Bring Back Blockbusters ...
What a 1950 Exhibitor Could Request ... and Get
Mutiny Revived for 1957 Dates |
A 1962 One-Sheet for Races Reissue |
Half-Sheet, and Below, a 30X40, for Mutiny's 1957 Bring-Back |
First obstacle: The combo ran over four hours, both pictures unusually long (Mutiny at 132 minutes, Races 111). This meant fewer programs, less audience turnover per day. Also missing was the kind of handling such product needed, and Brandt knew how to apply. You couldn’t just toss these on the board and expect them to move. Had Harry Brandt traveled with the show and supervised each stop, then flow of gravy might have run from the Globe’s boxoffice to each stop thereafter, but Brandt had neither time or inclination to follow MGM’s caravan, being independent, and very independent-minded. He had conceived the notion, now let them run with it. In this case unfortunately, most of runners stumbled, Variety’s key date evaluations going thus: slim, slow, weak, a best report indicating “better than expected” biz. It took skill to move atypical merchandise, and however popular Mutiny and Races had been, they were still from 30’s stock and had to be sold anew to a fresh generation. The scheme could work, did work, four years later when New York’s Holiday Theatre, managed by Mike Rose, paired Little Caesar with Public Enemy to sensational response. That combo had juice to thrive from coast-to-coast. Here then, was proof that not all such ventures were created equal --- for each Caesar/Enemy sock, or She/Last Days Of Pompeii, a 1949 mop-up reported previous at Greenbriar, there were fizzles like Mutiny On The Bounty and A Day At The Races, which however deserving of wide business, just couldn’t rate it, largely because they didn’t have selling acumen like Harry Brandt’s to see them across a finish line.
9 Comments:
What strikes me here is that the two films had no real kinship, aside from the nostalgia implicit in "2 of M-G-M's Biggest Hits". I wonder how many patrons came for one film and tolerated the other, or maybe even stayed for just one -- either title was arguably money's worth on its own. Maybe moviegoers in other markets felt that wanting to see just one of the films was like paying for a steak and only eating half.
The revival pairings that prospered more widely offered a full evening in the same key, with both features of the same genre: here gangsters and fanciful spectacle. You've also covered the success of the vintage Frankenstein and Dracula as a double header, and how the Bond films kept coming back as twofers. With moviegoing becoming more an occasion than a habit, revivals had to deliver an Event targeting a specific audience, not just some good flicks.
The surviving revival houses I know of have taken this to heart. Double features are carefully matched, so the people who come for one are almost definitely staying for the other.
You've rarely offered a clearer look at pure showmanship.
That sure is one wacky double-bill. But to paraphrase Sam Goldwyn, include me in!
I wonder if the Marx Bros. received a cut in their re-issues.
Remember Bugs Bunny doing a great impersonation of Charles Laughton as Captain Bligh?
Dan Mercer recalls a night in 1973 when Greenbriar in college years presented its own Blockbuster Double Feature:
DBenson makes an excellent point. I remember a showing at my college of "The Black Cat" and "Horse Feathers," put on by a intrepid student exhibitor who'd rented the big auditorium on campus. I'd only just discovered "The Black Cat"--the Edgar Ulmer version, that is--courtesy of this fellow, and had quite fallen in love with it for its style and literate script, the wonderful pastiche of its film score, and the splendid performances of Lugosi and Karloff. The auditorium was almost filled before the lights went down and I recognized members of the football team and their dates in attendance, also some members of a fraternity known from broadening the boundaries of merriment through the use of therapeutic drugs. The first off was "The Black Cat," and I was rather afraid that the audience had really come to see The Marx Brothers and would have little patience with a curious horror film from the early 'thirties. I could not have been more wrong. They were seemingly entranced with the film from its opening moments. When Lugosi reached out on the train trip to touch Jacqueline Wells' hair as she slept, while David Manners looked on, there was not a murmur or any laughter. I knew then that it had them, just as it had captivated me. It was thrilling to realize this. If anything, they seemed to be impatient with "Horse Feathers," not finding it all that funny. Was a college football comedy too close to home for the football players? No, I simply think that neither they nor anyone else in the auditorium wanted the reverie they had been lulled into to be disturbed.
I pair a film I want people to see with a film I know people want to see with only one show time and always with the one I want them to see first. Often people would get upset at first but then after having seen the film they would say thank you. That's how I built audiences.
I know I probably related this before, but ...
Back in 1980, when Disney's "The Black Hole" disappointed at the box office, it was paired with a re-release of "Sleeping Beauty" (itself a financial letdown on first release). Special ads heralded the combo as "Two Worlds of Disney Fantasy". A Google search confirms those ads existed and ran. What you'll have to take my word for is that one day the San Francisco Chronicle placed "The Black Hole and Sleeping Beauty" smack amongst the porno movie ads.
Hah!
Post a Comment
<< Home