The Central Theater

Get TOUGH!

2008-12-02T09:00:00.001-05:00

I've been meaning to get back to the blog with some original articles, but just haven't had the time! However, I'm now getting back to writing and hopefully within the next few weeks will have some interesting articles to share with you, my readers. This week, I've selected a vintage article, this one having been written for BoxOffice Magazine on July 17, 1954. My comments are after the article.

& & & & & & &

A VETERAN EXHIBITOR WHO, ALTHOUGH HE LIKES KIDS, SAYS

'GET TOUGH'

The Only Policy That Will Stop Misbehaving Teenagers

WASHINGTON, IND. - A. J. Kalberer, manager for Switow Theatres here, started in the show, business back in Lafayette, Ind., in 1912 when he was just 12 years old as a "super" in the old Opera House there, running errands for the actors and stagehands. He hawked candy in the third balcony and later became an usher at the glorious sum of $1.25 a week-six nights.

Later in his career he was a Fox Film Corp. exploitation man, a manager for the Quimby-Marcus circuit at Fort Wayne until 1927, and then was with the Fourth Avenue Amusement Co. of Louisville and Indianapolis until 1938. Since then he has managed the Switow interests here, which at one time consisted of three theatres. Now there is only one indoor theatre, the Indiana and the East 50th Drive-In.

Besides being an excellent exploitation man who can get the last ounce out of a picture, Kal loves kids. He has two grandchildren and a membership of 1,000 in his Saturday matinee Kiddie Klub. He knows most of them by name. Kal uses his Roy Rogers Rider club as a means not only of giving special attention to the kiddies, but also to impress upon them the importance of good behavior while attending the theatre. He has this to say about it:

"At present I have a Kiddie Club which is over five years old. More than 1,000 boys and girls are members. We have their names, addresses and birthdays. They get birthday cards and a free ticket to the show when it rolls around. We have a half-hour party every Saturday from 1:00 to 1:30. They pay regular children's admission prices and afterwards stay for the regular show. We have games, contests and giveaways and also a heart-to-heart talk about proper conduct and the respect of others. All of these rules are also on their membership cards. We remind them about these rules every Saturday.

And it has added up to having an orderly house most of the time when these youngsters attend the show. As a result we do not have any children under 12 years of age on the barred list."

Asked to expand his method of licking the vandalism problem in theatres, Manager Kalberer says:

"In the 16 years I have been resident manager of the Switow theatres in Washington, I have learned, the hard way, that there is only one policy that will prevent bad deportment by teenagers in movie theatres, both indoor and outdoor houses. GET TOUGH . . .

"It is a bitter pill to take, being a so-and-so to some of your patrons and I, personally, have had many sleepless nights worrying and wondering if I was right. However, time has told its own story and I now have little or no trouble.

"If you want to have any semblance of order during the presentation of your programs and reduce the volume of physical damage to theatre property, you, the manager, must have the same contempt for these ruffians as they have for you and your property. These rowdies are in the minority and once you personally weed them out, not for one or two weeks but for months, they will come back on your own terms ladies and gentlemen.

"To achieve and maintain good order takes lots of extra work and requires constant vigilance by the manager-not ushers-or deputized officers and the like. And there will be some heartaches along with the headaches.

"A walk in the rest rooms during breaks, during previews or at any time groups of girls or boys enter; (cashiers and concession girls have been trained to check the rooms). Spotting groups of teen-agers certain days or nights who usually like to take up several rows in the same location and then standing or sitting near them giving them no quarter about boisterousness; giggling or other unnecessary talking or noise; constant surveillance at all times and ejecting those who will not cooperate, or who “smart off”; refund admissions only when parents come to the theatre and personally ask for it; checking seats, immediately after questionable teen-agers leave so you can tell who did what and go after them—all of these things let those who bend their efforts towards destruction and annoyance know that you will accept no foolishness.

"We have had several parents make the youngsters pay out of his or her weekly allowance the cost of recovering cut seats. This helped spread the word around and almost entirely stopped seat cutting. Throwing candy, boxes and such at each other and at the screen has been eliminated by this same process as well as ejecting the first offenders without a warning.

“As for obscene writing on toilet walls, this can be completely eliminated by constant watching and by having the porter touch up with patching plaster and paint any writing that may get by.

WAIT TO BEAT HIM UP

“Sure, they used to tear out the plumbing, fill the toilet stool water tanks with tissue and paper towels, drop whiskey bottles and trash in the stools and stop them up. Sure, we have had teenage gangs of 14 and 15 year old boys wait for us to beat us up. They didn’t however, for once you single out one of the gang, back him up and show him you are not afraid of his threats, the whole gang will eventually talk themselves out and call it off. If this doesn’t work, walk away and either contact the parents or local police. They pick them up and it is thrashed out at home or in the private room of the police station. You can’t do this, however, without taking some initial abuse in words, but in any case, I feel that my theatres have gained something in the cost of repairs and renewal savings.

“Of course, not all parents will agree with you that their Johnny or Jane is in the wrong and will upbraid you for accusing their minor of doing wrong. But they are in the minority and while it hurts, it soon comes to pass that these same parents have to get these boys and girls out of worse difficulties with the law.

DIFFICULT TO CONVINCE

“One instance that might be worth passing along happened here. A prominent bank president’s daughter who was about 15 years old, was the ring leader of the group of the like age girls who visited our movies regularly and constantly annoyed everyone around them. I knew this young lady, tried to be nice and explained what this conduct was doing to everyone trying to enjoy the movie. She failed to agree with us and continued her lark. We got tough and told her off. Naturally it was an insult and soon her Dad, a member of the same civic and fraternal clubs to which I belong, collared me. He bluntly told me that his daughter was a refined young lady and would not stoop to doing the things I accused her of. Before he had a good start, I pulled two passes out of my pocket, asked him as a favor to his daughter and to me, to used them the night his daughter and her girl friends were coming to the theatres—without her knowledge of course—and to sit about four or five rows back of them. This he did. The next day his daughter came with him to my office and apologized and promised she would be more considerate of others in the movies. Both he and his daughter are my best friends today. Of course, this also worked in the opposite direction in other instances. But on the whole, it helped. But it is a terrific job. And at times a very unpleasant one.

“We have a town of some 12,000 population. TV hurts like heck but I don’t believe it hurts half so much as disorderly conduct by the audience in keeping patrons from attending the movies more often. In the beginning it was necessary to bar from 20 to 30 teenagers from the theatre. In the space of a year we have cut this down to five or six. These will probably never be permitted in the theatre. The others, after a month or so of probation during which time they sign in and out and sit in sections designated for them, turn over a new leaf and become respectable movie patrons and are our friends again.

“Some movie managers will say ‘I can’t do this because I have competition in my town.’ My answer is, call a meeting of all the theatre managers in your town. If you are having difficulty along these lines, it’s a ten to one bet that your opposition is having it too. Draw up a working agreement whereby all theatres cooperate and bar the ‘bad eggs’ from all theatres. We here in Washington have competition too. Theatres in other towns within driving distance, where these barred ‘baddies’ go. But they don’t go for long, for soon these theatres, if properly operated, will cull them out.

“This GET TOUCH policy was not adopted willingly. Nor was it put into effect on the spur of the moment. I went through all the meetings with school officials, PTA groups, student councils and law enforcement agencies in our city. But after all their efforts, the situation grew worse instead of better. So, with their knowledge, I inaugurated the GET TOUGH idea. Most of the agencies are with me and have agreed that it works, despite the fact that it should not have been necessary.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Having some background in theatrical management, Mr. Kalberer's article interested me. At first, I was going to approach this article with a cynical mindset, but when I actually read it, I sympathized with him as I myself have found myself in many of those same situations. Unfortunately, these days the sort of thing he's talking about can land you a lawsuit for "profiling."

As for the Indiana Theater, it's still very much there, although it's been twinned. Here's a contemporary picture of the theater, which still has its marquee:

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/desk003/2258661305/sizes/o/

2008-10-31T13:20:00.000-05:00

Happy Halloween to all of my readers... more to come tomorrow.

And in the Construction & Equipment Department...

2008-07-20T18:00:00.002-05:00

This article will be interesting to the modern Exhibitor who no longer has the application of curtains or proscenium on his or her screen. From Motion Picture News, September 1, 1923.

Device for Projecting Border Around Picture
New Feature Introduced at Capitol Theatre, New York
Attracts Much Attention

Exhibitors will be interested in a new specialty that was shown at the Capitol Theatre, New York City, last week.

This specialty, consisting of a colored border (possibly it could be termed "proscenium") was projected so as to surround a short subject picture (a scenic, "My Country").

This border was elaborately designed and filled the entire stage opening excepting that portion taken up by the picture itself. Color was artistically applied to this border which gave a most pleasing effect, particularly in offsetting the tinted parts of the picture.

In some respects, this border surrounding the picture, seemed to produced an optical illusion, i. e., to give depth to the picture. This apparent depth should enhance the attraction of a picture to the ordinary observer.

A claim that is strongly brought forth by the inventor of this lighted and artistically colored border, is that it reduces eye strain. To what degree this is true could not be determined from the observation of the short subject shown at the Capitol Theatre. However, it does appear that theatres, particularly the smaller houses, will find use for this special projection which in a modified form will permit a colored proscenium to be projected to the front of the theatre giving an illusion that the proscenium is actually constructed as a part of the house.

This idea when applied only in respect to bordering a particular picture may lend itself aptly to enhancing the picture through added depth and added appeal from a special design incorporated in the border fitting the theme of the picture itself.

It seems likely that an adaption of the special projection may in one form or another find popularity among motion picture theatres due to the great flexibility to which this special projection can be subjected.

Two views shown on this page were photographed from prosceniums projected to the stage and serve as an illustration of what can be done along these lines. Color schemes are incorporated in the various designs.

Perhaps the most unusual phase of this specialty is the fact that no additional light source is needed to project the border of the proscenium to the stage. A special apparatus, which is not intricate in its design, is attached to the projector and uses light which is ordinarily cut off from the screen while the picture at the aperture is in motion and one of the shutter's blades are in front of the projection lens. By a special arrangement of prisms, lenses and reflecting surfaces, this light which is ordinarily wasted, is redirected through a slide and focused on the stage of the theatre. The apparatus is ingeniously designed and appears to work in a very satisfactory manner producing excellent results.

As was previously stated, great flexibility in the application of this idea is permitted through the various designs and colors which may be incorporated in the slide so that color screen used in connection with this slide gives the proper effect on the stage.

The inventor of this device is Thomas A. Marten and the system will be known as Marten Projection. Plans have been laid to commercialize the system for distribution to theaters throughout the country so that exhibitors will be afforded, in the near future, an opportunity to inspect this new feature.

Image Caption: Two views of sets projected to the stage of a motion picture theatre by the Marten Projector described in the article on this page. The sets incorporate colors and toning and may varied so that nearly any design can be obtained. [Color not present in original article]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Interestingly enough, Thomas H. Marten's (H. for Henry instead of "A.") patents for this item can be found here and here, assigned to the Marten Corporation Ltd., of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

How NOT to sell your picture.

2008-07-18T15:54:00.003-05:00

Today's blog is an abridgment. There will be an additional entry on Sunday.

Originally I was going to be discussing the original film platter of 1913, but as I was doing research in trades, I came across this and decided to hold that article for next week. This one was too rich for me to pass up and found its way to me through an issue of Motion Picture News from 1923.

'23 was a big year for Hollywood and Exhibitors alike, and particularly the great Buster Keaton, who after some years of making comedy shorts in Hollywood, was finally up to bat for directing a feature-length comedy, largely in part to producer and distant family-in-law, Joe Schenck.

So I was tickled pink when I saw this ballyhoo ad for THREE AGES, Metro's new comedy-feature-debut of Mr. Keaton's, at that time playing at the Loew's Warfield in San Fransisco.

Then my jaw dropped when I looked closer...

Now, I'm anything BUT a politically-correct nut, but it struck me as sort of common sense, even in 1923, that connecting your film with a group of white supremacists, even ever so indirectly, might not be the best way to sell your picture. Looking at the specific details about the campaign struck me as an even more bizarre take on selling a film:

So not only are they attached to the KKK ("Keaton's Kolossal Komedy"???), they've got a professional laugher (ie. an insane man) walking around town laughing at people in order to get them to come to the show. Goodness!

An incredible discovery (in color!)

2008-06-30T17:19:00.002-05:00

I was watching a film today, and was taking note as it pertained to some interesting filter work being done in front of the camera. At that second, I had remembered that using different colored filters in front of the lens sequentially can cause a color effect. Ergo, it occurred to me that this can happen inadvertently when color filters are being used for other purposes. Color filters serve a variety of purposes in black and white photography-- anyone who had done amateur b/w photography knows the advantages of having a color filter set at their disposal.

But I had remembered another use of such color-sequential photography being used in black and white. I popped in my DVD of the 1932 DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE remembering they do the old gag with switching a red filter to a green filter (or vice versa) across the lens to get a color effect on someone's face with the complementary colors painted on. So I watch carefully, note what it looks like what filters they're sliding across the camera, take some screen shots, put them into Photoshop and viola, natural (but not great) color, giving some sort of impression of what the make-up for that shot consisted of.

All of these were difficult because either Frederic March and/or the camera were moving around, causing color fringing, but the second transformation in the park yielded very good results, as you can see. I believe there are a number of black and white films that use this gag, but I'd like to generate a list in order to get some feedback for this work.

What say you, folks?

We're coming back!

2008-04-16T09:33:00.002-05:00

Howdy folks! After our remodeling we will have our grand reopening this Friday, April 18. Watch for it!

Upcoming from Image Entertainment

2007-07-31T16:34:00.001-05:00

Coming soon from Image Entertainment/The Blackhawk Library:

Lon Chaney stars as the gentle outcast Quasimodo in the first film version of Victor Hugo's classic novel, The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Paris of 1482 was meticulously recreated on the back lot of Universal Studios for this powerful drama that turned Chaney into a screen legend -- now presented in the ultimate special edition of this timeless classic.

Mastered in high definition from an original multi-tinted print.

New symphonic score compiled by Donald Hunsberger, adapted and conducted by Robert Israel. Recorded in Europe in digital stereo.

Insert essay and optional audio essay through the film, both by Michael F. Blake, author of two books on Lon Chaney.

Facsimile reproduction of original souvenir program.

Gallery of Original 3-D stills (3-D viewing glasses are included with this DVD).

Extensive gallery of 2-D stills including production shots, scenes and advertising materials.

Behind-the-scenes footage of Lon Chaney out of makeup on the set.

A rare 1915 short starring Lon Chaney in a dual role of a hunchback fisherman and fate in Alas and Alack.

LENGTH: 118 minutes

LANGUAGE: English

AUDIO FORMAT: Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo

DVD LAYERING: Dual

DISCS: 1

FORMAT: DVD

ASPECT RATIO: 1.33:1

More information here.

Coming Friday to the Central

2007-07-30T12:44:00.000-05:00

A preview of this Friday's blog.

Stereo at the drive-in? What it's all about...

Sexy, leggy usherettes will also be welcome.

Concession Conforms to Theatre Design

2007-07-29T11:07:00.001-05:00

From June 5, 1954:

This graceful concession stand of serpentine design was recently installed in the mezzanine lobby of the Roxy Theatre, New York City. It is easily accessible to patrons entering the theatre, whether on their way to loges, orchestra or balcony. The 33-foot stand was custom built by Sinicrope Son and is constructed of stainless metal, highly polished fireproofed wood and plate glass. Its flowing lines conform to the architecture of the theatre. Complete refrigeration maintains all commodities on sale at the proper temperature, including candy and the beverages dispensed from Selmix units. Brilliant spotlighting highlights the refreshment merchandise.

Make your movie house a HOUSE OF HORROR!

2007-07-28T13:42:00.000-05:00

Bunker Theaters

2007-07-27T09:00:00.000-05:00

For those of you entrepreneurs out there who want to get started in the Exhibition biz, consider this cheap alternative to finding an existing theater...

ALL-ALUMINUM PREFAB THEATRE BUILT FOR $60 A SEAT
From BoxOffice Magazine, The Modern Theatre, April 2, 1949

The 600-seat Rose Theatre, which recently opened in Franklin Park, Ill., industrialized Chicago suburb, is an all-aluminum prefabricated building adapted to theatre use.

Of greater significance, however, is the fat that the theatre was built at a cost of only $60 a seat. This compares with the price of $150 to $200 a seat for the conventional type of construction, according to T. J. Theodore, chief engineer of the Fairfield Enterprises, Inc., designers and builders of the Rose.

Although construction time on the Rose Theatre was less than three months, actually more than a year of intensive investigations and studies of the special requirements and problems of theatre construction preceded building activities.

The field of prefabricated buildings was searched carefully by Fairfield Enterprises before the all-aluminum arch type prefab manufactured by the Reynolds Metal Co. under the trade name of Alumi-Drome was selected. This building proved to be ideal for adapting to theatre use.

Aluminum does not rust or corrode and requires no painting or tarring. It combines structural strength with lightness which speeds construction and cuts building costs. Important too, according to Theodore, are its insulating properties. Aluminum is said to reflect 95 percent of all radiant heat striking its surface. In the winter inside heat is reflected back into the interior of the building. The heavy-gauge sheets of embossed aluminum are firmly grasped by rigid aluminum framing members on all sides so there are no loose edges to catch the wind. A patented, all-bolt method of assembly is used.

Theodore points out that obtaining an appropriate prefab building in just one phase in the complex job of designing and building a theatre. Without competent and experienced planning and engineering savings made in purchasing a prefab building can be wiped out by the succeeding phases of construction.

According to Theodore, expensive frills are dispensable since patrons soon overlook these but never forget poor screening, uncomfortable seating or inadequate ventilation. These functional considerations were paramount in planning and constructing the Rose. Yet, appearance was not forgotten as is attested by comments of visitors that have inspected the building.

The auditorium of the Rose is finished in Nuwood, insulation is Fiberglas throughout. The lobby is laid out for efficient handling of patron traffic. A glass enclosed cry-room is provided on the second floor adjacent to the projection booth. Heating is furnished by an automatic oil-burning forced air heating system. The front of the building is dressed up by using red face brick with lannonstone and glass block trim.

C R E D I T S:

Prefab Building: Reynolds Metal Co.
Adapted by: Fairfield Enterprises, Inc.
Insulation: Fiberglas
Seating: RCA International
Projection & Sound: Simplex

Captions
1. Auditorium of the Rose, a 600-seat prefab theatre in Franklin Park, Chicago suburb, The front of the house was dressed up by using red face brick with lannonstone and glass black trim.

2. Auditorium of the Rose is finished in Nuwood, and is insulated with Fiberglas.

3. Above. View of the cry room showing the seating, plate glass window in front and the loudspeaker above the window which provides the sound. Below. Lobby of the Rose Theatre. Note that the candy bar and popcorn machine are at the end of the lobby where they are readily accessible yet do not interfere with handing of lobby traffic.

EPILOGUE/MY THOUGHTS

It is interesting to note that in the '40s during and particularly post-War there was a interest in structural recycling in the US. Buildings that were previously used as war manufacturing facilities quickly became renovated into the most commonplace of business places.

So it is not so surprising that enterprising exhibitors would turn to these "Quonset Hut" locations in creating a functional movie theater, as shown above. The Rose Cinema, which was constructed in 1941 (same year as the Central in Passaic), survived until 1981. It saw its last days (as many theaters did) as with triple-x/grindhouse programming.

For more information about Quonset Hut style theaters, check out Cinema Treasure's listing of Quonset Hut Theatres.

Come to Capitolfest 5!

2007-07-23T15:25:00.000-05:00

Just a plug here for my good friends at the Capitol Theatre, Rome, NY. I will be there Saturday and have a show I am hosting on Sunday. For those in the greater Northeastern US, you owe it to yourself to see great films of the silent and early talking era, presented in 35mm in a 1,741 seat, 1928 movie palace. Eminent film musicians Avery Tunningley, Dr. Philip C. Carli, Bernie Anderson and Robert Israel will be performing throughout the weekend on The Capitol's 3-manual, 7-rank Moller theater organ.

Among the schedule will include Barbara Stanwyck's first talkie, THE LOCKED DOOR (1929), the rarely seen 1926 version of BEAU GESTE with Ronald Colman, the silent comedy SICK ABED (1920) with Wallace Reid and Bebe Daniels, HIS GLORIOUS NIGHT (1929) with John Gilbert, the East Coast premiere of the silent version with synchronized music & effects track of ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT (1930) and a tribute to Bebe Daniels, with two features and two shorts.

My show will consist of 40 minutes of rarities from my collection as well as from archives and collectors all over the world. Included in the program will be a rarely seen Hal Roach short as well as miracles of the screen you may or may not need special glasses to see! The show will be presented entirely in 35mm. If you are a reader here, please come up and say "hi" to me afterwards.

Find out more about Capitolfest at The Captiol Theatre's website for Capitolfest 5.

Happy 4th of July

2007-07-04T21:00:00.000-05:00

The Management would wish to convey to you and your family a most happy Fourth of July!

For those Exhibitors who want to feature a sing-a-long with their show....

DEVELOP HIGH-INTENSITY ARC SLIDE PROJECTOR

Projecting pictures of a size and brilliancy comparable to large-screen theatre projection, a universal high-intensity arc slide projector which accommodates 2x2-inch, 3 1/4-inch and 4x5 slides has just been developed by Strong Electric Corp. of Toledo.

This new projector fills a long-standing demand for an arc slide projector capable of projection pictures to the mammoth size screens of drive-in theatres. It is also ideal for school, college and and church auditoriums and classrooms, particularly where there is difficulty in darkening the room.

In projecting 4x5-inch slides it will largely be employed by TV and motion picture studios for projecting background scenes before which the play is enacted. A 50 C.F.M. capacity blower cools the slides so effectively that even dense slides may be projected for an hour or more without damage, it is claimed.

As compared to the yellow light of the Mazda, heretofore relied upon for slide projection, this high-intensity arc projects a snow-white light that gives the picture real brilliancy and sparkle. The projector is extremely simple to operate. It can be plugged into any 110-volt A.C. convenience outlet.

Economical of carbons, the motor-driven arc burns 6mmx7-inch copper-coated carbons at 45 amperes and 21 volts to project 7,500 lumens of light. The burning time for one carbon trim is 80 minutes. The optical system includes three lenses and a 3 1/4-inch focus polished glass reflector of 24-inch working distance and 10 1/4-inch diameter.

The length of the projector is 78 inches and adjustable legs permit establishment of the optical center at a height of from 36 to 55 inches. A projection angle of as much as 27 degrees downward of 10 degrees upward is afforded.

(BoxOffice, Modern Theatre Section, Page 34, October 4, 1952.)

[[ Your Ad Here ]]

How draperies will lead to YOUR salvation as an Exhibitor!

2007-06-29T21:00:00.000-05:00

*tap tap tap*
Is this thing still working?
Sorry I left you hanging, there, folks. Well, now I'm back and we can get down to business.

It is fascinating to read contemporary trends in movie house decor. Today, theaters are "functional"-- they do what they have to, but they're not usually very pretty to look at. Interestingly, this article from BoxOffice's Modern Theatre Section (Sept. 1, 1951) contains the attitude that inadvertently started this trend.

To artists such as S.L. Mitchell, functionality and pop fashion took precedent over timeless beauty. In a way, I think some of the popular designs at the time are hit or miss. The article has several pictures demonstrating the concepts mentioned within (captions are at the bottom of this post)... what do you think?

FRAMING THE PICTURE
Beautiful Draperies Enhance the Film and Lure the Patron Back
by S.L. Mitchell (Knoxville Scenic Studios, Inc.)

Have you ever asked yourself this question-- "Why do we frame a picture?" When we think about it the answer is obvious-- to enhance and direct attention to the picture itself. Yet we all have seen frames in homes and picture galleries that cried so loudly, "Look, I'm the frame! Am I not beautiful!" that we forget the picture inside. So had the person who selected the frame. If we agree that, after all, the "play's the thing," then our moving picture frame should not distract but should complement and focus attention on the picture within. So what are some of the characteristics of good picture framing as used in our modern theaters today?

One of the keynotes of modern design is simplicity. In decorating our homes the gilded, ornate frame that enclosed grandfather has gone to the attic. The word "functional" has been stressed more and more in recent times. Picture frames, as well as chairs and beds, are designed with more thought given to their reason for existence. Good design today dictates that we plan a frame that will not distract but will serve best its function of focusing attention on our picture.

Mere simplicity, however, is not enough. We take great pains and pay good money to artists for beautiful walls and carpets. We bend over backward to give our customer a comfortable seat to relax in. We want him to be at ease and enjoy his surroundings. The picture frame, since it is a part of these surroundings, must be in harmony with them. Furthermore, while being simple and in good taste, as well as fitting in harmoniously with the over-all decor, the frame must be beautiful in itself if it is to attain the maximum results in fulfilling its purpose.

With these characteristics -- simplicity, harmony and beauty -- in mind, let us analyze ways in which these maximum results can be secured. We should consider styles, fabrics, colors, as well as the components of a good picture frame, and how they can be used to direct attention to and enhance the main feature of the house, the picture itself.

STYLES DO CHANGE

Style is one of those elusive things that is hard to define although we can readily recognize it when a good-looking, well dressed woman walks by. Style in theatre decoration had remained for a long time under the influence of the court theatres of Louis XIV and the gingerbread palaces of our grandfathers. Theater owners vied with each other in "gilding the lily." Ostentation was the keynote. Curtains were embellished with braids and beads. Somber backgrounds were garnished with tassels and tinsels, and walls and ceilings had to be covered with intricate ornamentation. Confusion held sway with distracting details. But modern architects and designers have finally been admitted to our picture palaces, and a pleasing theatre today is a far cry from the ostentatious temple of the Belasco era.

THE USE OF MODERN FABRICS

Fabrics themselves have changed in this evolution. Modern theatre fabrics lean more to solid colors rather than the heavy patterns of a few years ago. We still find patterns, but they are in the bold designs of carpets, murals, and wall fabrics. These are balanced by plain colors in the curtains just as in our modern homes, restaurants and offices, we balance florals and patterns with plain solid colors. As a result, we achieve in our theatres simplicity and smartness far more pleasing than the raucous confusion of yesterday's multi-colored textiles.

Brocatels, tapestries and heavily woven jacquards have been replaced by soft materials that are rich looking and drape better. Here we are indebted to modern chemistry and the strides taken by the manufacturers in the development of nylons, rayons, synthetic satins, ersatz silks, fiber glass and plastic ad infinitum. Also very appealing is the fact that these new materials are much kinder to the exhibitor's purse.

Another contribution of modern chemistry is the perfecting of flameproofing compounds. We have available permanently flameproofed fabrics that will meet the most rigid requirements of the varied state fire codes. This is even possible without marring the beauty, color and draping qualities of the curtains.

COLOR BECOMES IMPORTANT

Just as heavy fabrics have given way to soft flowing, lighter-weight materials, colo has changed its face. Exhibitors used to cry, "Give me any color as long as it's red!" Somber colors around the screen were recently considered necessary to avoid distraction and minimize any light reflection that might reduce the visibility of the picture. But our ideas have changed, just as the fallacy of the pitch-dark movie house has been exploded in favor of illumination sufficient for the patron to avoid possible hazards in getting to and from his seat.

Modern theatre decor, including our picture frame, has changed complexion to lighter hues and pastel tones. We are also more conscious today of the effects colors can have on our audience, psychologically and even physically. We no longer cry for just red, but have even used green, once taboo, since we have "discovered" that it rests the human eye. Psychologists have convinced us that cheerful and harmonious colors give our patron an inward satisfaction and, perhaps even unconsciously, an urge to come again.

THE FRAMING ELEMENTS

Having all these new fabrics and colors of the spectrum at our disposal, how can we use them most effectively to frame our picture? Draperies on a typical stage will begin with a valance and, perhaps, cascades or proscenium legs. Just back of this curtain frame we have a front curtain, separating in the center and traveling to the sides. Often, this proscenium setting is in th eform of a contour curtain, as illustrated in the accompanying photographs of the Carib and Gateway theatres. As this curtain rises, by means of a series of cables, it forms its own valence and cascades. Incidentally, all curtain movements and light changes are handled by remote control from the projection booth.

Several feet behind this setting is the screen, framed at the top by a grand drape, or teaser, and at the sides by tormentor legs. Covering the screen itself is a title, or screen, curtain. The opening of this curtain provides a dramatic focus of attention as the picture begins. A recent development in the screen curtain has been the introduction of unusual mural effects.

Through the use of dyes on soft materials, colorful and distinctive designs may be achieved without losing qualities inherent in draped curtains. The photographs illustrate most effectively the results accomplished through this new technique.

When the stage is used for live shows or other programs there will be a background of drapes, curtains across the stage and legs to mask the sides, commonly known as the cyclorama or "cyke." Here modern practice calls for subordinate backgrounds, plain materials and neutral colors, so that there is no distraction from what is being presented on stage.

THE FRAME IN ACTION

But to return to our picture screen, we have it framed with curtains, simple but beautiful to look at and in harmony with the rest of the theatre. To this we add the magic ingredient, movement. Let us assume an ideal situation before the running of the picture. The house lights are on and the stage curtains are closed. Our customer walks in, feels the soft carpet under his feet, glances at the attractively decorated lobby and is ushered to a comfortable seat. As he relaxes and looks around him the cares of the day begin to leave him. His mentality may be low and his taste nil but the decor and colors around him provide an "atmosphere" that consciously or unconsciously he likes. His eyes rest on the curtain facing him-- beautiful in itself because of its richness and its soft folds. His attention, of course, wanders. But suddenly it is riveted as the house lights dim and the contour curtain in front of him slowly rises in flowering cascades and rippling festoons. Before him is a new scene, a gorgeous array of tropical loveliness-- large, bold splotches of multicolored splendor (in just the right colors) on soft rayon or satin in beautiful folds. While he is still under the exotic spell the curtain quietly parts in the center and glides majestically to each side. The screen comes to life as the picture is projected and the show is on. How more effectively or forcefully could we focus and hold attention on the picture itself?

A bad frame has ruined many a good picture, while a good frame can save a second or third rate film. Although we are now belittling the importance of top features in filling the house, the average theatre patron, given pleasant and comfortable surroundings, will agree that "movies are better than ever" and will come back for more regardless of what picture is showing. So let us keep in mind the importance of the total impression on John Q. Public-- the front, the lobby, the furnishings, the decor, the picture itself and not the least of these, the frame around the picture that he has enjoyed for two hours.

Photographic Captions

1. Simple, but beautiful and dramatic, is the "picture frame" at the Gateway Theatre, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. The aqua contour curtain harmonizes with the palm-green masking legs and borders. In contrast, the proscenium is rust-colored. The eggshell satin screen curtain is enhances with an especially designed mural of tropical foliage done with hand-painted dyes.

2. This photograph of the Martin Theatre, Sylacauga, Ala., shows an interesting drapery treatment of the wing wall. The valence is of deep green royal rayon damask, the front curtain is chartreuse, and the masking legs and borders are dusty rose. Marine life is depicted on the aqua screen curtain of rayon ripple repp. The sidewall is enriched with pleated gold fabric overlaid with white diagonals; the decorative panel in the lower corner ties in with the curtain mural.

3. Exquisite color drama has been achieved in the draperies of the Carib Theatre, Miami Beach, Fla. The contour curtain of tangerine hammered satin, with the first masking legs and border of emerald green satin, and the second pair of legs of deep bottle-green plush. The theme of the theatre has been carried out in the scene curtain of translucent turquoise rayon ripple repp, decorated with a hand-dyed mural of marine life found in the Caribbean waters.

4. The contour curtain in the Varisty Theatre, Martin, Tenn., is of dusty rose hammered satin with harmonizing masking legs and borders of aqua and eggshell figured damask. Scalloped, egg shell-colored rayon satin forms the screen curtain.

5. In the Taylor Theatre, Gate City, Va., the festoon valance and cascades are of rust colored panne plush. The front curtain is made of turquoise figured damask, while the masking legs and borders are of copper-toned satin sheen. A screen curtain of gold figured rayon satin complements these colorful draperies.

6. The luxurious sweep of this curved contour curtain in the Palace Theatre, Tampa, Fla., extends past the wing walls. Total width of the dusty rose, satin sheen curtain is 135 feet. The masking legs and borders are of aqua sunrise brocade and the screen curtain is of eggshell sunrise brocade.

Your Ad Here...

Back in Action

2007-05-02T21:50:00.000-05:00

Sorry folks... between work and my personal life, I'd forgotten all about this blog! Now that I've got some spare time, I've got more coming, so keep checking.

For now, here is a word from the late Jack Valenti about film pirates...

See you soon!

Critics Forum: 1941

2007-03-22T17:00:00.000-05:00

In doing research for an upcoming article, I was pleased to find this editorial from Film Daily's 1942 Yearbook, Page 108. While some of the points may seem of their time, there are many that still hold water today.

Responding to a FILM DAILY invitation to freely express opinions on three major components of the industry, newspaper, wire service and magazine film critics and syndicate columists and commentators from all over the country made numerous suggestions for the betterment of the motion picture industry. Forum questionnaire was in three parts, "If I Were a Producer," "If I Were an Exhibitor" and "If I Were and Advertising-Publicity Director."

A digest of the critical suggestions, in the order of their frequency, is reprinted below:

If I Were a Producer

* Seek better story material.
* Make fewer and better pictures. More "A" and fewer "B" subjects.
* Include less propaganda and war material and less flag waving and would concentrate on lighter screen fare-- comedies and some musicals.
* Put more reliance on experienced directors and writers.
* Make surveys to determine the desires of patrons.
* When casting, diversify roles and stop changing characters to fit actors.
* Adhere more closely to published works when filming.
* Remake fewer old pictures.
* Shorten features when material does not call for length.
* Produce fewer musicals.
* Stop exaggerating stage possibilities in musical sets.
* Make more better-type shorts.
* Seek new personalities for supporting as well as star roles.
* Produce more biographical films.
* Arrange for sufficient footage at the beginning and the end of features to enable patrons to read cast credits, and would use less time for other production credits.
* Be more original and not follow "cycles."
* Use more color.
* Aim features for definite population groups instead of trying to please all with each feature.
* Excercise more care with Latin-American films and
* Be fairer with characterizations of newpapermen and men in other professions.

If I Were an Exhibitor

* Eliminate or cut down duals (nearly 50 per cent).
* Eliminate games and giveaways.
* Use more good shorts.
* Survey the film tastes of their locality.
* Eliminate advertising films.
* Watch out fo patrons' comfort.
* Use more showmanship in management and advertising.
* Avoid over-selling.
* Use fewer trailers.
* Dispense with pop corn and candy machines.
* Shorten programs.
* Enter community affairs.
* Use more newsreels (some called for fewer news reels and several compained of the sameness of news reels).
* Run best features at choice evening hours.
* Balance programs.
* Regulate sound for volume and clarity.
* Revive old pictures.
* Extend runs on good films.
* List starting times of features accurately.
* Use flesh in orchestras or on stage.
* Use only good shorts, and
* Raise house lights between programs.

If I Were an Advertising-Publicity Director

* Be more truthful, use fewer superlatives, not oversell or exaggerate.
* Work closer with motion picture editors giving them local items, exclusive stuff less and better-- shorter and better written material; more fresh items for smaller town newspaper.
* Improve press books.
* De-emphasize sex.
* Improve mats.
* Use more ad space in newspapers.
* Use some institutional ads and publicity copy, and
* Campaign to bring back former movie fans.

Who's trashing 3-D? ...or... 3-D: What's it to me?

2007-03-12T09:00:00.001-05:00

In a September, 1996 issue of 3D News, Marvin Jones told this amusing story in his article about the misconceptions of red and blue-- anaglyph-- 3-D glasses, and the general attitude towards 3-D movies by "critics," which I believe will illustrate my point for this article beautifully:

This came to a head a few weeks ago when, in a cable-TV special on movie gimmicks, film critic, Roger Ebert, commented that one of the things that killed 3D movies was the dislike of the audience for those pesky red and blue glasses.

Jones went onto an Internet forum which Ebert frequented and set the facts straight, only to find a truism about posting facts on the web-- there will always be a million monkeys with a million keyboards to "set you straight":

Immediately the bulletin board was filled with messages from literally dozens of people who clearly and without any doubt remembered going to 3D movies as kids, and watching them through red and blue glasses! One man had absolute proof-- when he saw HOUSE OF WAX, he became so frightened that he removed the glasses and saw the images on the screen fringed in color, proving that they could not possibly have been anything but red and blue glasses he so clearly remembered anyway!

Another man had seen the Polaroid system for the very first time only a couple of years ago at a business conference and he had commented at that time that if this technology had been available in the 1950s, 3D movies might have survived, a sentiment shared by the dozens of others at the meeting.

Many made the point that Roger Ebert should certainly know what he was talking about and is much more to be believed than some obstinate no-nothing like me who refused to accept the testimony of dozens of reliable eye witnesses.

For years, words synonymous with 3-D movies have been "cheesy," "low-budget," "unimportant," and filled with "a cast of nobodies." How many times have you read in a magazine retrospective, such as the one above, that three-dee films of the '50s required "those corny red and green glasses" and that 3-D died because these glasses gave people headaches and strained their eyes? The iconic image of summer nights at the drive-in, with greasers in their hot rods with their gals in poodle skirts watching CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, using colored glasses no less, is about as fake as the nostalgia that generated it.

There is something alluring to myself and many other artists about stereoscopic photography, particularly in movies. The thought that your favorite actors or actresses are almost real enough that you can touch them is the draw for most. Others find the added sense of realism is pleasant and enhances the story. To me, I feel I fall into both categories. 3-D in any form-- still, motion or sonic, excites me as a movie goer. If you invite me to a 3-D movie, even if it has the worst story ever written, I'll give it a shot.

On the other hand, there is no denying that even though there a trend of public interest in 3-D every thirty years or so (1923, 1953, 1983 and 2003), the most carefully photographed and, in my opinion, the most enduring of these films were those made in the '50s. And take it from me: anyone who tells you seeing a flat version of a 3-D film is the same thing doesn't know what they're talking about. You simply cannot judge what is there by what is not there! How, for example, can you enjoy or critique ROBOT MONSTER without its biggest asset, its stereo photography (or the "Billion Bubble Machine")? When Charles Bronson jumps up from the camera to attack Paul Picerni in HOUSE OF WAX, how can you say the effect is not totally lost when the film is seen flat? The performances are still the same, but performance makes not a film alone.

Have no fear, dear readers. Professor Theakston is here to set the record straight for 3-D, who is currently not here to speak on his own behalf.

One of the most entertaining experiences in this writer's recollection was attending and helping put on last year's Second World 3-D Exposition, held at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood, CA from September 8 to Sept. 17. The festival was organized by the 3-D Film Preservation Fund through Jeff Joseph/Sabucat Productions. The nine-day show presented almost 40 different programs, including features, shorts and special guests. The most important aspect of the festival, however, was its presentation-- exactly as these films were meant to be seen-- with two interlocked projectors, Polaroid glasses and filters, in synchronization, and on a silver screen.

The attendance list read like a "who's who" of 3-D. More famous names such as Leonard Maltin and Joe Dante presided over some of the interviews. Bob Furmanek, who single-handily saved more than THIRTY stereoscopic pictures with his own money was there to enjoy them. Stereoscopic historians Ray Zone and Dan Symmes both clocked in about a thousand hours at the Egyptian, I think. Jeff Joseph sweat bullets striving for perfection, and I know that he loved every minute of it.

For the those who were lucky enough to have attended, the first thing the festival did was shine light on the oft-published myth that only B-movies starring unknown actors made up the majority of 3-D films. MGM's KISS ME KATE with Howard Keel, Kathryn Grayson, Ann Miller, Bobby Van, Keenan Wynn, James Whitmore, Tommy Rall and Bob Fosse? Never heard of them. MONEY FROM HOME with Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis? Who are they? SECOND CHANCE with Robert Mitchum, Linda Darnell and Jack Palance... who? Well, someone important must have been in one of those films... let's see... who else were in these films? Jane Russell, Ray Milland, Grace Kelly, Victor Mature, Robert Stack, Rita Hayworth, Jose Ferrer, Vincent Price, Gilbert Roland, Phil Silvers, Randolph Scott, Victor Jory, Edmund O'Brien, John Ireland, Joanne Dru, Macdonald Carey, Charles Bronson, Virginia Mayo, Ernest Borgnine, Lee Marvin, Cameron Mitchell, Anne Bancroft, Lee J. Cobb... okay, you get the idea.

Once, when I was speaking with Dan Symmes, he had something very profound to say that I tend to agree with. According to him, 3-D is something that should be taken in small doses by the masses, but not for the reasons most critics would have us believe. Symmes made an analogy to me that still holds true today: 3-D is like the circus-- it is something special when it comes to town once a year, but if it was here all year around, it would become commonplace and dull. Part of the magic of 3-D is that it's a special occurrence, and that you savor it when you get that rare opportunity to experience it.

It is also often written that it is the glasses that always kill 3-D. This subject is always the basis for ignorant writers who like to slight stereoscopic films' benefits. But how frequently do these "writers" take the time out to research their topic. How did, and how do, audiences really feel about wearing glasses? As with anything, some history must be stated to put things into context.

When BWANA DEVIL was released in 1952, there had already been at least a dozen 3-D films shown in the US alone, starting in 1922 with THE POWER OF LOVE, a feature starring Noah Beery and Barbara Bedford. There were examples of 3-D test films shown to audiences before this film, but to all intents and purposes, POWER OF LOVE was the first time an audience saw a finished 3-D product, in this case, a feature. After this, a slew of 3-D short subject novelties were produced, and even a feature, M.A.R.S. (aka RADIO-MANIA, which survives, in its flat form only). With the exception of M.A.R.S. (which had its own crazy system you can read about here), all of these films utilized cardboard, anaglyph (red and green/cyan/or blue) spectacles that you held by hand up to your eyes.

Dual-strip, Polaroid projection techniques became an enterprise in motion pictures at the 1939 World's Fair in Flushing, New York, however, when John Norling's animated short, IN TUNE WITH TOMORROW appeared, projected in black and white, dual-strip 3-D, introducing the spectacle of Polaroid filters to the public. A year later, the film was remade in color as NEW DIMENSIONS, which was subsequently reintroduced to a new public in 1953 by RKO-Pathe as MOTOR RHYTHM.

The viewers for IN TUNE WITH TOMORROW and NEW DIMENSIONS were, similar to previous glasses, cardboard spectacles that the audience member held with his or her hand to eye level (uniquely shaped like Chrysler Plymouths, the car that the short promoted), but unlike previous attempts, the lenses had magically become clear, not colored.

(It should be noted that this was not truly the first time that any audience saw Polarized 3-D-- such an event had occurred at demonstrations given by Edwin H. Land, the inventor of Polaroid, in New York City during the winter of 1936.)

But for IN TUNE WITH TOMORROW, Polaroid had made the breakthrough that was expected of them-- instead of projecting just slides and crude home movies with their filters, it was time to go a step further and make the technology available for film makers who were interested in realism. After all-- the cameras for shooting such things were already available and accessible. Men such as John Norling and Jacob Leventhal had been shooting footage in 3-D for years. The only limiting factors up until that point were the projection techniques-- color filter-based anaglyph processes. Polaroid filters took things a step further by making the signals being sent from the film capable of being transmitted in and not limited by color.

The following year, at the Golden Gate International Exposition in San Francisco, CA, the Pennsylvania Railroad Co. premiered their own travelogue in the Vacationland Building as "Pennsylvania Railroad's Magic Movies!" The eight-minute, black and white short, entitled THRILLS FOR YOU might seem to be pedestrian commercial to some viewers today, but to a 1940s moviegoer, the added illusion of depth to the image made it much more. Not unlike the IN TUNE WITH TOMORROW viewers, THRILLS FOR YOU came with a set of Art Deco glasses shaped like the trains that Pennsy was going to try to sell you tickets to hop on. But the audience was there to hop on a different kind of train-- it was a short ride, but a good one-- the illusion that for just a few moments, they were going to see all of the luxuries of PR as if they themselves were in the cabin with the wealthy, lucky folks that got to travel cross-country.

3-D sat dormant for another decade or so, with one or two items popping up as the typical "novelty." World War II raged on, and Polaroid had far more important things to submit to the country than funny glasses and pictures that leaped off the screen.

Largely forgotten, it was in 1951 that 3-D was re-invented. During the Festival of Britain, numerous stereoscopic shorts were exhibited, many made by the Stereo Techniques company in the UK. In these instances, the spectacles took a new form thanks to the Polaroid Corporation, who had focused on comfortable glasses for stereo slide photograph projection. No longer did you need to hold glasses up to your eye-- in the interim, Polaroid introduced the modern cardboard "flap glasses." With tabs on the sides, the glasses rested comfortably over your ears, in the manner of normal glasses.

Thus, these were the glasses that were used when BWANA DEVIL first hit the screen. In a way, you could say that the film was the first American 3-D feature shot in color, or the first 3-D feature in the US shown in a Polaroid system. In any case, it was the film that started the public interest in the format. Because of BWANA's groundbreaking technique, all of the features released in the US between 1952 and 1955 were shown with Polaroid glasses. The Lippert shorts A DAY IN THE COUNTRY, COLLEGE CAPERS, BANDIT ISLAND, as well as some burlesque shorts, were the exception to the rule, and even some of these were available in dual-strip formats.

With the introduction of newer and better distribution of films in 1953, more comfortable glasses were not the prime concern of those involved-- quantity and availability was. Flimsy models put out by fly-by-night companies first flooded the market during the first few months following the November premiere of BWANA DEVIL. Polaroid warned exhibitors against such firms.

By May, a steady supply of quality 3-D glasses was being manufactured by a number of companies, including Polaroid. But the comfort of the glasses was still an issue that had to be solved. Polaroid and other companies worked feverishly on developing various models of glasses with varying degrees of comfort and adjustment.

In August, 1953, a report-- a result of months of research conducted by Certified Reports, Inc. for one "major client,"-- was published. The study detailed the use of glasses in conjunction with stereoscopic pictures, and more importantly, what patrons thought of them. As reported in MOTION PICTURE DAILY on Aug. 5, 1953:

"The survey was a continuing study which began in February and lasted through a part of July and was conducted in key cities in the East, South, Midwest and West, covering four pictures, "Bwana Devil," "Man in the Dark," "House of Wax," and "Fort Ti." The results are based on the answers of 4,336 patrons who were interviewed personally in the lobbies, 1,648 patrons who submitted completed questionnaires and 4,592 patrons who were metered uttering spontaneous remarks in the auditorium and lobbies. These figures totalled 10,576 persons."

The article continued:

In answer to a question regarding the comfort of the glasses, 2,348 of those interviewed in lobbies said they were uncomfortable, and 1,998 said they were comfortable. Those who responded in questionnaires registered, percentage wise, a heavier opposition, 1,132 patrons stating that their viewers were uncomfortable and 516 offering no complaint Thus, 58.2 per cent of the total reported discomfort and 41.8 per cent no discomfort.

In total, a majority of patrons did not care for how the glasses wore, but did it effect their choice of returning for another 3-D picture?

"To the question of whether their experience in wearing the 3-D glasses to see future three-dimensional pictures, the answers were more favorable to the new medium. Of those who were interviewed personally, 3,826 said that they expected to return to see more, 480 answered negatively and 30 said they were undecided. Those who responded through questionnaires also cast a majority vote along the same lines: 1,092 stated that the glasses would be no factor in keeping them away, 548 said the viewers would keep them away and eight said they were undecided.

"Combining the two groups, those who disavowed the effect of the viewers on future 3-D attendance comprised 82.2 per cent of the total, those who asserted that it would have an effect on their return formed 17.2 per cent and those who were undecided comprised 0.6 per cent."

While viewers felt the glasses needed to be improved, clearly it did not effect their choice to return to the movies for another dose of their favorite stars leaping off the screen into their laps. Film equipment companies were going at it all wrong trying to fix the glasses-- while they needed to be more comfortable, such as the design of those seen below, the glasses were not the problem with 3-D films.

It is often stated that glasses were the cause of headaches. This common misconception is repeated continuously by the press because the lay man does not know or understand the technical process behind stereoscopic projection techniques. In public lectures and in short articles, compression of space and time is stressed by editors and therefore the public rarely is given the full and technical details of any given subject.

Projecting dual-strip 3-D is a science. I draw the line between an "art" and a "science" because for all practical purposes, a science is based on rigid fact and standard, whereas "art" utilizes talent and imagination. In order for a dual-strip presentation to work correctly, standards must be applied and adhered to at every performance.
In the dual-strip projection set-up, you have three key players: the projectors, the screen and the viewer. The first-- projectors-- must be of the standard change-over operational set. They must be able to or modified to load 6000-foot reels, rather than the normal 2000-foot reels, as both machines are being utilized, and therefore cannot achieve a change-over without another set of machines (thus, all 3-D films that go over the time limit of about an hour must have one or more intermissions). Both lamp houses must be balanced precisely, as both will be illuminating the screen at once.

Most importantly, the two projectors must be linked in a way that the electrical impulses of the motors to each projector are identical. This can be achieved in a number of ways, the most popular being that of Selsyn motors. Keeping perfect synchronization is of paramount importance. Every motion between the two machines must be identical-- there is no margin for error.

Essentially, the reason for keeping sync is the result of why 3-D failed in the '50s. If you're running two films at once, and one film goes out of sync, even by a frame, your eye cannot adjust to the difference in motion. The result is a watery mess-- it induces headaches and eye strain if not treated. Similarly, phasing of shutters have to be in perfect synchronization, too. Shutters must open and close at precisely the same moment. If one shutter is closed while the other is open, even at 1/8 of a frame's difference, the viewer may not consciously note any issue, but the image will have visually smaller, but equally important issues similar to sync problems. The look on the screen is not particularly watery, but is more of a blurry, jerky look.

Framing is imperative. Two images can be easily aligned symmetrically by the naked eye, but it is important that the framing of the two images be perfect. Otherwise, the viewer's eyes are straining to "lower" one image and "heighten" the other in order to converge the two. This results in eye strain. This is the first item that should be checked before anything else, as it is the most noticeable and most painful.

The two images are projected out through their respective ports through Polaroid filters placed over the port glass, which in turn filter what is essentially scattered light into vertical or horizontally polarized beams. When the beams hit the screen and reflect back, horizontal beams are picked up by their corresponding filters in the glasses and the vertical beams are reflected. This process works in a complementary fashion with the other filter.

The Polaroid filters have to be adjusted at precise right angles to one another in order to correctly filter out one another (in turn, these adjusted angled must be in conjunction to the glasses.) Turning a flat Polaroid filter at the wrong angle will change the direction of the light and therefore let unwanted light though to the complementary filter. This is why at many presentations of Polaroid 3-D, you cannot cock your head to an angle without compromising the 3-D image. The ghost image, or "crosstalk" as it is referred to, is your glasses picking up the perpendicular light beams.

Each Polaroid filter should be changed after several performances for optimum filtration. Polaroid filters are light sensitive, and after a certain amount of strong light is exposed to them, will lose their polarizing characteristics.

The screen to which these beams are projected must be metallic, preferably a silver screen. Because of its optical nature, metallic screens will reflect the two images without scattering the light beams, thus preserving the filtration effect.

A minor problem, fingerprints should be avoided at all costs on both glasses and booth filters. Fingerprints on Polaroid surfaces can compromise the 3-D effect.

With all of these operational challenges, is it any wonder that exhibitors, projectionists and studios ran to CinemaScope, a push-button "miracle"? Certainly, you viewed it without glasses, but how could a wider screen even compare to the true, third dimension? Whereas 3-D promised things leaping off the screen, to some extent-- well done or not-- it was delivered. It may not have been "a lion in your lap," but who doesn't blink at the paddle-ball man in HOUSE OF WAX delivering his eponymous gimmick into the audience. Even Vincent Price remarks after that very moment, "I hope you don't think I've gone too far hiring this fellow to bring people in [...] let's try it for a week or two and once we're established, we won't need that sort of thing."

Developments in technology always come at a stagnant pace. Had 3-D come as foolproof as CinemaScope had, perhaps we would be seeing half of our films today in a stereoscopic form. But unlike its predecessor, Cinerama, 3-D had the disadvantage of confusion and imperfection working against it. Whereas Cinerama was format far and few, its sparsity was its savior. Quality control ruled Cinerama's grandeur, but 3-D unfortunately fell victim to many formats competing for Exhibitor's dollar, promising the same thing with different titles-- Natural Vision, Paravision, Dynoptic 3-D-- it was all the same thing, but on paper, it seemed like a million formats with subtle nuances that each other had apart from one another. When CinemaScope came at Exhibitors' door, the previous "gimmick" could be laughed off with profit.

Thus, knowingly or not, there was a conspiracy to kill 3-D, and it was coming from all directions. It started with the projectionists. Sync issues kept creeping in. From day one, even at press screenings and premieres, projectionists had a tough time keeping sync, it seemed. Harrison's Reports told of one such press event on April 11, 1953:

"In showing "Man in the Dark," Columbia utilized 17-inch magazines, necessitating two intermisions. At the beginning of the second of the three parts in which the film was shown, the synchronization was so out of kilter that the showing had to be stopped for adjustment. Three separate attempts were made to bring the second part into synchronization but to no avail, with the result that, after a delay of approximately forty-five minutes, it was decided to skip the second part and to proceed with the third part. At the conclusion of the third part, the second part was screened, for by this time the trouble had been corrected."

A couple of months later on June 13, Harrison's Reports revisited the issue, citing the MAN IN THE DARK incident and also:

"But that was not so bad because the picture was shown, not to the public, but to the critics. Here is a case, however that concerns the public, which paid good money to see a 3-D picture. It happened at the Wiltern, a Hollywood theatre owned by the Stanley-Warner circuit, during the showing of "House of Wax." The two prints were out of synchronization by one frame for two days; the projectionist could not correct the trouble on the first day and continued showing the picture out of sunchronism the second day. The result was that the eyes of the patrons were so strained that some of them suffered headaches while others became nauseated."

What happened at the Wiltern wasn't the only case of such an occurance. According to Harrison's, at the Criterion Theater in New York City during a showing of FORT TI, a show was canceled and more than one hundred admissions had to be refunded because the projectionist could not sync the two prints. That audience no doubt went home disappointed, but perhaps free, for the better, of a headache.

All of this trouble could have been easily remedied with more careful consideration of the prints. Built into most prints are edge coding-- numbers that repeat in order every foot, so that the number of frames missing may be judged. Had the projectionist at the Criterion inspected the two prints side-by-side, utilizing the identical edge code printed in both "eyes," he could have fixed the out-of-sync splice and gone on with trouble-free shows, assuming his projection equipment was in perfect operation.

On top of the languidness of the projectionists personally, their union was asking for more. At theaters running 3-D demanded that the Exhibitor employ an extra projectionist, as you are using an extra projector! And if you were running a film with stereophonic sound, forget paying two operators-- you had to add a third one to thread up the magnetic sound print! Then, once the first or second reel was going, said sound operator sat down picking his nose for an hour-- on the theater's payroll, of course. Because of the extra cost of the sound operator, the Paramount in Hollywood opted to play Columbia's FORT TI in mono, rather than pay another wage.

Polaroid and involved parties scrambled frantically to find a solution. The 3-D boom meant prestige and profit for Polaroid, and it wasn't going to be a stretched out, stereophonic splash on a screen that would cut them short, if they had anything to say about it. What Exhibitors needed was an invention that would remedy all of the problems that arose of a dual-strip projection system-- and Polaroid wasn't the only company working on that issue:

And that... is what we'll talk about next week.

Coming soon...

2007-03-09T21:00:00.000-05:00

This week's blog is coming soon...

Princely India

2007-02-22T09:00:00.000-05:00

This press sheet for PRINCELY INDIA, a 1949 Warner Bros. two-reel specialty in Technicolor, was found crammed between two pages in a trade magazine of the same year, and caught my attention, largely because it was on bright yellow paper (not so well reproduced in these scans).

Reading more into it, I find that it was written (and I suppose directed) by Owen Crump, who married into the Fairbanks family, and a few years later directed and wrote his most important film, Paramount's 3-D epic about the Korean War, CEASE FIRE! Crump also produced a couple of interesting features in the Central's library-- GUNN, a feature version of the TV show with a more mature Craig Stevens, and wrote and produced ZEPPELIN, the 1971 epic about the disasterous airship.

Doing a bit more quick research, I find that Crump's credit listings between 1942 and 1952 are vague, at least on the Internet Movie Database. Considering how much information is missing from that site, though, it wouldn't surprise me to learn he spent most of the time doing short subjects and newsreels. PRINCELY INDIA seems to be proof that he was, at the very least, working.

The "supervisor" on the production is George Hollingshead, who hailed from Garfield, New Jersey, a stone's throw from where I live. I don't know what the "supervisor" tag was supposed to be, but judging from his MANY credits as a short subject producer, I can imagine it was their way of saying he produced the short.

According to some of the planted articles, who all refer to the film playing at the strand rather than the generic "..." or "your name here" slugs, Lou Marcelle provided the commentary for the film. Marcelle led an interesting career as a character actor on radio in the '30s and '40s, but film buffs will remember his voice as narrator for such classics as CASABLANCA and DESTINATION TOKYO. For a short period, he was the Paul Frees of his time.

Does anyone know where one can get a copy of this obscure film?

Requires only one foot of lobby space!

2007-02-21T09:00:00.000-05:00

A Note to Movie Bloggers...

2007-02-20T09:00:00.000-05:00

My Favorite Movie/TV Blogs (in no particular order):

Vitaphone Varieties
Lost British Television
Greenbriar Picture Show
Cartoons on Film
Ferdinand Von Galitzien

These blogs will get links on my sidebar. Did I miss any??

Mystery Movie Continued...

2007-02-16T09:00:00.000-05:00

April, 1949. It might have seemed like just another ordinary night in Kansas City. It was a brisk evening, and people were out on the town, participating in the usual activities-- shopping, nightclubs, and most importantly, moviegoing. But at the Paramount on Main Street, something very important was occuring...

Those who had read the movie ads in the paper perhaps saw the notice. "Come TONIGHT," the advertisement said. "See the Hollywood SNEAK PREVIEW of the 'Mystery Movie'!" A preview of a Hollywood film was no new concept. It had been done since the 1920s by producers in order to judge the public's reaction to a film. Perhaps it wasn't even all that uncommon in Kansas City-- after all, it is a major city in the country, and certainly had its share of theaters that could lend themselves to all sorts of experimental usage.

The scene was exactly as seen above. If one drove by and was sharp enough to catch the marquee, they were greeted by "SNEAK PREVIEW" emblazoned on it, and a banner that greeted attendees with "MYSTERY MOVIE" just above the doors to the lobby. People were buying their tickets in a steadfast fashion, waiting... anxious to find out what the movie was, and even more thrilled to give it a "dud" or a "go" with the little card and pencil they were handed out on the way into the theater.

The set-up had a new angle, though. M.D. Cohn, the manager, had worked a deal with Paramount, his home office, to sneak preview their new film, BRIDE OF VENGEANCE, with the Paramount's 1,900 seat auditorium as the location for the test. The Paramount, which was previously the Newman, was built in 1918 and had just been bought by Paramount a year or two previous.

Timing was perfect, as BRIDE was not yet scheduled for release, but was finished, and there was enough time to incorporate public reaction in merchandising plans that were then in preperation. The plan, which was apparently of Mr. Cohn's design, was a well-thought advertising blitz, which resulted in the advertisements placed in the papers, as well as blow-up of the advertisements in one-sheet form on the front of the building.

The screen attraction, EL PASO, with John Payne and Gail Russell, had normal matinee showtimes that ceased at 6:00 PM. Members of the last performance's audiences were welcome to stay for free during the 6:00 sneak preview. Two sneak previews followed at 8:00 PM and 10:00 PM.

However, in the lobby of the audience, a tape recorder picked up natural audience reactions to the film. These tapes were then transcribed on disc and sent to Paramount's ad execs. Everything was done to encourage honest opinions by telling them that the criticisms were for the distributor and producer of the picture. I'm sure there were probably stooges planted in the audiences as well.

The end result was an interesting one, which gives us a little idea of what that particular demographic liked-- there were 120 comment cards filled in. 98 of them were outstanding or good. 22 either thought the film was ok or was bad.

Sneak preview tonight!

2007-02-15T15:00:00.000-05:00

Update on Mystery Theater

2007-02-14T22:45:00.000-05:00

Here is an update on last week's mystery theater post. According to Ken Layton over at Cinema Treasures:

I live in Olympia, Washington and I can confirm that picture of the "Olympic" is indeed the Olympic theater in Olympia, Wash. It first opened in 1924 as the Liberty Theater. In March of 1948 it was extensively remodeled and the name was changed to the Olympic Theatre. In 1982 it was torn down and the Washington Center For The Performing Arts was built in it's place. The city of Olympia owns & operates this place now.

Thanks for the info, Ken! And thanks to Cinema Treasures for featuring my query on their front page.

"For three days only, coming next week..."

2007-02-09T09:00:00.000-05:00

Flipping through trade mags, for a movie theater buff, is like a dream come true. Aside from all of the daily gossip between productions, full color trade ads and exhibitor reviews, there are countless photos of new theaters and theater displays. Even as interesting are the "before and after" theater shots that lined articles such as BoxOffice's "The Modern Theater" section, which promoted you, the Exhibitor, change your gaudy, 1920s-style movie palace into a streamlined, art deco masterpiece.

Within these pages are hundreds of ads of popcorn dealers, air conditioning installers, Filmack ads, and general proprietors of theatrical paraphernalia. While flipping through an April, 1949 issue of BoxOffice, this ad caught my eye, and thus, this week's article was born...

Now, I'm an admitted neon freak, and I love theaters, and obviously their marquees, so you can imagine my reaction when seeing this ad for the Wagner Sign Service. It was fantastic-- not only was THIS an ad placed by a major manufacturer of neon marquees, they were showing some samples of their best work!

What killed me, however, was the fact that they didn't list what each of the theaters were. With clues, names and photos in hand, and armed with omnipresent Internet tools such as Google and Cinema Treasures, I went on my quest. Here is what I discovered in a night's worth of research...

Excuse the poor quality images to follow... you'll have to click on these, of course, to get the full picture.

This one was simple enough. A quick search on Cinema Treasures turned this one up quite quickly. The El Monte Drive-In, located at 9700 Lower Azusa Road, El Monte, CA, on the intersection of Lower Azusa and Ellis Lane, was a creation of one S. Charles Lee, who was responsible for some of the nicer theaters in California, including the now-derelict Fox Theatre in downtown Los Angeles.

One source says the drive-in was built in 1948, when the photograph in the ad (and seemingly, all of the photos in the ad) was taken.

As seen to the right, courtesy of UCLA's photo archive, the seating capacity was 791 cars, a fairly decent amount for a down-town drive-in. It seems to have been fairly prosperous in the '50s through the '70s, and made several movie appearances, starting in 1958's ATTACK OF THE 50 FOOT WOMAN. During the '70s, it went to an all-Spanish format, which I imagine in Southern California was a good business choice, based on demographics. Apparently, in 1995, Fred Olen Ray made use of it in his film, BIKINI DRIVE-IN. Interestingly, this short film may have been the last time it was captured in a film. Just a few years later, in 1999, the El Monte was no more, torn down to make way for a Home Depot.

The next photograph was a little bit trickier. I had the name of the theater, but "The Imperial" certainly doesn't say where it's located, and is a somewhat regular name for theaters. It is not, as common a name as the Central, however, and therefore was easy to trace quickly.

This marquee seen belongs to The Imperial Theatre in Cincinnati, OH. Built in 1913, it first served local audiences with family programming. By the 1960s, however, it was turning to more adult fare, ending in 1978 as the Imperial Follies Theatre, running X-rated material, with live burlesque acts in between. The building is now gutted, but the marquee, complete with its neon crown, which made it easy for me to track down, and exterior still remain.

There are hundreds of Rialto theaters in the world-- the name caught on like a wildfire after the New York Rialto first opened its doors. This, my search for this Rialto, seen to the right, was next to impossible, but it was done.

At first, I thought it could have been a Rialto in Texas because of the booth and similar positioning of the one-sheet frames in the front, but the marquee was all wrong.

One by one, I clicked on each listing on Cinema Treasures 150-something results. Fate was kind to me, and I found it early in the list-- the Rialto Theater, located on 2616 S. Calhoun Street in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The 700 seat theater opened its doors in 1924. The theater was augmented by another 300 seats through the addition of a balcony during the 1940s. It was probably around this time that this new marquee was added. The theater saw its good and bad days-- in the early '80s, it was a Spanish movie theater, followed a few years later as a triple-X rated house. It was labeled as a historic landmark in the early '90s, and in 2003, it was taken over by a group called The Reclamation Project, who are apparently in the midst of a restoration of the building. According to them, the original installation organ is still intact, and will be used as part of the theater's revival as a performing arts/urban ministry center.

The Olympic Theater was hard to find, because the listing on CT is of it's recent incarnation, The Washington Center for the Performing Arts. Despite the heavy remodeling the facade has gotten, I'm 75% sure this is the same theater. It opened in 1948, and for sure, this theater is having its grand opening with a 1948 film. If it is the WCPA, the look of the theater has been drastically changed. And, like the previous incarnation as a movie house (which their website doesn't acknowledge, like most PACs), I wonder if the comedies are guaranteed or our laughs refunded.

Does anyone know any more about this one? It would be nice if someone who used to go to this theater could drop me a line and confirm whether or not I'm right or wrong.

Ok, kiddies, here's the mystery photo. No marquee, but from 1948 again, as seen by the re-issue paper for BUCK PRIVATES, and the feature, TEXAS, BROOKLYN AND HEAVEN:

Anyone know?

Printed Paper, Part Deux

2007-02-02T09:00:00.000-05:00

Part two of the large poster extravaganza...

The poster to the left is one of my all time favorite posters ever. At first glance, it does not seem particularly colorful, and perhaps by some standards not particularly well drawn either.

But if you sit and study it, and look at the fine detail work that's attached to it, you'll come to realize that it really is quite a masterpiece, not only as a piece of art, but also in a sense of 1930s exploitation advertisement.

The 1932 film promised more than it delivered to its audiences, and it ends up being a travelogue with a little dance at the end tagged on. But it cannot be denied that the poster (or at least, in this case, the three-sheet) employs some striking imagery and false promises to get its audiences in.

As with last week's INGAGI, nude women in a perilous ritual are the centerpiece. While the film was shot mostly in Mexico, the "Fire Ordeal of Singapore" is the centerpiece of the film. In actuality, the final dance scene of the film is so obscured by trees and shaky photography that it could have been shot in someones backyard in Los Angeles, and no one would have been the wiser.

Also of note is the name of the company: Television Productions, a prestigious label for a small-time, British company that made this single picture. "First Division"-- no relation to the more successful First National-- was mainly an independent distributor.

If you didn't know better, you would be forgiven in thinking that the above six sheet promoted perhaps an early or obscure Charlie Chaplin short. It is, in fact, not a Chaplin short, but what Chaplin himself considered the next best thing: Billy West, a Chaplin imitator. Born in Russia in 1892, Roy B. Weissburg grew up in Chicago, and began acting in pictures in 1912.

Interestingly, he was one of the only Chaplin impersonators that the famed comedian did not sue for infringing on his character. Some have speculated it was because West had indeed made the character himself earlier than Chaplin did. In any case, for a brief period, West returned the favor by starring in a number of shorts opposite Oliver Hardy, who portrayed an Eric Campbell-like counterpart. West later went onto his own fame in equally funny shorts for other companies, and did some directing during the sound era.

Believe it or not, I've never seen 1934's GREAT EXPECTATIONS, based on the famous Charles Dickens novel. All the same, the above six-sheet is a great example of the selling power of colorful images-- it makes me want to track it down now. Stone litho meets art deco lettering... simply wonderful.

The above six sheets are for two spectacular poverty row serials that are as good as the artwork that advertises them.

THE PHANTOM EMPIRE was one of Mascot's last serials before being incorporated with Monogram, Consolidated Film Industries and several other companies into becoming the reigning studio of serials, Republic Pictures. The famous robots that were used in the film (and later in serials and TV shows such as CAPTAIN VIDEO) were originally made for the Joan Crawford/Clark Gable MGM musical, DANCING LADY. The scene it was used in ended up being scrapped.

One of the smaller companies of the Republic merger was Principal Pictures, whose serial, THE RETURN OF CHANDU (1934), was actually a cash-in on Fox's 1932 feature, CHANDU THE MAGICIAN, directed by the great William Cameron Menzies. The first serial starred Edmund Lowe as Frank Chandler, aka Chandu, and playing a part not dissimilar to the one he had played the year earlier for Menzies' production of THE SPIDER (with El Brendel!). Bela Lugosi was the villain, Roxor, in that feature, but returns to this serial production as Chandu the Magician, himself!

Several years after his cohort, Gene Autry, had made THE PHANTOM EMPIRE, William Boyd starred in his famous Hopalong Cassidy role in this production, RIDERS OF THE DEADLINE. The film co-starred the usual suspects: Andy Clyde and Jimmy Rogers, but has the added distinction of featuring a young Robert Mitchum as a thug. The above six sheet is a spectacular sight of Hoppy taking up the top right quarter of the image. Quite striking, indeed.

The hero of every child of the '40s and '50s, Columbia's big serial event of 1948, SUPERMAN, did expectantly phenomenal at the Box Office, despite being a poor example of the stories featured in the Action Comics magazines.

The 15-chapter serial features Kirk Alyn as the Man of Steel, with Noel Neill as reporter Lois Lane and ex-Our Gang member Tommy Bond as Jimmy Olsen. Neil later reprised the role to greater fame on the syndicated TV show of the 1950s with George Reeves as Superman.

Carol Forman, serial femme fatale extraordinaire, and sporting an awful blonde wig, is the villainess, the evil Spider Lady. Just a year earlier, she was Sombra in THE BLACK WIDOW, who killed her victims with the title anachronid. The screenplays of many serials are a lot fun, but highly inventive they were not!

While not Columbia's best serial effort, and certainly not deserving of a 15-chapter run, SUPERMAN is still an action-packed, interesting, alternate-universey look at SUPERMAN at his peak, pre-TV show. The supporting cast is filled with genre veterans, such as Jack Ingram, Charles Quigley, Herbert Rawlinson, Forrest Taylor, and Nelson Leigh.

SUPERMAN was followed up two years later by the admittedly better ATOM MAN VS. SUPERMAN, in which Lyle Talbot makes Lex Luthor's screen debut, bald head and all. Kirk Alyn, Noel Neill and Tommy Bond repeated their roles.

The final large paper is fitting... this advertisement is literally the "writing on the wall"-- the sound heard 'round the world-- VITAPHONE. A rare 24-sheet, this speaks for itself:

Son of CHILI CONE!

2007-01-22T09:00:00.000-05:00

I promised you guys something good this week (other than my usual post), so here it is...

For those of you who enjoyed the infamous Rutherford Chili Cone, you'll be happy to know that the most ludicrous idea for a concession stand product ever didn't end there!

No sir, not only did the idea of a salty cracker ice-cream-shaped cone stuffed with chili appeal to one Rutherford Food Company, but to three Chicago-based companies.

As seen at the left, the announcement for the Hot Chili Cone was made in the March 6, 1954 issue of BoxOffice (for those keeping track, a month after the premier of Rutherford's ChiliCone), the three components, Chili, cone and server equipment, all being supplied by different companies.

Also available were free backboard and window posters. If anyone has one of these or knows the whereabouts of one, by all means, let me know!

As I somewhat imagined, this product was geared more towards the drive-in circuits, but I was not surpirsed to see the company pushing the chili cones at indoor theaters, too. I still can't imagine getting past the smell of chili both in the lobby and in the theater.

...and the messes! The messes....

As if that little blurb wasn't enough, I've saved the best for last... a full page ad for the product!

Printed Paper (Part 1)

2007-01-19T09:00:00.000-05:00

Before anything else, I must apologize about last week's lack of article. I was on a very interesting film-related trip to Chicago, which I will expound upon soon. Hopefully, my variety this week will redeem me. I've been on a '50s kick lately, so I'll try to break away from that within the next few weeks.

Several people have been asking about the size of the photos-- you have to click on them to see the full image. The ones in the article are just thumbnails.

This is part one of a two part post. Part II will be posted later this week.

Looking at the image to the right of this 1903 poster, one might think it originated as a piece of advertising for an early Edison, Biograph or Lubin short. But this colorful artwork is actually a relic of William W. Pratt's stage play, Ten Nights in a Bar-Room, based on the book of the same title by T.S. Arthur. The reformist play, which had premiered in 1856, was a perennial favorite with American audiences, and continued to play theaters into the 1920s.

It is not a poster for a movie, but I'm using it to illustrate the colorful, detailed art craft that not too long after would saturate the pedestrian market for motion pictures.

If there's anything that attracts the human eye, it's pattern and color. It's one of the subliminal reasons that movie-going is so popular. It's also the target behind advertising pictures well. And while one sheets and window cards are nice, there's nothing like large paper. This blog is dedicated to big, colorful paper that caught our eyes all those years ago...

Between the years 1910 and around 1975, some of the most artistically, inimitable poster artwork was created in order to attract patrons. Sizes varied from the relatively small lobby cards and window cards, up the the very largest, the 24-sheet, a billboard poster sizing an intimidating 12 feet by 9 feet.

Almost all of the large paper was printed in sections: three sheets (81 inches by 41 inches) started as literally three sheets, but soon came in two pieces, and even as a whole, occasionally. Six sheets (81 inches by 81 inches) came in sometimes three, but usually four pieces. 24 sheets varied, but were generally 10 to 12 pieces.

While many posters were off-set printed in regularly lithography style, the nonpareil printing style was unarguably that of stone lithography. An artist creates a "plate" for each primary color (magenta, yellow, cyan and black) using blocks of flat limestone of a fine grain. A litho crayon, or oily paint substance is used to make the image, in positive, on each block, by the artist. Much care must be taken care, as each block must be identical in shape, and proportional in color.

Once each color is laid out, all of the porous limestone blocks are saturated in water. Those areas painted repel the water, as they are oil based.

An oil based ink is then rolled onto each block. The water soaked areas that are not painted repel the ink, and the areas covered in the crayon or paint hold the ink.

Finally, a sheet of paper is carefully pressed onto the block.

The result is infinite tonality-- a delicate blend of color and detail that is unique to any other printing process. Examine this six sheet from Biograph's 1917 reissue of D.W. Griffith's 1913 production, JUDITH OF BETHULIA. As Griffith left the next year for better things, the obvious happened to the one-trick-pony Biograph Studios. This re-edited version of the film, entitled HER CONDONED SIN, was one of their last releases before the company folded.

Study the poster carefully and you will begin to pick up details that are not apparent on first glance. Notice the detail in color tonality, particularly the flesh tones. The choice of color is like that of the old masters... the virginal, white Judith dances in somewhat pink hues in front of a dark, sea green orgy in the background. The stray rose on the ground is almost an afterthought, but could be a painting in itself.

If Griffith was the pinnacle of drama, it was undeniable that Charlie Chaplin was the apex of comedy. I had many large-sized posters to choose from to represent Chaplin-- all colorful and beautiful-- but I chose this particular three sheet because I feel it is one of the only pieces that best represents the spirit of Chaplin's films.

The striking blue background contrasts nicely with Charlie's red vest, and little Jackie Coogan's maroon rag clothing. Primary colors are the emphasis in this portrait, resonating nicely off of Chaplin's primary elements of drama and comedy woven into the film.

The company of First National Pictures in less than a decade would be purchased by Warner Brothers Pictures, after their tremendous success with the Vitaphone picture, THE JAZZ SINGER.

And not less than four year later, this colorful six sheet from the 1932 Warner Bros.-First National picture, I AM A FUGITIVE FROM A CHAIN GANG.

I always enjoy paintings of subjects that utilized colored light from different directions, particularly the contrasting use of the colors blue or green on a person's face. With the CHAIN GANG 6-sheet, Paul Muni's awestruck expression is heightened by the subtle blend between a pale yellow and a deep green. Muni's figure is then contrasted by the blood red background of the harsh events that occur in prison.

Just a year before, this three sheet lured audiences in with its exploitative promises of native women being defiled by the most savage gorilla of Darkest Africa, INGAGI.

Produced by Congo Pictures, Ltd., and available in both silent and sound editions, the picture initially caused a sensation at the Box Office, grossing much needed profit for an independent distributor in the early days of the Great Depression, but the feature was also dealt a major scandal.

Aside from the bare-breasted native women being groped by a six-foot gorilla, the supposedly 100% authentic documentary soon was exposed as a fraud-- the woman seen here in the poster and figuring prominently in the storyline was caught by some to be, in actuality, a fairly well-known Hollywood actress that had been trying to get leading roles for some time.

Further examination proved that the supposed jungles of Africa were no farther from the arc-lights of Hollywood, California than Bronson Canyon!

Even INGAGI's overgrown chimp was a fake, albeit a masterful one-- the king of monkey costumes himself, Charlie Gemora, a master make-up artist and ape man par excellence was the supposedly ferocious gorilla.

Footage of the jungles were culled from documentaries, and just as lawsuits were starting to materialize, the film was pulled from the market. The success of the film's sexual relations between woman and overgrown simian no doubt inspired a couple of entrepreneurial producers to create the grand-daddy of all over-sized apes, KING KING, two years later.

Speaking of Kong and overgrown gorillas, here is RKO's family-friendly answer to their continuing series of giant ape films, 1948's MIGHTY JOE YOUNG. Seen in this lithographic three-sheet is the climax of the film, as Joe saves a group of children from a burning orphanage.

The scene was heightened by an interesting printing effect, thanks to the Technicolor Corporation and an inventive process, in which the film was "colorized" in a fashion that certain highlights, midtones and shadows were all uniquely colored. The end effect was a startling mix of red, orange and yellow hues, with localized colors in certain areas of the image.

Experiments continued for some time on Merian C. Cooper's earlier production of CHANG to a good degree of success. These test still survive today.

Around the same time, there were other kinds of monsters scaring up big bucks at the Box Office. Universal-International decided it was time to pair their biggest money-makers together-- Abbott and Costello, along with Frankenstein, Dracula and The Wolf Man, in what most film buffs consider the best blending of comedy and horror ever put on screen: ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN (or for you purists out there, BUD ABBOTT AND LOU COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN).

Above is a rarely seen image: the astounding 24-sheet for the film. Only one is known to exist in a private collection, dusted off time to time only to be put on display for a short period. Driving down an urban highway and seeing this sign MUST have gotten someone to take the next exit to the nearest theater for an afternoon of laughs and fun.

About a decade later, Universal turned out another classic. Neither the primary 24 sheet nor this following poster exist, as far as I know. This particular picture is taken from the pressbook and is about as close to the real thing as we'll get, unless someone unearths one in a warehouse somewhere...

THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN had an incredibly COLORFUL teaser 24-sheet, as seen above. Printed with black and Day-Glo Orange ink, I tried to recreate the color as best as possible on the computer, but as we all know, these sort of things are best seen in person. I have to imagine a poster of this contrast, color and size both startled and amazed drivers on the road. No doubt, it left a very sizable impression on those who saw it.

Stereophonic Sound or Bust!

2007-01-06T15:45:00.000-05:00

Sorry about the late post, folks. I completely changed my mind while I was in the middle of writing what should become next week's article (as I will be out of town, anyway). A discussion on an Internet forum sparked my interest in eventually getting around to this one, and during Wednesday, I spent all evening researching. My time to pen these blogs is limited, so it usually takes about four to five days. Here are the fruits of my labor...

In 1953, Exhibitors and studios were attempting to recover from the setbacks of Television. Studios were turning to methods of 3-D, widescreen, and stereophonic sound as alternatives. But not all Exhibitors were happy about change.

The "miracle" known as CinemaScope was another one of these novelties, but certainly an experience in its own right, none the less. With widescreen, color and stereophonic sound, 20th Century Fox, who held the rights to the process, made good numbers for the Exhibitors at the Box Office, and gave themselves a much needed boost in profit as well. But, while the transition to widescreen was fairly simple and commonplace, the hassles of running such things as interlock projectors and installing extra (and expensive) speakers and amplifiers was difficult and relatively sparse.

It was no surprise, then, that in the January 16, 1954 issue of Showmen's Trade Review, it was reported that the Community Theater, a 1,500 seat house in Morristown, NJ, operated by the Walter Reade Theater chain, was running THE ROBE's audio through one, monophonic speaker. Even less of a shock was Fox's outrage to the situation. Up until that point, all other exhibitors had complied with Fox's requirements for sound and projection of their CinemaScope features: to be shown on a Miracle Mirror, Astrolite or equal-quality screen of the correct ratio, as well as the installation of four-channel stereophonic sound (sound head, sprockets, amplifier and speakers), to properly run their four-track print.

The Community had half of the correct elements-- a 35-foot wide Astrolite screen met sufficient visual standards, but through means of a mixer manufactured by the Cinematic Corporation of Bloomfield, NJ, the four-channel soundtrack which came with the film was mixed from all four channels into one signal, and then piped into a single speaker.

Even though the Community's lobby displays made no mention of stereo sound (or lack thereof), it was reported that the theater ran a recorded speech before the showing which announced to the audience it was about to hear stereophonic sound. According to observers who were there for the monophonic viewings, they "found a boom noticeable and lack of crystal clear quality, but were unable to say whether this was usual in the theater." The sound did not appear to be off in the rear of the theater, curiously, but "it became obvious that the sound was not issuing from the parts of the screen where the action was taking place or the dialog being spoken." Even though this was common previously in movie theater, moviegoers were being cheated out of the promise of Fox's "miracle" of stereophonic sound. It was half of the experience for the full ticket price.

Ironically, not long before this skulduggery occurred, Fox had planned to test a single-track version of THE ROBE (whether it was magnetic or optical sound is unknown) in Ohio, but changed their mind at the last moment, citing that even if the single-track system were successful, it would "prove nothing, since there would not be sufficient prints in the single-track version to meet exhibitor needs for CinemaScope pictures."

By January 20th, Fox was in heated talks about applying for a court injunction against the Walter Reade chain's use of the mixer. To add fuel to the fire, Reade installed the mono mixer into two of his other New Jersey theaters, in Perth Amboy and Kingston.

Immediately after the story broke in Showman's Trade Review, Walter Reade Jr., head of the theater chain, as well as the president prolific Theatre Owners of America (TOA) association, announced he would issue a statement, but never followed up. With Reade running the organization, there was no doubt that the TOA was about to be dragged into a game of chess with 20th.

A week later, Spiros Skouras, president of Fox, and Reade had come to an apparent resolution. Both parties were court shy, but never-the-less had lawyers ready to do battle. To avoid legal conflict, Fox was to go ahead with their tests of mono sound with CinemaScope in four regions, and according to Reade, to use one of his own theaters as "a guinea pig" for the experiment. Reade's motivation was for his benefit in end: Fox okayed the use of their mono print and Reade did not have to install further, modern stereo equipment in his theaters. He would be able to carry on running THE ROBE at the Community, as well as the in the two other theaters, using the new mono prints for one month, as part of the test to determine whether the studio would change its stereo policy.

Drive-in theaters also wanted to run 'Scope films, but were relying on a single, mono speaker to pump sound into individual cars and couldn't possibly install 4-track into each car. In the February 6 issue of BoxOffice, Abram F. Myers, general counsel for Allied States Association, made the statement that Fox would have to shift its policy for drive-ins "if the handsome profits earned by 'The Robe' are not to be wiped out by the losses on lesser product that does not hold up in the key runs." The ball was in Fox's court, who on the same page revealed that they would stick to their guns with their new drive-in sound plan. The key points were that:

1. CinemaScope will be made available to drive-ins, but the film prints will have four-channel magnetic recording and the reproduction will have to be on a two-speaker system similar to the one demonstrated Monday by International Projector Co. at Bloomfield, NJ. Both RCA and Altec are said to be working on such a system.

2. Al Lichtman, director of distribution, sent Alex Harrison to Cincinnati to explain to Allied drive-in convention delegates how the new system works. This was after the convention had ridiculed a report that two-speakers-per-car would be required for drive-ins and after there had been sharp criticism of the company's failure to reply to a telegram sent at the start of the convention.

3. Lichtman issued a second statement replying to the Theatre Owners of America board of directors in which he said Fox would continue to insist on the use of stereophonic sound and that where an exhibitor finds it impossible to secure credit for the apparatus, the company will use its influence to help him get installations on a long-term payment basis.

The same week, in response to the announcement, TOA formed a committee to "militantly" protect Exhibitors from attempts by the studio to take control of theater operations away from them. According to Reade, "whether an exhibitor installs stereophonic sound or other equipment must rest in his own discretion and choice." Fellow exhibitors weren't too happy with Reade's handshake deal with Skouras, officially announced at the January 31 TOA meeting. One fellow NJ exhibitor, after seeing Reade's grosses without the stereo sound commented, "he can buy three stereophonic installations out of the profits of the first three bookings!"

Things continued to heat up. On February 10, Variety announced that Reade cancelled tests when he was told by Lichtman at Fox that their policy wasn't going to change, no matter what the outcome. "Even though exhibitors might sit at the tests, their judgements on the requirement of stereophonic sound would not be respected or considered in Fox's decision," was Reade's opinion based on conversation with Lichtman. Even Variety warned that a future legal battle was certainly on the way to the circuit.

There are few facts to report after this point, no doubt with a lot of back-room deals that were never documented. Consequently, there is a point that is subject to much confusion, even with many of the facts present. For years, texts on the subject reported that the parties did have a fierce court battle in which Reade got his way, championing the right to run mono sound on 'Scope prints. Whether or not this case was actually tried, Variety reported on February 17 that Reade himself folded, installing stereo in all of his theaters, citing that lack of Fox product to him was his concern. According to them, the new contract with 20th for HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE was the deciding factor in making Reade spend $3,000 on a new stereo system per theater.

Fox had won the battle, but apparently not the war. Pressure from TOA and other exhibitors, coupled with the drive-in debacle forced Fox to come to a new solution. On May 6, Fox announced the cancellation of their previous policy on stereophonic sound. As a result, exhibitors who were interested in playing CinemaScope features had their choice of four-track magnetic, one track magnetic, and one track optical soundtracks.

MGM followed suit the same week with its policy on their CinemaScope productions and stereo sound. General sales manager Charles Reagan said, "The new policy is designed to service theatres which present the single-channel track as well as those equipped for magnetic sound and the new Perspecta sound." Reagan also added that while the choice was optional, it was the opinion of MGM that all exhibitors should take any opportunities available to improve audio presentation, including installation of stereophonic sound systems.

The Perspecta stereophonic system that MGM previously referred to was a groundbreaking plan to incorporate a stereophonic track within a monophonic, optical track. Developed by the Fine Sound Laboratories in 1954, it debuted with that year's WHITE CHRISTMAS, alongside VistaVision, Paramount's new widescreen process. More about Perspecta in an upcoming article.

The headaches didn't end there. In June, a group of Minneapolis exhibitors had had enough. S.D. Kane, North Central Allied executive counsel, reported that a "sizable number" of exhibitors who installed stereophonic sound now wanted Fox to reimburse them for the equipment "which has become unnecessary."

All of this chaos was reflected humorously in Martin Quigley Jr.'s column in the Motion Picture Herald later that month in a blurb captioned "Print Happy!" He was right, as this following list was what caused the headaches Exhibitors had to deal with:

*Standard print - standard sound
*Standard print - separate stereophonic sound print [fullcoat mag, interlocked]
*Standard print - separate stereophonic sound print; effects on optical track with picture [aka WARNERPHONIC (more on this in a future article)]
*3-D - two print system
*3-D - single print system
*3-D - two print system with separate stereophonic sound print
*CinemaScope - 4-track stereophonic sound
*CinemaScope - single optical sound track
*CinemaScope - Perspecta directional sound
*CinemaScope - single track magnetic
*CinemaScope - reduced to standard "2-D" print [Note: they mean a reduced, non-anamorphic print]
*VistaVision - Perspecta sound
*VistaVision printed in SuperScope - Perspecta sound
*SuperScope print of standard picture.

Quigley aptly noted, "the Italians have a word for a situation like this. It is basta. The meaning-- THAT'S ENOUGH!"

Theater Display of the Week

Keeping in the trend of 3-D and all things to attract the eye...

Happy New Year (1933)

2006-12-31T17:32:00.000-05:00

From your friends here at the Central Theatre,
have a happy and prosperous New Year.

We look forward to your patronage in the following months to come...

--The Management

An Usher's "Do's" and "Dont's"

2006-12-29T09:00:00.000-05:00

Just a note: thanks for the positive comments, private and otherwise. Please feel free to leave some public comments, too, though. I love generating discussion afterwards!

Having had been a theater usher for a few years myself, dealing with theater goers has been second nature to me. I know what to do and not to do with certain customers (and how far you can stretch the rules with certain ones). Therefore, it is always curious, and even humorous at times, to me when I see a "vintage" list of rules as set by any theater proprietor. While many of the rules I would agree with as generalities, quite often, I find that these lists are made by managers with no concept of public relations, and some points are childishly naive.

Case in point, this 30-point guide made by Nat Wolfe, Warner Ohio zone manager, and Dick Wright, his assistant, in 1949. This "Service Manual" became WB's official training guide for new service employees. Riddled with typos and spelling errors, I know that this one was the real thing. I've cleaned up most of them, but left a couple of the foolish ones in. The following is from BoxOffice, July 16, 1949:

1. Be diplomatic when referring to guests and use the terms, "Gentlemen," "Lady" or "Child."

2. When wishing to attract a guest's attention, never summon but step directly up to the guest and say, "I beg your pardon, sir."

3. Assist guests in every way possible. Be especially courteous [to] ladies, children and elderly people. Crippled people should be extended every possible courtesy.

4. Never give guests any orders. Communicate your desires in the form of a request. Accompany the acceptance of your request by, "I thank you, sir."

5. If asked your opinion of the performance, answer: "The comments are very favorable, sir," or "I think you will enjoy it."

6. You must keep your hands off the guests.

7. If a patron asks you the time and you do not have a watch with you, answer: "Just a moment, sir, and I will get the time for you."

8. Always do your utmost to answer a guest's question. Go to your manager if necessary. Unusual service gains distinction for your theatre and for yourself.

9. Never leave your post unless given permission by the man in charge.

10. When referring to one of the organization always use title and name of his position.

11. You are warned not to carry on conversation unless it is in the line of duty. In cases of necessity, be brief.

12. In answering questions, take time enough to look directly at your guest and reply in a manner that is direct to the question asked.

13. Friends and former employees, are to be treated by you as a guest. Excuse yourself from them and see them after working hours.

14. If you make the mistake of letting some guests into your aisle ahead of others, who have been waiting longer and then later complain, answer, "I am very sorry, it was my mistake. I will be sure to give you the next seats available." And be sure to do it. A promise broken is a very bad advertisement.

15. Use your flashlight to aid guests and don't rush them as the change from the outside light to the darkened auditorium is very confusing. Be patient. Remember, you are accustomed to the darkness and they are not.

16. If you are directing to another aisle and a person desires a seat in your aisle, never say, "Seats are available in aisle four, please," but "I am sorry sir, this aisle is filled at present, but you will find seats in aisle four."

17. Guests wishing to find better seats down front should be assisted at all times. Discourage setting down front when musical numbers are on. Say, "Would you mind waiting until the musical number has finished, please?"

18. If you cannot seat a party together, try at your first opportunity to do so. This is a mark of distinguished service and is greatly appreciated by a guest. Treat each individual guest as a friend you have not seen in a long time.

19. If you are requested by a guest to ask another guest to move so that he will be able to seat his party together-- you will say, "I am very sorry, we do not make it a practice to ask guests to move, you may do so if you wish."

20. Be careful not to glace yourself at anytime so as to obstruct a guest's view longer than is necessary.

21. Do not walk up or down the foyers unless it is absolutely necessary. Things in the auditorium are to be quiet at all times. Avoid any unnecessary confusion.

22. Do not say "sh-sh" to anyone. If a patron is creating unnecessary noise, say, "I beg your pardon, sir, you are annoying those around you," and then leave immediately. If the patron persists in making noise, call an executive at once.

23. Do not wait for an answer in this case, it might lead to an argument, and this is to be avoided at all times.

24. Mothers with crying children should be treated with the utmost courtesy and care. If the child continues to cry after you have spoken to the mother, say, "I am very sorry, Ma'am, but I must ask you to take the little one to the rest room."

25. PETTING COUPLES [hubba hubba!]: Do not disturb unless the conduct is such that it is attracting the attention of those around them. If their conduct is noticeable, do not hesitate, but say, "It will be necessary for me to call one of the management if your attitude does not change at once." Call the manager if they persist.

26. INTOXICATED PERSONS [*hiccup!*] "If you will come with me there is a friend in the lobby who would like to speak with you." This statement cannot offend and being in a suggestive tone will be apt to be carried into effect. In the case of a vicious person, you may have to resort to an extreme method of removing the person from the theatre, and do not hesitate to do this with the approval of the manager.

27. MORONS OR DEGENERATES: Call the management at once.

28. Do not step backwards or forwards without first looking int he direction in which you are stepping.

29. If a guest reports a lost article to you, do your best to locate same, and if not found, refer the guest to party in charge of the floor.

30. If a patron incurs and has an injury, do the following: (a) Go at once and offer first aid; (b) Render any assistance possible: (c) Immediately call the manager if the case is severe; (d) Secure all available information concerning the accident as follows: name, address, age, weight, height, glasses, at least one witness, exact location and reason. Examine conditions of spot where accident occurred, to ascertain if the fault was the theatre's or not. Be careful not to make any mistake of mentioning the extent of the theatre's liability. Do not make any statement regarding the accident to anyone but the manager. At times, it will be possible for your theatre to get a signed statement from the party releasing the theatre of any liability. Be sure and get accident reports for public and employees.

Photo: M. Nat Wolf, managing director at the Hippodrome Theatre in Cleveland, is shown discussing he service guide for ushers with two members of the staff. (BOXOFFICE PHOTO)

I've sure they were listening attentively...

Theater Display of the Week...

Mammy!

Merry Christmas to all...

2006-12-24T19:41:00.000-05:00

I was thinking of what exactly I wanted to post as a present to you all for Christmas. Originally, I thought I'd put up the usual silly photos of celebrities doing Christmas-y things, but that's being done elsewhere, so here's something unique for you (and to those who didn't make Friday night's show-- you know who you are!): The Central Theater's official yearly Christmas reel, including...

*Generic color snipe with Jack Collins reading from "A Christmas Carol" (early '60s).

*Dick Powell and the cast and crew of Zane Gray Theatre (including Aaron Spelling) wishing us a Merry Christmas (late '50s). Sorry for the quality on this, it was a low-contrast print.

*Snipe for Murray the K's Peppermint Twist Christmas Party, including Joey Dee and the Starlighters, US Bonds, Timi Yuro, Bobby Lewis, The Isley Brothers, Jan & Dean, The Belmonts, The Vibrations, The Crystals, The Chantels, and upcoming shows for Johnny Mathis, Bobby Vee and Dion at the 14th St. Academy of Music in NYC (1961).

*Happy New Year 1958 bash for the kiddies snipe-- with funny hats and noisemakers, too!

*Bob Hope, Jayne Mansfield, Jerry Colonna and others look on in a Buick Commercial from Bob's show (late '50s)

*Two geeks run around in the snow in uptown NYC around early 1960s (122nd St. and Broadway, Juliard). I guess this was trims for some educational short.

So there you have it-- Merry Christmas everyone! See you this Friday!

Let's all go to the Lobby, and get ourselves a Treat!

2006-12-22T01:43:00.000-05:00

Who doesn't remember that classic Filmack jingle? But who remembers who Filmack was? Or who knew that that particular snipe was animated by Dave Fleischer, of Popeye fame? This post is dedicated to those concession stand items of yesteryear that are gone now-- for better or for worse-- and the circumstances surrounding them. Read on, dear visitor...

Our story begins in 1946. It's the year after the Second World War has ended, and a little invention known as the Television is slowly creeping its way into households. At the same time, it's causing sales to slowly creep out of other public locals, namely movie theaters. And while more and more Americans tuned in, more and more Exhibitors rushed in ways to win audiences back. This process hits its peak in 1953, when movie studios take note, and incorporate new methods of film-making: widescreen, better color, stereophonic sound, and 3-D.

At the same time, food distributors took advantage of the situation by promising salvation through concessions. Reading the ads placed in Exhibitor magazines such as Motion Picture Herald and BoxOffice, one could easily see how a theater owner might think he'd make a cool million in the first week off of concession stands alone. Distributors offered them everything, save for the moon! "600 per cent profits in the first week!" was the slogan for one. Even if it was 600% in the first week, I'm sure it was 50% the next.

Going through these magazines is like stepping into a little time machine made out of paper. They've got everything-- the dirt on the studios, the new releases, what productions were in the works, what you could do with your theater, and most importantly, how the picture was doing across the country.

In my opinion, BoxOffice was the best of these magazines at the time, and clearly they knew how to keep their reader's interest. Each issue was about 80 pages thick, sometimes 100 if you had a special issue with a section known as "The Modern Theatre." It was here that some of the strangest and most fascinating items were advertised, as they were all brand new, practically untested. Furthermore, BoxOffice gave you the pictures you wanted, too-- what the items looked like, how it worked, and those ever-important shots of new theaters that had just been remodeled or built.

I think our first item is possibly the most bizarre of the bunch-- who would possibly dream up such a strange invention as chili in a cone? Well, the Rutherford Food Corp. did, according to this advertisement.

Even more entertaining than the idea of a chili cone a la ice cream is the extravagant claims that its cracker cone will "keep crisp four times longer than it takes even the slowest person to eat it." The salty cracker cone, as the put it, to me seems like it would be of the taco shell variety, probably made of some sort of corn meal that had been deep fried into that shape-- covered in salt, of course.

The chili, which was made by-- surprise!-- the Rutherford Food Corp., measured in at an exact 104 ounces (they're very specific about this), but of course, you have to buy that as well as all of the accouterments to store it. I'm also still confused about the 66% gross, though... I assume they mean that at the prices that they sold them for, the exhibitor got 66% OF the gross. But how did it perform? How many were sold?

One can't help but imagine some Midwestern theater in the middle of nowhere selling these things. No doubt some poor clod bought one to his ultimate dismay, as I can just picture the thing crumbling and spilling chili into his lap. I imagine cleanup was a major issue with this item, not to mention that chili smells quite potent. Sitting next to someone eating these things was probably very unpleasant, with odors and sounds of crunching cracker taking priority over the film at hand.

In doing a little research, I found reference to a Rutherford Food Corp. in Kansas City, MO-- in 1947, that company was not paying overtime for its employees, and a major lawsuit was filed. Apparently, if this was the same company, the chili makers were paying their employees in beans...

The next item is pretty neat. Who doesn't like milkshakes? What server doesn't like speed? And what Exhibitor doesn't like PROFITS? That's what the Port Morris Machine & Tool Co. seem to promise, with a guarantee that their shake machine will produce a 16 oz., 27° F shake in 20 seconds.

It's machinery like this that you don't see in theaters anymore-- sleek, deco, stainless steel body, glass windows to see the shake process at work. I wonder how big the actual thing was... those machines always looked much bigger in the photos than in person. I'd imagine this machine was probably fairly large-- six, or even seven feet tall, but in reality, it was probably three or four.

The item below is still produced, but less common in movie theaters. Jujyfruits (and their miniature counterpart, Jujubes), for a long time were a staple of theater concessions. Why they've disappeared in recent days remains a mystery to me, but the lack of Hersey products in general may have something to do with it. Perhaps it's just a regional occurrence.
The original distributor, Heide, had (has?) been in business since 1869, and Jujyfruits have been around since 1920, when they first hit the market, and eventually, made their way into movie theaters. Little known are the origins of the strange shapes they're molded in, but according to several source, they come in the form of Pineapples, Tomatoes, Raspberries, Grape Bundles, Asparagus, Bananas, and Pea Pods. Strange as this combination is, Jujyfruits had been a winning choice in theaters for years because of their transparent quality that makes choosing which Jujy to eat easier.

I like the subtle slip of TV Guide's logo in the bottom advertisers listing. I'm sure Exhibitors didn't like being reminded of who they were up against, but at the same time must have been getting a kick that a magazine representing their competition was advertising product that they themselves carried.

One of my all-time favorite items while digging around movie theater catalogs was this one, seen on the right. Although I vaguely remember seeing one as a kid, I can't say that I distinctly remember ever seeing it in a theater, and past that, it never had anything but an orange drink being circulated in it. When I saw this in one of the Modern Theater catalogs, I fell in love with it again.

There's something magical looking about it, as if the fountain inside the plexi-glass dome was some sort of microcosmic world of its own. I've seen no less than five or six of these being offered up in the same issue, so it must have been very popular at the time. Even the company that produced it, Majestic Enterprises, Ltd., seemed to live up to their name, in this case.

This particular model is quite nice-- apparently it's illuminated inside with a pale orange light, too, which I imagine had its own special effect. Like the milkshake machine, though, it was much smaller in person than it looked here. Here, I'd imagine it was four or five feet tall, while in reality, it measured a mere 32 inches high. With six gallons of drink pouring through, it, though, I'm sure it was still an impressive sight.

While fried chicken might have been a little much for a simple movie theater, it was a natural for Drive-ins across the country. It was cheap, quick to make, and had a relatively long shelf life. Already an American favorite, making its way to theaters was not much of a stretch of the imagination.

Seen here are two patrons of the Altoona Drive-In, located in Altoona, PA (long torn down), eating some mighty fine southern fried chicken. The pre-cooked chicken (yum!), dubbed Chick-n-Basket, was an invention of Frozen Farm Products, Inc., and was apparently a big seller for them at the time.

In each serving was three pieces of chicken, and judging by the photo, probably some french fries, too. Some distributors reported 100-150 servings (36 servings in a case) sold every night. According to the article (BoxOffice, Oct. 2, 1954), "the suggested price per portion is one dollar, although drive-in prices vary from 80 cents to $1.25." Available from the same company were baskets (seen in photo) that were plastic, and cost $35 per 1,000 baskets.

Also available, according to this article, were display materials and snipes, in both color and sound, and sported a special jingle to the tune of "A Tisket, A Tasket!" I'd love to see one of those!

That brings me back to my initial topic-- Filmack. Established in 1918 by Irving Mack, Filmack was the main distributor of snipes and concession trailers. If there was anything that you needed to announce for your theater, Filmack was the place to go to to when you needed custom snipes.

Filmack sent out their monthly catalog, Inspiration, every month, announcing all of the various snipes they could print up for you, along with the print. To fill in space where they didn't have anything to put in their 10-14 page catalog, corny jokes were inserted without rhyme or reason. On top of that, Mack had his own article, Mackaroons, which was filled with more corny jokes/tidbits of wisdom, such as "it isn't what young girls know that bothers parents, it's how they find out!" One can only imagine a show breaking down, and having the manager stepping up on stage with his own stand-up act lifted entirely from Inspiration. I'm sure that went over well!

In 1953, Filmack hired animator Dave Fleischer, who had finished his tenure at Columbia after leaving he and his brother's animation studio and was at that time working at Universal as a special effects inventor. Their goal was a series of generic cartoon snipes that utilized color and catchy jingles, and could be used in any theater to generate interest in concession stand products.

Printed in Technicolor, a process that became cheaper in bulk quantity, snipes such as "Let's All Go to the Lobby" were a run-away success with Exhibitors as they made going to the lobby an amusing and memorable movie going habit. At $11.25 a snipe, they were not cheap, but they paid for themselves instantly in the increase in concession sales they generated. Seen above was a February of 1954 special-- buy both snipes for the low price of $20!

And here is the two page advertisement, just in time for the 4th of July for the lesser seen, but equally as catchy, trailer, set to the tune of "This is the Way We Wash Our Clothes!" Note the special mention of the Drive-In, which had begun to take off in just a few years previous.

Filmack is still in business (based out of Chicago) and you can still buy 35mm prints of these classic trailers at nominal prices here. You won't be getting Technicolor prints anymore, but their latest batch of low-fade Eastman prints are still quite stunning. In fact, "Let's All Go to the Lobby" was registered by the Library of Congress in 2000 as being "culturally significant," and added it to the National Film Registry. It is, as I know it, the only snipe to have ever been entered as such. Irving Mack is smiling, somewhere.

A First Post

2006-12-19T00:30:00.000-05:00

If you're reading this post for the first time, chances are that I've invited you to this blog, or in browsing it months later, have decided to check back posts.

In any case, I'd like to welcome you to my blog, my own little space on the internet created particularly for my musings. The subjects I will cover in the future will be broad, but will stick primarily to a particular subject-- the movie-going experience. So little has been written about such a vast topic, and indeed it is a favorite of mine to talk about. Whereas it would be easy to bore you to death with my personal details, I'd rather share with you a fascinating piece of history and leave you with a smile on your face.

Continuing articles will contain in-depth information (with sources, when necessary) and rare, sometimes never-before-seen photographs and sound clips. Whether it be a movie review, some back story about a film, the movie palace experience, stories from the projection booth, etc., I promise that every article will be interesting, and either be filled with humorous or captivating anecdotes, as told to me by those who lived it.

Sit back and relax. Grab yourself a bucket of popcorn, perhaps. The tickets don't cost anything here, but you'll be getting just as much fun as those golden Saturday afternoon matinees.