The Washington times., 1914-10-22
THE BEST
Photoplay Department in
WASHINGTON
Fight for Cleaner
Film GiOen q
Powerful
Boost.

There have been two important
happenings this week in motion pic
tures that must have a decided ef-
feet on those irresponsible producers
who do not care what they produce
20 long as they can find thoughtless
exhibitors to buy their film. the
first of these is the editorial an
nouncement by the Moving Picture
World Of the fact that il has de-
cliued to accept advertising matter
for and refused to review in its
columns two films that ii regards as
highly Objectionable. This boldly
published statement, which is in line
with the many progressive policies of
the same publication. strikes a new
and deeper blow at the improper film
than has ever been struck before and
opers an entirely new field of what
We might call real social service.
Never before, so far as we know,
has a publication refused admission
70 its advertising columns of the an
nouncement of a book or a play or
a story that has features that are
Objectionable to the editor from the
standpoint Of their effect on morals.
There may be isolated instances Of
such happenings, but there have been
none that, we can recall. While a
paper might decline to print the
story. its advertising columns have
usually been permitted to carry ad-
vertising that was paid for.
The Moving Picture World. how
e. &C. Il
into it's crusade against unclean pic
lures and backs up its editorial pro-
test with a most practical demon
stration of its ability to keep all it's
columns clean. For this it should
be commended, and for setting a
precedent for other publications, not
only OF moving picture matter but
Of a more varied character, it is to
be heartily congratulated. The sec
ond important happening is the pub
hcation in the same journal of an
article by the Rev. E. Boudinot Stock
ton. s. T. B., on the subject of such
pictures as he believes are detri-
mental to the morals OF the COM
munity. Father Boudinot is q mo-
ton picture enthusiast He has gwen
hlm than many laymen,. and is an
enthusiastic advocate both Of its use
for entertainment and for educational
purposes. In his article he states:
There is absolutely no excuse pos
sfole for this kind of picture, but it
may be argued with some apparent
plausibility that the vice and drug
and other pictures that are exposes
with a moral lesson" are very differ
ent and should not be classed with
them These latter claim to be pro-
duced and disseminated only for the
purpose OF warning people Of the
grave and serious dangers to their
moral life with which they are sur
rounded and to be intended to help
people to be able to recognize and
escape these dangers. Even SO, do
they do anything more than give US
a knowledge Of the details, most OF
them revolving and disgusting, OF
the cancers and diseases that wreck
and destroy the life of some persons.
Not one OF them teaches us how to
escape them or how to get cured
IL we become q victim to them. All
that they can do is to scare us into
fits and panic over the imminency
and awfulness OF the things to be
avoided and to deprive US Of the
power of sane reasoning and ener-
getac action that Will preserve US
against the evil they expose. You
cannot teach child how to keep
clean by showing him how he can
get dirty, but you can put ideas
into his head and make him want
10 see how dirty he can get without
getting into trobule. You cannot
teach anybody how to live a godly,
sober and righteous life by showing
him the many different WAYS in
which he can become vicious. You
have got to show him what godli-
ness. Righteousness and sobriety
mean and why they will make him
better and happier and are desir-
able. In other words, If you wish
10 teach anybody anything, you do
not do II by teaching him what the
things arc not and how ne can get
them, you do II by showing him
what the things are and how he
can get them. The most you can
do with vice and drug pictures Is
10 drive hysterical and nervous per-
disgust stronger minded and saner
natures.
At the bottom and in the last
analysis, the expose with a moral
lesson" is no whit better or diff
ferent from the frankly immoral
picture. Both deal in vice as a sub
fect and both show you how vice
tries TO make itself attractive.
By four years of hard fighting
ture, the American people have
shown plainly that they have no
sympathy with foreign moral or
rather immoral standards. and that
they want clean, wholesome pictures
that will appeal to a mans better
self and will bring him more in touch
with the good, the true. the beauti-
ful. IN every community. however,
there are always individuals of a
warped nature, poisoned mentality
and scared moral force who not only
delight In foulness and filthiness
themselves, but are also willing for
the sake OF gain to pandcr to the
depraved tastes and baser passions
OF others. even when II involves the
corruption of innocence and the de
struction of all that is pure and
noble and holy. Consequently no
sooner have we begun TO be success
fui in stemming the tide Of frankly
immoral pictures with which some
manufacturers have endeavored to
food the market than We are con-
fronted with the same kind of pic
tures in the guise of moral preach
ers' who proclaim that their mis-
sion is Ito save the innocent by ex-
posing the evils with which they are
surrounded" and the so-called vice
and drug picture raises its snaky
head.
Thanks to the clean-minded manu-
facturers and the national board Of
censor ship. this sort of thing has
been practically. although not alto
gether. eradicated from the ordinary
programs. but one after another,
during the past year. feature films
OF four. five and six rells have been
put upon the market and extensively
advertised processing to teach
Rreat moral lesson by unmasking