“If the ad. story can be told in less than one thousand feet, so much the better. I notice some commercial producers offer to release several subjects by different advertisers on the same reel. I know in the case of press advertising that it is a serious mistake to cram as many words as possible into a small, displayed announcement, but in film publicity the reverse is the case.
“The more material you compress into a film the snappier it will be,” commented Mr. Earle, “though clearness should not be overlooked. The bugbear in the motion-picture industry to-day is padding, and I should be sorry to see national advertisers fall for it. A film may occupy the screen longer, but it will certainly not impress spectators any the more.
“The big advertisement has its place in filmdom if the story succeeds in maintaining the interest from beginning to end, but you must remember that a whole page magazine ad. can be read inside of two minutes, while a feature, its motion-picture counterpart, demands at least an hour of a fan’s time.
“But there is no room for the big feature in the regular motion-picture theater. If I am not mistaken, there will spring up a chain of photoplay theaters in the large cities to which the public will be admitted free. At these ‘billboard stations’ short, regular photoplays will be sandwiched in between the ad. films so as to attract the folks inside.”
Mr. Earle raises some interesting points, which deserve the consideration of every national advertiser.
XXIV.
ADVERTISING FILM CIRCULATION
Motion-picture advertising has presented its crop of new problems, and probably none so involved as circulation. Let us, first of all, compare the film with printer’s ink. To my mind, a motion picture is like a press agent’s story syndicated to a chain of newspapers throughout the country, yet it is different in some respects. A write-up may be released for simultaneous circulation and published in several thousand newspapers on the same day, but this stunt would not be practical in the case of a motion picture.
The regular photoplay producers have specified release dates for their productions, and although several thousand exhibitors may book the same production, their dates will be spread over a period of about six months. Each print supplied by the film manufacturer costs the exchange at least $100. The leading theaters are in a position to pay the high rental demanded for first run, but the exchange has to keep that print working overtime in order to make a profit, so it is hired out to other exhibitors at proportionately reduced rates.
Now, suppose you have a one-reel industrial film produced. The negative, we will say, costs $500, but for every print you need the charge is $100. Now, if you are going to have your film shown at every theater simultaneously, it means that you will have to supply one print for each theater. As the picture will only be retained for a day or so, it is extremely doubtful whether the expense will be justified, so it is best to utilize only one print in each territory. A film does not generally begin to show signs of wear and tear until after about six months’ constant use, and, if we allow one day for each theater, each copy of the picture will be shown in about 156 theaters. Allowing an average audience of one thousand at each of the two evening performances, the film will have been seen by 312,000 people. There are more in these than appear on the surface, for, although a publication may guarantee such a circulation, you have to allow for those readers who skip all advertisements. In the motion-picture theater this can not be done, as only one thing is shown on the screen at a time, and in the darkened hall a spectator can not turn his attention elsewhere.
Another thing which must be taken into consideration is the fact that the one-reel film occupies the screen for eighteen minutes, which is several times greater than the time a reader devotes to a press advertisement.