes this year ; the contract is ex-
tremely specific on substitutions, and no arbitration
board will dare render an award differently.
* * *
Fox 1928-1929 Substitutions
DRY MARTINI (26) : The story of the fin-
ished product is the same as that promised, as is the
director, but the cast is not; June Collyer, Edmund
Lowe and Barry Norton were promised, but Mary
Astor, Matt Moore and Albert Gran are being de-
livered. Since there has been a substitution of stars,
you are not obligated to accept it, unless you have
signed a Rider permitting the Fox Corporation to
make the substitution, or you signed the contract
after the substitutions were made.
ME, GANGSTER (24): Star substitutions;
Lois Moran, Nick Stuart, and Ben Bard were prom-
ised, but June Collyer, Don Terry and Anders
Randolph are being delivered.
MOTHER MACHREE (49) : O. K. Those
who bought this picture on their 1926-27 contracts
and did not sign a Rider are entitled to it.
ROMANCE OF THE UNDERWORLD (1) :
Star substitution ; Edmund Lowe, Ivan Linow,
Nancy Drexel were promised, but Mary Astor,
Robert Elliot, Ben Bard and John Boles are being
delivered. The story is the same.
PREP AND PEP (6) : There has been a minor
change in the cast in that David Rollins and Sally
Phipps were promised and David Rollins and
Nancy Drexel are being delivered.
{To be continued )
Entered as second-cloas matter January 4, 1921, at tile poat office at New YorK, New York, under the act of March 3, 1*19.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly -Subscription Rates:
United States... *10.00
U. S. Insular Posses-
sions 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.60
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Har reports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1928
No. 51
Facts About Talking Pictures and Instruments — No. 10
I went to the Roxy the other day to see and hear the pic-
ture program that consisted of all-talk Fox shorts.
There were no seats to be had in the orchestra ; so I
bought a seat in the balcony.
But the only seats that were vacant in that part of the
house were in the rear and in the sides.
I took a seat in the rear first, but as I could not hear well
I moved further down in the middle of the balcony with
the hope of finding a seat there. As I could not, I took a
seat near the wall.
From that point I tried to hear what the characters were
saying. But I soon gave up the effort in despair ; I could
not hear as well as I did from the seat in the rear. Now and
then I could catch a word, and sometimes I could guess a
phrase from the action, but not a full line of talk.
I did not know whether the fault lay in the sound record-
ing on the film, in the sound reproducing apparatus used,
or in the acoustics of the house. So, in order for me to find
out, I went to an early performance the following day and
took a seat in the orchestra.
From that point, I could understand every word the ac-
tors spoke, although the tone quality was not of the best.
I then realized that the fault for my inability to hear in the
balcony lay not in the recording, but either in the acoustics
of the house or in the sound projection apparatus used.
Was it the acoustics?
Though it is difficult even under the best of conditions to
make a theatre of the size of the Roxy “alive” to sound in
all parts of the house, with a proper sound projection ap-
paratus the “dead” spots can be reduced to the minimum
and, under certain conditions, even eliminated altogether.
But the horn system, which is used by the Roxy, is not the
kind that will bring about such a result, for the reason that
the horn has directional properties ; it directs the sound to
the spot to which it is pointed, in a sort of beam. The fur-
ther away from that beam one sits the more difficult he finds
it to hear the actors. To cover all parts of the house with
sound beams it will require a large number of horns. And
this is impracticable for a theatre that has to have the stage
cleared in a short space of time for other attractions.
With the cone system of sound projection, unless the
acoustics of the house are extremely bad, there need be no
“dead” spots, for the reason that cones, of which one can,
within reason, use as many as he wants to for an installa-
tion, being mounted at various angles, send the sound to all
parts of the house, not in “restricted” beams, as is the case
with the horns, but in wide waves. Thus a better distribu-
tion of sound is obtained.
So in making up your mind what talking picture instru-
ment to buy, insist that correctly mounted cone sound pro-
jectors are supplied with it ; and see that they are mounted
at varying angles, so as to distribute the sound in all parts
of the house evenly.
In addition to better sound distribution, the cone system
gives, as I have said in other articles of this series, better
tone quality. The horn modifies and even distorts the sound
waves while they pass through it. You are well aware of
the fact that the voice can under no circumstances be made
to sound natural through a megaphone. And the horn is a
megaphone. On the other hand the cones, being so mounted
as to be free to move in and out, like pistons, send forth the
sound waves much more nearly as they are created at the
source.
That the horn cannot give tone quality as good as the
cone was proved to me the other day beyond any doubt :
The Columbia Phonograph Company gave me, at my re-
quest, another demonstration of their non-synchronous in-
strument, which uses, as I have already informed you, the
cone system of sound projection. The cones are twelve
inches in diameter, the same size as those used by the RCA
Photophone system. The tone quality was so good that it
seemed to me as if I were hearing the original orchestra.
In “Damnation of Faust,” Rakoczy March, I picked out
tympanies, bass violins, horn bass, bass drums, and drums
clearly, — low frequency sounds that I have vainly sought
to recognize in the Vitaphone photo-orchestra. I took that
record wiih me and went to the branch office of the Platter
Cabinet Company, manufacturers of the Phototone non-
synchronous instrument, and had it played over the Photo-
tone, which at that moment happened to be connected to a
horn, the kind they used to supply with their instrument be-
fore they adopted the nine-inch cone, mounted on a bell-
shaped baffle board. The inferiority in the tone quality
was so pronounced that it was almost sickening. Most of
the bass sounds were reduced to the point of inaudibility.
All the music was pitifully muffled. There was no simi-
larity between the Rakoczy March that I heard over the
Phototone instrument and the Rakoczy March that I heard
over the Columbia instrument.
The cone has also a greater range of high as well as of
low frequency sounds. In “The Lion’s Roar,” the two-
reel all-talk Mack Sennett comedy, which I heard at a
demonstration at the RCA Photophone headquarters, I
heard a young woman reach heights in the musical scale
that could not have been reproduced by the horn with the
same naturalness, the same faithfulness, if at all. It seemed
as if no “coloring” of the original voice was lost.
Some of the talking picture instruments of independent
manufacture employ cones (nine inches in diameter), well
enough, but they have each cone mounted on a baffle board,
in the shape of a box, with the cone mounted opposite the
open end. Though cones so mounted give a better tone
quality than the horns, such mounting is scientifically incor-
rect, for the sound waves are distorted just the same. There
is a cavity back of the cone so mounted, which is detri-
mental to good sound reproduction, for the reason that a
cavity always introduces undesirable resonances. Have
some one talk into a soap box or any kind of box and you
will notice how unnatural his voice sounds. Put a sea shell
next to your ear and again you will notice that a murmuring
sound is emphasized by the shell as it would be by any other
cavity. The cone must not have a cavity close to it ; it must
be so mounted as to be free and clear to send forth the sound
waves unimpeded. There must not be near it any medium
that may create resonances. Even the bell-shaped baffle
board that is used by most non-synchronous instruments is
bad. The desire of the designers of these sound projectors
is to direct the various sound waves into the auditorium so
as to get a greater volume of sound. But in so directing
them, the baffle board also distorts somewhat their propor-
tions by introducing undesirable resonances.
* * *
One other factor that you must, in making up your mind
to fit your house for talking pictures, take into considera-
tion is the acoustics of your theatre. There are some
theatres whose acoustics are very good ; there are others
whose acoustics are fair ; but there are some whose acoustics
are very bad.
When the acoustics of a theatre are bad, nothing can be
done about it. It will be just throwing so much money
away if an exhibitor were to fit such theatre for talking
pictures. Long, narrow theatres with hard walls and hard
seats belong in this class. But when the acoustics are fair,
the theatre can be doctored up so that they may be improved.
But only an expert can tell whether they are good, fair, or
bad. Arid the sound experts are so few that they are a
( Continued on last page )
202
“Geraldine” (PT) — with Eddie Quiilan,
Marion Nixon, Albert Gran and
Gaston Glass
(Pa the, Jan. 6 ; Silent, 5,959 ft.; 69 to 85 min. )
The action in the first two reels is charming. It
is a light comedy-romance, in which Eddie Quiilan,
this new screen recruit, does excellent light work,
supported by the good little actress, Marion Nixon.
And had the same mood been maintained ail the way
through, “Geraldine” would, no doubt, have taken
its place among the charming entertainments of
the season. But in the third reel the action switches
to a high-class cabaret, where carousing and drink-
ing goes on. And the charm of the story is ruined.
There is no pleasure in having the heroine say, by
means of a subtitle, that the ginger ale into which
the villain had poured whisky (a fact she was un-
aware of) tasted nice. This does not make the
picture more dramatic, and causes more people to
condemn motion pictures. The drinking scenes in
the cabaret in general are in no way entertaining,
and are not edifying. The police court, where the
young hero makes a sacrifice so as to save the hero-
ine from going to jail and from thus hurting her
reputation — and this occurs towards the close of
the picture — directs somewhat an appeal to the
emotions, but it cannot offset the unpleasant feeling
left in the spectator by the drinking scenes in the
cabaret.
The story is by Booth Tarkington. Mr. Tark-
ington wrote charming novels but this one must
have been changed considerably. Albert Gran and
Gaston Glass are in the cast. The picture has been
directed by Melville Brown. There is no fault to
be found with the direction.
If your patrons do not object to the drinking-
scenes, they may get fairly good satisfaction out
of it.
Note: The characters are supposed to talk in
some parts of the picture. As it was shown silent
in the projection room, it is not known where the
talk is. And none in Bathe knows it yet, because
the information has not been received from the
Coast.
“Adoration” (S) — with Billie Dove
(First Nat., Dec. 2; Syn. 6,609 fl->' Si/. 6,370 ft.)
Unless royalty stories, which have been supplied
to Miss Dove for several pictures, have surfeited
your custom, “Adoration” and Billie Dove should
give them very good satisfaction, for there is real
heart appeal in it. Such appeal comes from the
fact that Miss Dove shows loyalty to the man she
loved; reduced to poverty, and having tied from
Russia to Paris after the revolution to save her
life, she did not cease hoping to be reunited with
her husband some day. The scenes that show the
two meeting face to face in Paris, almost in rags
and being compelled to do menial work for a living,
are powerful. They are deeply pathetic. But the
Prince could have been made less jealous and more
human, and the picture would have profited there-
by, for he would have awakened twice as much
sympathy. Miss Dove looks and acts as a Princess ;
she is charming. Antonio Moreno does well as the
jealous husband. Emil Chautard, too, awakens
much sumpathetic interest ;in Russia he was a
great General, friend of the Prince and of the
Princess and close to the Czar ; in Paris, he was
shown as making a living by shining shoes. It is
December 22, 1928
the first time that this a fter-the-Re volution phase
of the life of the Russian aristocracy has been
touched. Of course, the way the Russian aristo-
crats had treated the common people before the
war does not do them credit ; but their sufferings
as a result of the Revolution appeal to the human
emotions. The direction is by Frank Lloyd. It
was supervised by Ned Marin.
The story has been written by Lajos Biro. It
starts in St. Petersburg, now Lenigrad, during the
world war, and shifts to Paris immediately after
the Revolution. On the day of the flight, the hero
had seen a woman, who he thought was his wife,
enter the home of the villain. He is beaten by the
revolutionists but succeeds escaping with his life.
In Paris he broods over the supposed infidelity of
his wife, and takes to drink. He neglects himself.
The Princess eventually learns where he is and
goes to him. But thinking her guilty of indiscre-
tion he repulses her. The heroine, however, even-
tually convinces him that she was innocent of any
wrong-doing ; it comes to light that the woman
the hero had taken for the heroine was her maid,
who had put on her coat.
“Show Folks” (PT) — with Eddie Quiilan
and Lina Basquette
(Pathe, Oct. 21 ; Silent, 6,581 ft.; Synch. 6,466 ft.)
It is a story of back-stage life, but it is so well
done that it exerts a powerful appeal to the
emotions of pathos. It does not usher itself with
trumpets but it grows on one as the story unfolds.
The most powerful part of the picture is the last
thousand feet, where the characters talk. It will
be hardly possible for any one to conceal his emo-
tions in that part. And it is not maudlin ; the senti-
ment is healthy. The human interest in those sit-
uations is caused by the fact that the heroine throws
down a brilliant stage career for the man she loved,
even though that man was an egotist and felt that
his success as well as the success of the heroine had
been owed to his efforts, whereas it was the heroine
that had brought it about. But the heroine shows
unselfishness and steadfastness, virtues that make
a character lovable on the screen, just as they make
him in real life. The scene that shows the heroine
rehearsing as a star in a dramatic production, steal-
ing away and going to the hero, who was playing
in vaudeville, to take her old part in his act, so that
he might not fail, will bring tears to the eyes of
tender-hearted persons. Her turning of a deaf ear
to the entreaties of the theatrical producer to stay
in his show, telling her how much he loved her, and
offering to marry her, is another tenderly pathetic
situation.
The plot has been founded on a story by Philip
Dunning. It was directed by Paul L. Stein with
skill. Eddie Quiilan is an excellent hero; he im-
personates the role of an egotistical actor with
realism and conviction. Miss Basquette is sur-
prisingly good. The two make a very good pair.
And their voices register well. Robert Armstrong
is the theatrical producer. His voice, too, registers
well. Bessie Barriscale, as the old actress, down
and out, is excellent. Perhaps many of the old
picture-goers would want to see her in talking pic-
tures now if they knew that she is in the cast. She
has not lost any of her old acting ability. Carol
Lombard is in the cast.
It is a good picture either as a “talker” or as
silent.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
203
December 22, 1928 HARRISON'S REPORTS
“The Head of the Family” — with
VVm. Russell, Virginia Lee Corbin
and Mickey Bennett
( Gotham ; Oct. 15 ; 5,587 ft.; 64 to 79 ft.)
A pretty good comedy drama. It is full of laugh-
able situations and no little heart interest as well as
a love story. It is the story of a hen-pecked father,
formerly a plumber, who had become wealthy and
had lost control of his family because he was too
weak-willed to assert himself. He is brought to
his senses by an employee, also a plumber (hero),
by going away and giving the plumber a letter to
his family, authorizing him to act as head of the
family. The hero proceeds to spank the heroine,
the young wild flapper daughter, to persuade the
young son to give up the vamp who was gold-
digging her way into his affections, and to quiet the
too-talkative wife who domineered the whole
family, making them all like it.
William Russell, at first a smart-aleck, becomes
more likeable after he falls in love with the heroine.
He almost loses her by pretending to have fallen
for the vamp, so that he could get back from her the
jewelry the young son had given her. Miss Corbin
is full of pep and makes a charming heroine. At
first she resists the efforts of the hero to tame her
but finally falls in love with him. Mickey Bennett
is a fresh youngster as the hero’s pal and assistant.
Richard Walling is adequate as the young son and
Alma Bennett is a seductive vamp. Aggie Herring
is good as the arrogant wife and William Welsh as
the husband.
The picture, adapted from the Saturday Evening
Post story by George Randolph Chester, was di-
rected by Jos. C. Boyle.
A good program picture for smaller and neigh-
borhood houses.
“Napoleon’s Barber” (AT) — with a
Special Cast
(Fox short “Talker”; 2,999 /*•; 33 min.)
While the recording of the voices is not so bad,
the reproducing is ; there is too much reverberation,
manifestly the result of improper sound-proofing,
and of wrong distance of actors from the micro-
phone. The talk sounds metallic, and at times as
if ti came out of a barrel. The acting is very good,
but as an entertainment the picture is only fair.
It is a fictitious incident from the life of
Napoleon, showing a barber with revolutionary
ideas, telling his friends how he hated the Tyrant,
and how much he would like to have him in his
barber’s chair to cut his throat from ear to ear. A
stranger approaches him and asks for a shave. Soon
they open a conversation and the barber, not know-
ing who the stranger is, resumes his harangue
against Napoleon, telling him what a beast this man
Napoleon is, and what a “butcher.” Through an
incident it comes to light that the stranger is none
other than Napoleon himself. The barber then
falls upon his knees and begs Napoleon to spare his
life. Napoleon leaves the barber shop telling the
barber that he can forgive a revolutionist, that he
can forgive a bad barber, but that he can never
forgive a bad poet, such as the barber was.
W hile Napoleon is in the chair, the conversation
takes many twists, even touching on Josephine, the
Empress. When the barber finds out that the
stranger is Napoleon, his knees shake, naturally.
Napoleon asks him to shave some rough spots from
his chin, left because of his bad barbering; but the
barber is shown as unable to proceed.
“Isle cf Lost Men” — with Tom Santschi
( Rayart ; Oct.; 5,800 ft.; 6 7 to 82 min.)
Not a bad sea melodrama for those who like this
type of pictures. It is a fast moving blood and
thunder he-man tale of the tropical isles, the hero
being shown always fighting one of several villains
between breaths.
The story revolves around the efforts of the hero
to search for valuable islands by aid of a chart;
the theft of the chart by the skipper (one of the
villains) of a pirate ship, and its subsequent recov-
ery. There is a love story between the heroine, a
supposed daughter of a cut-throat trader, another
villain, who had kidnaped her when she was a baby,
and the hero, whom she had rescued when she found
him on the beach after he had been shipwrecked.
Tom Santschi, the skipper, is good as a husky
fighter who bullies his crew into submission. Allen
Connor is likeable as the hero who was finally
united with the heroine after they were found by
the captain of a yacht, who turned out to be the
father of the heroine. Patsy O'Leary is a pleasing
heroine. James Marcus is a despicable thieving
trader whose greed caused his death at the hands
of his wife, a native, because he had sold the heroine
to the skipper and she herself was in love with him.
Paul Weigel is the clergyman who educated the
heroine and brought about the union of hero and
heroine.
There are thrilling fights on board the pirate ship
when the hero, seeking to recover his chart, is
found, after the crew had thought a ghost was on
board. This led to many fights and the skipper
was hurled into the sea and drowned. There is even
an accidental fire on board which in some way is
forgotten. The picture was directed by Duke
Worne from a story by George W. Pyper.
“The Haunted House” (S) — with a
Star Cast
(First N., Nov. 4; Syn., 5,986 ft.; Sil., 5,755 ft.)
The picture is just what the title indicates that
it is. It is a mystery picture, in which the characters
are put in such a predicament by slamming doors
and by other mysterious noises, as well as by skinny
arms extending to grasp the victims by the throat,
that such characters appear frightened out of their
wits, and, if one is to judge by the way the picture
was received at the Paramount Theatre, this city,
that fear is transmitted also to the spectator. In
fact, he is held in tense suspense. Here and there
the action shows some tendency to lag for those that
are hard-boiled, but the general public seemed to
enjoy it immensely. Children may get scared out
of their wits by the mysterious happenings. The
end of the action shows that all these mysterious
doings were done purposely, to help one of the
characters find out who it was that had put arsenic
into the glass from which he had drunk some liquid.
The plot has been founded on the mystery farce
by Owen Davis. It has been directed by,Benjamin
Christensen. Chester Conklin and Flora Finch,
contribute much comedy. Thelma Todd, Larry
Kent, Edmund Bresse, Barbara Bedford, Sidney
Bracy, William V. Mong, Eve Southern, Montague
Love and others are in the cast.
204
HARRISON’S REPORTS
luxury. So when you decide to buy an instrument, make
sure that the company you are dealing with employs sound
experts and it is reliable enough to tell you the truth
whether your theatre should or should not have a talking
picture instruments ~
I am gathering the necessary data for an article giving
instructions as to how to make a rough test yourself. The
talking picture, is here to stay. In order for you to make
the best of it, it is necessary that you, train, not only your
eyes, but also your ears. You must put yourself in a posi-
tion to know what you are doing. Otherwise, you will be
throwing away money you cannot afford to throw away.
Every one of the sellers of talking picture instruments will
tell yotr that they have the best instrument in the world.
You must put yourself in a position to know whether it is
so or not.
In undertaking this series of articles, my chief object
was to give you the information that would enable you to
know what type of instrument is the best and why, so that
you might save yourself from buying a mediocre instru-
ment first and being compelled to buy a good one after-
wards. Talking picture instruments, even of independent
manufacture, cost a great deal of money. And you cannot
afford to buy a new instrument every month. I know that
you are eager to make an immediate installation of such an
instrument because business is bad right now and you at-
tribute it to your lack of such an instrument. As a result,
you may plunge right into an expense before you stop to
think of other factors.
For instance, suppose you installed such an instrument ;
where are you going to get your films from? I have asked
the Vitaphone Company to make itself clear on the matter
of interchangeability, and although Mr. Quigley was good
enough to reply with courtesy to the several communica-
tions from this office, the question is far from being settled.
I asked Sam Morris, General Manager of Warner Bros.,
if they would rent their talking pictures to exhibitors that
have a talking picture instrument installed, and was told
by him that they could not do so at present owing to their
contractual obligations with Electrical Research Products,
Inc. He said, however, that this matter is being discussed
and MAY be settled soon. How soon it will be settled,
however, neither he nor any one else knows. And there
are few other worth-while talking picture features in the
market at present.
Many persons in this industry think that Electrical Re-
search Products cannot stop an exhibitor from showing a
Vitaphone talking picture over a talking picture instrument
of independent manufacture. Unofficially, I agree with such
persons myself, if Warner Bros, will let them have it. It is,
in fact, my belief that Otterson is bluffing, for the reason
that the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the
case of Motion Picture Patents Company vs. Universal
Film Manufacturing Company, rendered April 9, 1917,
stated that “the grant by patent of the exclusive right to '
use, like the grant of the exclusive right to vend, is limited
to the invention described in the claims of the patent, and
that the law does not empower the patent owner by notices
attached to the things patented to extend the scope of the
patent monopoly by restricting their use to material neces-
sary for their operation but forming no part of the patent
invention, or to send such articles forth into the channels
of trade subject to conditions as to use of royalty, to be im-
posed thereafter, in the vendor's discretion. ... In de-
termining how far the owner of the patent may restrict the
use after sale of machine embodying the invention, weight
must be given to the rules long established that the scope of
every patent is limited to the invention as described in the
claims, read in the light of the specification, that the patentee
receives nothing from the patent law beyond the right to
restrain others from manufacturing, using or selling his in-
vention, and that the primary purpose of the law is not to
create private fortunes but to promote progress of science
and the useful arts. . . . The extent to which the use of a
patented machine may validly be restricted to specific sup-
plies or otherwise by special contract between the owner of
the patent and the purchaser or a licensee, is a question
outside of the patent law . . .”
In other words, not only can you, according to this opin-
ion, show any film on a Western Electric instrument or a
film made by the Western Electric process over any instru-
ment (if you can get such film), but you can use parts from
any concern to repair a Western Electric instrument with
so lpng as the parts in question are not covered by patents.
But, as I have said, this opinion of mine is unofficial ; not
being a lawyer, I cannot undertake the responsibility of
advising you on legal matters. This must be done by your
lawyer. Even then, the matter is not settled, for there must
be a court ruling.
It is with great regret that I am not able to give you this
December ^2^1928
week the information about independent talking picture in-
struments I promised last week to give you, for the reason
that I haven’t complete information on them, and I don’t
want to discuss in these pages any instrument, unless I have
all the facts about it. For instance, I asked Mr. Alfred
Weiss, manufacturer of the fliophcme disc instrument, to
give me the serial numbers of the patents under which he
manufactures his instrument, but so far I have not received
a reply. Information of this nature is essential for your
protection. You cannot afford to put yourself into a posi-
tion where you can have lawsuits, as you naturally would
if you were to install an instrument whose patent rights are
not well defined. You have property that can be attached
in case there were a lawsuit.
Theatre Owners Chamber of Commerce of New York
City has called a meeting for Thursday (December 20) ; it
has invited the independent manufacturers of talking pic-
ture devices to tell that body just how they are going to
protect the exhibitor from lawsuits. Their contracts may
specify that they will protect you, but that provision is
meaningless when it comes to performing it, unless there is
a real guarantee. This is another reason that made me re-
frain from discussing these instruments this week.
Be patient 1 First make sure that you will have talking
pictures to run in case you should decide to install a talk-
ing picture instrument ; secondly, see that the instrument is
fully protected by patents before buying it ; and, thirdly, get
a bona fide guarantee against lawsuits. Let any payment
you make on one of these instruments be put in escrow at
a bank, until the patent rights of that instrument have been
legally established. Don’t rush madly headlong into
trouble !
Notes on N on-Synchronous Instruments
Columbia Phonograph Company informs me that they
supply two cone speakers with the §800 instrument, which
will give ample volume of sound for theatres seating up to
1,000 ; that four cone speakers are supplied with the large
machine, which sells for $1,100; that either one or both
amplifiers can be used at the same time ; and that the selling
terms are, 30 per cent, down and balance in six equal
monthly payments, f. o. b. Bridgeport, Connecticut. For
further particulars address Mr. Woerner K. Doetsch, in
care of Columbia Phonograph Company, 1819 Broadway,
New York, N. Y.
The Good-All Electric Manufacturing Company, of
Ogallala, Nebraska, manufacturers of the Good-All Orches-
trola, informs this office that they are ready to sell to all
exhibitors, irrespective of whether they have their instru-
ment or not, special sound records.
The Platter Cabinet Company states that they are now
selling sound records, and that beginning in January they
will be ready with their cue service.
Nu-Art Record Cue Service, of 308 South Harwood
Street, Dallas, Texas, has replied satisfactorily to all ques-
tions put to it by this office.
Kramer Organ Company has replied to a communication
from this paper stating that they are back of the National
Record Cue Service of America, of 1600 Broadway, New
York City, and that they have a full line of sound effect
records, such as, freight trains, passenger trains, aeroplane
effects, carnival, storms (thunder and wind), gong, cuckoo,
horse hoofs, sleigh bells, applause, fire apparatus, and others.
They invite me and any exhibitor to visit their office and
inspect their outfit.
ORDER YOUR MISSING COPIES!
During the Christmas mail rush, your copy of HAR-
RISON’S REPORTS may go astray. If so, order a
duplicate copy at once; it will be supplied to you free of
charge.
You had better also go through your files and see if
there are any copies missing so that you might order dupli-
cate copies. You cannot tell when you may need just the
copy that is missing. “Every copy is worth its weight in
gold,” a subscriber told me the other day. “I steal it at
$10 a year.” So why have your file short of any copies
when you can have it complete without any cost? I want
you to get the full benefit out of all the information given
in the paper. You cannot afford to miss any of the talking-
picture articles. So go through your files now 1
HARRISON’S REPORTS offers to the
subscribers the greetings of the season.
Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879.
Harrison’s Reports
Yearly Subscription Rates:
United States ....... $10.00
U. S. Insular fosses-?
sions . 12.00
Canada and Mexico. . 12.00
England and New
Zealand 14.50
Other Foreign Coun-
tries 16.50
25c. a Copy
1440 BROADWAY
New York, N. Y.
A Motion Picture Reviewing Service by a Former Exhibitor
Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors
Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial
Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor.
Published Weekly by
P. S. HARRISON
Editor and Publisher
Established July 1, 1919
Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649
Cable Address :
Harreports
(Bentley Code)
A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING
Vol. X
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1928
No. 52
An Analysis of the Reformed Standard Contract — No. 4
In pointing out in the previous article the unfair-
ness of the arbitration procedure in the motion pic-
ture industry, I overlooked one important fact, that
the managers of the exchanges, among whom the
three exchangemen-arbitrators are selected, are not
free agents; they are merely employees. And as such,
they cannot act with freedom. When they are to
render a decision on an important question, a question
that might, as said, involve a loss of millions of dol-
lars to the producers yearly, they are compelled to
think of their jobs. On the other hand, the exhibi-
tors, being mostly owners of theatres, are not sub-
jected to the same mental strain; if they are not
prompted to act by selfish motives, they can always
render a decision impartially, feeling that, even if
they should decide wrong, they would at least know
that they voted in accordance with what they be-
lieved was right. This is an advantage, which works
to the benefit of the producers. And such advantage
will not be offset by the exhibitors until the system
of choosing exhibitor-arbitrators that has been sug-
gested in the previous article of this series has been
adopted. So long as the present system prevails,
there will be no justice in arbitration; the arbitration
boards will be merely collection agencies for the pro-
ducer-distributors.
Of course, the producers do not want them to be
anything else. A few weeks ago three cases came
before the New York board involving sums of 67c,
72c and 73c. They want the arbitration boards in
the main, not to decide disputes between distributors
and exhibitors, but to collect what they think exhibi-
tors owe them. And they are surely able to twist
the spirit of arbitration the way they want to. In
the case that I mentioned in the previous article of
this series, that Florida case, in which a theatre was
destroyed by fire and the exchange brought the exhi-
bitor before the board and secured a decision against
him, I took the matter up with the Home Office of
the company in question. Their justification was, as
the General Sales Manager said, that this exhibitor,
after the fire, played in his airdome the pictures of
the other distributors but not theirs. In accordance
with the provision in the eighteenth clause of the old
standard contract, there were no contracts in exist-
ence immediately after the destruction of the theatre
by fire. And yet they brought this exhibitor before
the board on what they thought was a grievance.
RULE II
1. This article provides the manner whereby the
Chairman of the Board shall be elected. In the New
York zone, there is an agreement whereby the office
of the chair alternates between the distributor and
the exhibitor groups. One month, one of the three
distributors acts as chairman, and the next month,
one of the exhibitors. Another agreement is to hold
the meetings in the distributor quarters one month,
and in the exhibitor quarters the next month. This
arrangement has been found extremely satisfactory,
in that it puts both sides on an equal footing. The
same arrangement has been copied by a few other
zones, but not by all. This paper suggests that all
zones adopt it.
One other important thing the exhibitors of this
zone have done is to have their own stenographer
during the board meetings, who takes down the pro-
ceedings. Thus the exhibitors, too, have a copy of the
minutes. It is essential that all the other zones adopt
this system.
2. This article empowers the arbitrators to fix the
amount that the distributors shall demand of the ex-
hibitor as security, in the event the exhibitor de-
faulted. As this rule has been adopted by the dis-
tributors as a group, its legality is questionable. In
fact, the legality of the entire arbitration proceedings
is questionable for the same reason. (More will be
said on this matter in the conclusion of this series
of articles.)
3. This article gives to the arbitration board the
right to adopt its own rules of procedure. But it
is a meaningless article, for the rules of arbitration
procedure are made by the Hays organization.
4. “The findings, determination and directions of
the Board of Arbitration upon such controversy shall
be conclusive and binding upon the parties thereto.”
Such findings, determination and directions of the
board may be conclusive and binding, if you want to
accept the word of the makers of these rules, but
that does not prevent you from seeking justice in
the courts, from applying for a vacating of the award,
in case the arbitrators, (1), rendered an award by
corruption, fraud or other means; (2), showed par-
tiality; (3), were guilty of misconduct in refusing to
postpone a hearing upon sufficient cause shown, or
in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material
to the controversy, or guilty of having misbehaved
in any way whereby your rights were prejudiced.
You can apply to the courts for the vacating the
award on any of these grounds, if you should not
want to attack the legality of the arbitration pro-
ceedings entirely, on the grounds of conspiracy, as
well as on the grounds of your being deprived of your
rights of trial by jury, which, because arbitration in
this industry is compulsory, are taken away from you
without due process of the law. Judge Thomas D.
Garnahan, of Pittsburgh, in continuing the injunc-
tion sought by P. L. Gorris, of McKeesport, Penn-
sylvania, against the Pathe Exchange, which de-
manded “additional security” (the well known black-
jack), said among other things;
. . There are some things in these contracts
that do not seem to me to be right. . . . The con-
tracts look to me to be one-sided. . . . The contracts
are said to have been made by representatives of the
exhibitors as well as of the distributors, but the con-
tracts themselves are all in the interest of the dis-
tributor, and the exhibitor does not seem to have very
much to say about them. . . .
“So far as the arbitration is concerned, there is a
provision about arbitration, but what has the exhibi-
tor to do with that? He does not have any choice
in the selection of the arbitrators at all. The arbi-
tration arrangement or agreement or clause is made
by a representative of the exhibitors and they get
together — the national organization provides for that,
you have the national organization of each — and they
arrange these clauses in the contracts. Those pro-
visions in the contract, every one of them, is for the
protection of the distributor, as far as I can see.
There is a provision that three exhibitors may sit on
the arbitration board and three of the distributors
and the three distributors are taken right from the
very people who compose that board, there are only
14 of them; and the other three are taken from a
large organization, and the exhibitor has nothing to
say about it all; he cannot open his mouth about it
and he has to accept their decision or accept none. . .”
These are the words of the court. And they are
weighty, for no judge will take such a stand in a
( Continued on last page )
206
“Nothing to Wear” — with Jacqueline Logan
( Columbia , Nov. 5 ; 5,701 ft.; 66 to 81 min.)
A good picture. The underlying idea of the story is not
worn out, and has been constructed into a plot in a way that
the spectator is kept guessing as to what the outcome will
be. "lhere is suspense throughout, and some comedy.
The heroine’s love for furs, and her husband’s unwilling-
ness to buy her a particular fur coat she had set her eye on,
forms the foundation of the plot. In the development, the
heroine is shown going to an old sweetheart of hers to tell
her that her “mean” husband would not buy her a fur coat.
She returns home. Soon a messenger brings the coat with
a unsigned note, but addressing her as “sweetheart.” Think-
ing that the coat had been sent to her by her former sweet-
heart, and thinking it unwise to keep it in the house lest
her husband see it and create a scene, she sends it to her
former sweetheart with a note thanking him for the present
but requesting him to keep it in his apartment, so that she
might wear it when they go out. The old sweetheart’s
fiancee visits him, and is told by him that he has a surprise
gift for her, the gift being a diamond bracelet. At that
moment the messenger with the fur coat arrives, and the
fiancee, thinking that it was the gift her fiance had prom-
ised her, puts it on and thanks him for it. The old sweet-
heart hasn’t the nerve to tell her that the coat was not his
and that it belonged to his friend’s wife (heroine). The
hero returns home, and finding the heroine still cold towards
him asks her maid if she had received a fur coat he had sent
his wife. The maid, having been instructed by the heroine
to say nothing about the coat, answers in the negative. The
hero telephones to the fur shop and learns that the coat
had been delivered to his wife. Becoming suspicious of
theft, the hero engages a detective to find the thief.
Things soon become so complicated that the heroine is
arrested and the husband learns about the note, and every-
thing points towards divorce proceedings when the farmer
sweetheart and his fiancee decide to prevent it by marrying
in the hero’s house and thus reassuring the hero that there
was nothing wrong with the relations between the old
sweetheart and the heroine. The heroine had already
learned that the fur coat had been sent to her by her
husband.
The story was written by Peter Milne. The picture was
directed by Earle C. Kenton. Theodore von Eltz is the
hero; Bryant Washburn, the “old sweetheart”; Jane Win-
ton the old sweetheart’s fiancee.
There are no offensive sex situations in the picture, but
there is a “shot” of one of the women characters in the
nude. There is no necessity for this “shot,” in that the
story does not demand it ; it was evidently put there by the
producers as an “extra” attraction.
Note: One of the titles reads as follows: “Now get
the hell out of here !” The use of the word “hell” in a
picture is a violation of the promises the producers made at
the Trade Practice Conference.
“What a Night” — with Bebe Daniels
( Paramount , Dec. 22; 5,378 ft.; 62 to 76 min.)
Enjoyable ! This is owed to Miss Daniels’ good acting.
This time she takes the part of a newspaper reporter, who
had been given a job by the editor out of regard for her
dead father, with whom he had been a friend. The comedy
comes from the young heroine’s blunders, at the time the
hero, crack reporter, and the editor, were trying to get
something on a politician, and blunders were out of place,
as they might prove costly to the paper. In one part of the
film it is shown that the paper, on the strength of a can-
celled check as the evidence, had printed a strong story
about the connections of a gang leader with a certain promi-
nent politician, but the gang leader managed to take the
evidence away from the hero at the point of a gun. The
clue had been supplied by the heroine, and she would have
become very popular with the paper had it not been for
the fact that the gang leader succeeded in stealing the evi-
dence. Later on in the picture the heroine saves the day by
securing a photograph showing the gang leader and the
politician together, conferring in a lonely spot. This made
the heroine very popular with the editor and with the hero,
for without that evidence the paper would have been com-
pelled to retract the earlier story, and would have run the
danger of being ruined.
There are many laugh-provoking situations all the way
through, particularly the ones that show Miss Daniels and
William Austin hiding in the villain’s lair and trying to
December 29, 1928
get a flashlight picture of the gang leader and the politician
together. Bebe Daniels is good in the part of the innocent
newspaper reporter. Neil Hamilton, too, is good as the re-
porter. Wheeler Oakman gives his usual villainous per-
formance. Charles Sellon, Charles Hill Mailes, Ernie
Adams and others are in the cast.
The plot has been founded on a story by Lloyd Corrigan
and Grover Jones. The picture has been directed with skill
by Edward Sutherland.
A good entertainment for any theatre.
“Prep and Pep”(S) — with David Rollins
and Nancy Drexel
(.Fox, Nov. 18; Synchronized; 6,086 ft.)
A good program picture of a military school, in which
the chief diversion is the hero, a freshman, who had gone
to that school immediately after his arrival from London,
where he had been tailored in the latest style of clothes, and
where he had been groomed in the latest style of social
conduct, but which conduct wasn’t so popular with the
other students of the military academy. The laughs are
plentiful, caused by student pranks.
The underlying idea is not new, but it has been handled
in a refreshing way. It deals with a young man, whose
father had been a famous athlete in his days at the military
academy, but who had not turned out to be like his father.
He was timid, lacked athletic ability, and appeared to the
other students as a simple-minded fellow. After a while
he realized that his father’s fame was a handicap to him,
and that he would never make a success at the academy,
and decides to leave. But the headmaster shames him not
only into remaining at the academy, but also into making
good. He wipes oft the old score with the crack athlete of
the academy by giving him a good beating for the beating
the crack athlete had given him in the early days. He also
performs a heroic act in dashing with his horse into the
burning forest and saving the headmaster’s daughter (her-
oine) as well as the crack athlete himself, who had been
pinned under a fallen tree. For this he is acclaimed a
hero. Naturally he wins the hand of the headmaster’s
daughter, in addition to becoming fast friends with his
former enemy, the crack athlete.
The scenes that show the hero dashing into the burning
wood with his horse are naturally thrilling.
The story was directed by David Butler. It was written
by Mr. Butler himself, in collaboration with William Con-
selman. Others in the cast are, John Darrow, E. H. Cal-
vert, and Frank Albertson. Mr. Albertson contributes most
of the comedy as the hero’s roommate and manager.
“Dream of Love” with Joan Crawford and
Other Tried Actors
(M-G-M, Dec. 1 ; 7,987 ft.; 92 to 114 min.)
As a costume play, “Dream of Love” has been produced
with great skill. The acting and direction is of the highest
order, and the settings impressive and pleasing to the eye.
There are situations that hold one in fairly tense suspense.
One of such situations is where the dictator’s wife visits
the prince, whose father had been deposed, but who was
allowed to live in the country of the fictitious Balkan King-
dom, turned by the dictator into a principality, so long as
he behaved himself ; the dictator’s wife had been infatuated
with the Prince, and had offered to withdraw her moneyed
support from her husband and to help him declare their
country a kingdom once again, if he would promise to
make her his queen. The dictator enters the room and the
spectator fears lest he discover his wife hiding behind a
screen. The love affair between Nills Asther, as the prince,
and Joan Crawford, as the gypsy heroine, is well done, but
it is a bit hard to believe ; princes do not usually fall in love
with gypsies, even in fictitious kingdoms.
Mr. Warner Oland is good as the dictator. So is Aileen
Pringle, as the dictator’s ambitious wife. Carmel Myers
impersonates the part of the duchess, who had many lovers,
well. The picture is a bit sexy but the sex situations have
been handled well.
The plot has been suggested from Eugene Scribe’s play,
“Adrienne Lecouvre.” The picture has been directed by
Fred Niblo.
If your customers like costume plays they might enjoy
this one well.
HARRISON’S REPORTS
December 29, 1928
HARRISON’S REPORTS
207
“Sally’s Shoulders” — with Lois Moran
(F. B, O., Oct. 7; 6,297 ft.; 73 to 89 min.)
A pretty good program picture. While no one does ex-
ceptionally good work, the story- sustains the interest. The
heroine is shown making a salt-sacrifice ; she was willing
to give up the man she loved to her kid sister, who stole
all- her boy friends. She had brought up her sister and her
wastrel brother by keeping a modest tea room. Her brother,
a bank teller, got mixed up in fast company, married on a
dare, and embezzled funds from the bank to cover his gam-
bling debts. And because the heroine would not act as
hostess in the villain's gambling rooms and cabaret, the
villain has her tea room raided by having her brother hide
liquor in her cellar, where it was found by the raiding party.
The hero had faith in her until he learns that she had taken
the position of hostess, but, as he did not know that she did
so to prevent her brother from going to jail, when he had
the cabaret raided and found that the heroine was in the
villain’s office, he suspects that she had been unduly friendly
with him. He was ready to leave her when her brother, who
had reformed, tells him that she had gone there to warn her
young sister to leave before the raid. They are then united.
Huntley Gordon is the hero ; George Hackathorne is the
weak-willed brother. Others in the cast are Lucille Wil-
liams, James Mason and Edythe Chapman. It was directed
by Lynn Shores from the story of Beatrice Burton.
“Brotherly Love” — with Karl Dane and
George K. Arthur
( Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer , Oct. 13; 6,053 ft.; 70 to 85 min.)
An amusing farce-comedy. It is a mixture of broad
humor and satire, based on the freedom allowed in certain
prisons where the prisoners are treated more like invited
guests than criminals. Their cells are shown as decorated
like college rooms, their food is of the best quality, and the
spirit of brotherly love is encouraged by the prison warden,
who believed that kindness was better than tyranny.
The football game between the rival prisons is a gem of
burlesque. Fans will enjoy it.
Karl Dane is the crude prison guard, who wanted to get
revenge on a prisoner who had previously made a fool of
him when he was a floorwalker in a barber shop. He had
unwittingly committed an offense in trying to escape and
so landed in jail. Both were in love with the warden’s
daughter.
Jean Arthur makes a charming heroine as the nurse who
really loved the refined handsome young prisoner.
The picture was directed by Charles F. Reisner, from Pet-
tersen Marzoni’s story “Big Hearted Jim.”
“My Man” (PT) — with Fannie Brice
( IVamer-Vitaphone , Jan. 12; Synchronized; 9,247 ft.)
It is manifest that in this newly developed branch of en-
tertainment, the talking picture, artistic ability and intel-
ligence will subordinate beauty and lack of intelligence;
Miss Brice proves it. She is not a beauty-, such as we are
accustomed to see in the leading roles in moving pictures ;
but what an actress ! She can make you cry as easily as she
can make you laugh. He acting ability captivates the spec-
tator. “My Man” seems to have been written specially
for Miss Brice. She is given an opportunity to sing several
of the songs that she sang on the vaudeville stage. Some
of them are comical ; some are pathetic. “My Man,” is a
pathetic song. And she sings it with deep feeling, for she
is shown as having just lost the man she loved, her sister,
whom she worshipped, having stolen him from her. “Flora-
dora Baby,” “Second-hand Rose,” “Spring Song,” “I Am
An Indian,” “If You Want the Rainbow, You Must Have
the Rain,” are some of the other songs she sings throughout
the picture.
The story- revolves around a shop girl, a seamstress, who
lavished her affections on her orphaned sister. But the sis-
ter always caused trouble for her with her modem ideas.
Finally she runs away with a theatrical producer. The her-
oine is heart-broken. Her ability to sing and to act comes
to the attention of a producer. She is given a try out.
While she is being given the tryout, she sees her sister
come to the office and have a scene with the producer ; she
them realizes that it was he with whom she had run away.
But she is rejected. Her talent, however, could not be hid-
den ; she eventually finds her way on the stage, where she
makes a great success. She finds a young man (hero)
whose physical strength she had always admired, in difficult
circumstances and helps him. She takes him to her home.
They decide to marry. Just at the time her wayward sister
returns. She succeeds in taking the hero away from the
heroine. The heroine’s heart is broken and she orders her
sister out of the house.
The closing scenes show- the young hero and the her-
oine's sister sitting in the orchestra of the theatre where
the heroine was playing, the hero talking to his companion
and vowing to go back to the heroine and to beg her for-
giveness. It is not an altogether satisfactory ending, but this
defect should be overlooked because of the other good
qualities.
The plot has been founded on a story- by Mark Ganfield.
Archie L. Mayo has directed it with skill. Edna Murphy is
the bad sister, and Guinn Williams as the hero. The char-
acters talk in over half of the picture. The voice of Miss
Brice registers well ; so does that of Miss Murphy. But
that of Mr. Williams is not sharp. Others in the cast are
Richard Tucker, Clarissa Selwynne, Arthur Hoyt, Billy
Seay and others.
“Tropical Nights” — with Patsy Ruth Miller
( Tiffany-Stahl , Dec. 10; 5,449 ft.; 63 to 77 min.)
This picture has been founded on the Jack London novel.
Though Jack London’s novels are literary masterpieces,
none of them so far has made a genuinely good moving pic-
ture. “Tropical Nights” is no different from the others.
It is not a very good picture. The characters do not do
any-thing that would befriend them to the spectator with
any kind of warmth. On the contrary, some of the things
they do are displeasing to the average picture-goer. For
instance, in one situation the hero’s young brother is shown
luring the heroine into his shack and then making an in-
sulting proposal to her. Offering her a pearl, he is shown
as saying : "This pearl will pay your way home if
meaning if she would “capitulate” to him. In a later situation
a friend of the hero is shown making determined advances
to the heroine, threatening to tell the hero that she had mur-
dered his young brother if she would refuse. The murder,
which is committed by the hero’s friend for the purpose
of robbery, is not a pleasant sight either. Much less so
because an innocent person — the heroine — was made to
suffer for it ; she thought that the hero’s young brother died
as a result of the push she gave him when he made the in-
sulting proposal to her ; he had struck his head on a sharp
piece of wood, and therefore she was in constant mortal fear
lest she be detected. The only pleasing thing in the picture
is the tropical scenery, and the pearl diving. In one scene
the foot of the murderer is shown caught by a big clam ;
and in a later scene a devil fish of immense dimensions is
shown wrapping its tentacles around the body of the young
murderer, while he was still held fast by the clam. These
scenes have been made extremely realistic by Elmer Clifton.
Lawrence Gray, Robert Edeson, Raymond Keane, Shir-
ley Palmer, Ralph Emreson, Claire McDowell, and John
St. Polis are in the cast.
PAGE DAVE BARRIST AND “BREVITY”!
Mr. U. A. Graham, of Grand Theatre, Knoxville,
Tennessee, sent in his check for the renewal of his
subscription without signing it.
I sent it back and told him to put his “John Han-
cock” on.
He sent back the letter with the following
notation :
“Sorry, old fellow ! I’m really not an absent-
minded professor, but probably will be worse than
one by the time I have played off all those so-called
silent prints.
“Received one last week on ‘Excess Baggage,’
and my audience had to watch every reel end up
with, ‘Start here for sound effects.’
“I am going to try to borrow Leo, the M-G-M
lion, if possible and have him roar when these ap-
pear on the screen. That is, of course, providing
there’s any roar left in him.
“I guess I’ll sell my theatre and go into making
sound equipment. All a fellow seems to need is
a ’phone attached to his name and a good ‘sound’
slogan.
“Yours for more acting and less noise.”
208
HARRISON’S REPORTS
case before him unless he were sure that a great
wrong had been committed. And you will find many
a judge that will agree with Judge Garnahan, if you
should have courage enough to apply to the courts
for relief. In my experience as a publisher of HAR-
RISON’S REPORTS, I have observed that, in .al-
most every instance, the exhibitor who was wronged
by a distributor and applied to the courts for relief,
received a satisfactory settlement. I have but to
mention some recent case, leaving aside the Peekskill
case of several years ago, in which a distributor was
made to pay heavily for his wrongs against the ex-
hibitor and the exhibitor, whose counsel was the bril-
liant attorney, Mr. Nathan Burkan, was told by the
court that the defendants committed acts that were
liable to criminal prosecution. It is rumored that
Sidney Samuelson, of the Park Theatre, Newton,
N. J., received an $80,000 settlement a few months
ago. It is rumored also that Frank Rembusch has
received a $20,000 settlement.
I could go on and mention case after case that has
been settled out of court, because the producer-dis-
tributors will not let it go to the courts for deter-
mination, for if conspiracy were proved, it might mean
a severe punishment for some one.
5. “In any controversy submitted to a Board of
Arbitration upon complaint of a distributor which is
determined in favor of the exhibitor the Board of
Arbitration may in its discretion include in the de-
cision or award an award of a sum to be paid by
the distributor to the exhibitor not to exceed the cost
to the exhibitor of railroad transportation from and
return to the city or town in which the exhibitor’s
theatre is located and an additional sum not to ex-
ceed $10 provided the exhibitor has attended the
hearing.”
Notice the word “may.” Why shouldn’t it be
“shall”? When an exchangeman drags before the
board an exhibitor whose theatre is three hundred
miles away on a false dispute and loses the case, it
should be obligatory for the board to award to that
exhibitor his railroad fare as well as the $10 pro-
vided by this rule. If it were made obligatory, there
would be fewer cases before the board, for the ex-
changemen would be compelled to make sure first
that they had a real grievance instead of an imaginary
one before resorting to arbitration proceedings. You
should demand your railroad fare and the $10 pro-
vided for by this rule in case you should win a case
before the board, not only when the exchange is the
complainant but also when you are the the complain-
ant. The fact that it is you who brings the distributor
before the board should make no difference, for if
the distributor would have done the right thing in
the first place, you would not have been compelled
to bring him before the board. Exhibitor-arbitrators
should insist that the exhibitors be reimbursed for
this expense, for unless they do so the exchanges will
be encouraged to drag exhibitors before the board
on any slight pretext. I have known cases where
exhibitors far away from the center of distribution
were haled before the board not because the distribu-
tor had a real grievance against them but because they
knew that the exhibitors would settle the dispute to
the distributors’ favor rather than waste one or two
days of their time, away from their families and busi-
nesses, attending the board proceedings ; they felt that it
would be better for them to stand the loss rather
than be inconvenienced. Exhibitor-arbitrators should
discourage this abuse.
8. “Every dispute or controversy must be sub-
mitted for determination to the Board of Arbitration
within nine (9) months after the date of the breach
of the contract or of the act of ommission or com-
mission out of which such dispute shall have arisen.
»
In the rules that were in force from May, 1926, to
last May, when these (new) rules went into effect,
the time limit for outlawing the contract was twelve
months. It has now been cut down to nine months.
In the winter of 1926, when the Uniform Contract
was discarded and the Standard Exhibition Contract
was adopted, the exhibitors insisted that a time limit
be put for the performance of contracts. The inten-
tion of the exhibitors was to make it impossible for
distributors to resurrect old contracts and insist that
the exhibitor play them out, bringing them before the
board should they refuse to do so. That agreement
December 29, 1928
now forms this article, with this difference, that the
time limit, which at that time was made twelve ' months,
has now been lowered to nine, months.
According to this article, when you stop playing
pictures under a contract and the exchange neither
assigns play-dates to you nor brings you before the
board, the contract becomes outlawed nine months
from that date, that is, the date you stopped per-
forming it; or from the last picture you played, pro-
vided you did not ask for play-dates during that time.
Once you ask for play-dates, the nine months start
from that date.
It is understood, of course, that where the pictures
are made within the life of the contract and the dis-
tributor fails to deliver them during such time, unless
there is some other provision that prolongs the con-
tract automatically, the distributor cannot force you
to play the remaining pictures. What happens when
the pictures are produced outside the life of the con-
tract has been explained early in an article of this
series. But it might not be amiss to say that con-
tracts that contain no play-dates, whether for one
picture or for more pictures, become outlawed one
year after the date they were signed, provided you
did not ask for play-dates and the exchange neither
assigned such dates, nor summoned you before the
board of arbitration.
The reasons for limiting the right of either party
to bring the other before the board after nine months
from the time of the dispute, or of the act of omission
or commission, are as Air. Charles Aletzger, of In-
dianapolis, expressed himself to this paper, these: (1)
If the contracts were allowed to lie idle for over nine
months after the last service was used on them, the
Distributor would be placed to considerable incon-
venience in getting suitable prints with which to sup-
ply the Exhibitor at some later date; (2) if the con-
tracts were allowed to lie idle for over a year after
the last picture had been played, the Distributor might
dig them out and use them as a sort of club to coerce
the Exhibitor into buying some other of this Distrib-
utor’s product; and (3), where the parties “slept” on
their rights or were indifferent to them for nine
months after the last picture was played, the Board
should give them no consideration, under the theory
somewhat similar to that of the statute of limitations
in the regular courts. Where a long time elapses
before an issue is brought to the courts for legal
determination, the parties are liable to forget the cir-
cumstances surrounding the matter, the witnesses for-
get the facts or move away and cannot be made avail-
able to give testimony, or they die. For all these
reasons, the meaning of this article may be sum-
marized in the following:
“If the contract is over one year old and no pic-
tures have been played from it, or if nine months
(under the new arbitration rules, which supercede the
old rules) have elapsed from the time the last picture
was played under that contract and no date was asked
by you or assigned by the exchange, and the exchange
did not bring you before the board of arbitration,
such contract becomes outlawed, and the exchange
cannot take you before the board of arbitration or
in any way force you to play such of the remaining
pictures as were produced within the life of that
contract. If the distributor, who is required by the
terms of the contract to send you notices of availabil-
ity for every picture, fails to send you such notices
for one picture or, for that matter, for any number
of pictures, before the expiration of your contract,
then he has no right to send you such notices after-
wards and he can no longer force you to play any of such
pictures.”
In order for me to make the latter statement (about
the outlawing of a contract through failure of the dis-
tributor to send you notices of availability within the
life of the contract) clear, let me make an illustration:
Suppose you bought a number of pictures in the fall
of 1927, and the first picture you played under that
contract was on December 31, 1927. Suppose, again,
that you kept up playing the pictures regularly but
the distributor for some reason failed to send you
notices of availability for, say, three pictures (already
produced) before December 31. 1928; such contract
is dead, by reason of laches on the part of the dis-
tributor, and nothing can give him the right to revive
it, unless it be your consent, or unless there is an ap-
propriate added provision in such contract.
(To be continued)
Scanned from the collection of
John McElwee
Coordinated by the
Media History Digital Library
www.mediahistoryproject.org
Funded by a donation from
The Libraries of Northwestern University and
Northwestern University in Qatar
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11