Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-04-21
Flashes From the Screen
By c. E. Nelson.

Ol1O0lSA 44oNV OAAS R0"NA w
a motion picture before it is
shown than why a similar ofiicial
should nave the authority TO
come into the Office OF The
Evening Star and put the dead
ening blight of his autocratic
(but conceivably not omniScient)
power on your editorials, news
and advertisements before you
would have the right to print your
editions and deliver the paper to
Washington and out-of-town sub
scribers.
"All this is written in the best
Of good feeling and in the sincere
belief that the same people who
now wish to censor motion pic
lures would be equally hot on the
heels of the press If the older
medium had not fortunately been
in existence when the American
Constitution was written. (Signed)
Carl E. Milliken."
THIS logical review of the situa-
= ton from the producers and
distributors standpoint requires
serious attention. The whole prob
lem has been intensified and
given new importance by the
synchronization of sound with
visibility. When the sound pic
ture leaped into major status in
motion picture presentation, there
was estimated to be a weekly
world audience for the screen ag-
gregating 250,000,000 persons, 120,-
O0O, 900 Of them within the United
States. There are 10000 motion
picture theaters in this country,
and 81 miles of new film passes to
the screen each week. This shows
the great Importance OF the in
dustry as an entertainment me-
dunn.
One of the pieces of machinery
set up by the motion picture in
duStry itself has been a studio
relations committee in Hollywood.
There, a representative of the
Hays Office has available for the
use of all studios records Of all
types of reaction to dncluding
commentator and criticism of
former pictures. Censorship cuts
are of little or no value in this
work, for the reason that four out
Of five deletions are found to
represent the whimS of one board
only. This means that in four
out of five instances, a scene or
sequence that is ordered taken
out in one State will be passed as
clean and proper in the other
States. Then, It has been found
that many considerations seem to
motivate censor cuts. Producers
have often seen carefully con-
sidered pictures butchered.
According to the Hays organiZa-
ton, there is quiet and steady
activity in the motion picture in
dustry for the protection of its
patronS-the voluntary refusal to
reproduce as pictures those plays
or novels which depended for
their success either on Salacious
content or salaciouS advertising
If a play or book seems unsuitable
for the screen audience, the
author is given an opportunity to
take out those features which
seem unsuitable, revise his plot
and get paid for the result. The
name of the play is changed. AS
an illustration of this, Michael
Arlen's Green Hat" was found
unsuitable in its original form for
a motion picture. The story was
changed and a new title attached
There is a tendency among the
producers to attach flash" titles
to their pictures. This is a bit of
showmanship which comes down
to us from the days Of P. T.
Barnum. There is an idea, and
it is probably a mistaken idea,
among many movie producers that
naughty titles for simple, whole
some motion pictures is a smart
venture-that flash" titles drew
crowds and that flash" advertis-
ing keeps the box Office girl busy.
At this particular point, the Hays
organization can, and should, ex-
ercise it's powers. A full-page adj
vertisement showing cocktail
party, with no cocktail party in
the motion picture, might come
under the heading of misleading
advertising at least to the mind
Of the photoplay patron. In the
same way, when a producer
changes the title of a story from
Harvest Moon" to "Wiggling
Shoulders" the attention Of the
censorship advocate is attracted
to the picture-and the photoplay
patron fails to see a single wig
Cling shoulder. Flash" titles and
clash" advertising have little
place in a sensible plan to defeat
the proponents Of Federal censor
chin