1927: The Beginning of the End?

[Gary Johnson]

I was perusing through David Kalat's blog over at TCM and on one post he was attempting to dismantle the accepted effects that sound had on Keaton's career. To do this he cites box office revenues for the major clowns during the final years of silents.
To wit; Keaton's THE GENERAL underperformed at the box office. (Sit down David P. - I said underperformed, not 'bombed')
Lloyd's THE KID BROTHER underperformed at the box office.
We are all quite aware that Langdon's THREE'S A CROWD underperformed at the box office but even the following year
Chaplin's THE CIRCUS underperformed at the box office.

None of this is exactly breaking news. When these films are discussed individually most people are aware of how successful they were but to see them listed together like this within a year of each other makes one scratch our heads and surmise that the general movie-going public was beginning to turn their backs on the master comedians - and at a time when they were doing some of their best work. To dig this grave even deeper all of their follow up films in '28 also underperformed.....(and in some cases, even worse,) As far as I can tell only Laurel & Hardy were gathering B.O. momentum during the time before sound took over and they were only making shorts. What were the feature film comedies that people were flocking to? Those starring Beery & Hatton?

[Michael J Hayde]

What were the feature film comedies that people were flocking to? Those starring Beery & Hatton?

Definitely not!

Unfortunately, I don't have the exact date for this 1928 column in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle... but their movie critic Martin Dickstein had this news to report:

"While we're in the bragging mood, we can't resist the temptation to remind the members of this parish that not so long ago they were warned of the impending demise of the movie comedy. Your correspondent did not imply, of course, that Harold Lloyd, Buster Keaton and Harry Langdon were going to dispose of their gag men and devote the balance of their careers to the serious interpretation of Shakespeare. It was intimated, simply, that filmgoers were growing weary of the animated comic strips of which the screen had been experiencing a veritable deluge. After the success of "Underworld," the movie trend began to turn unmistakably in the direction of the so-called crook drama. Recent releases of the larger companies have indicated that the mode in movie entertainment is swinging definitely back to the old-fashioned melodrama.

"Now comes the impressive announcement from Hollywood that the Paramount comapny will release not more than 15 feature comedies among its 70 productions scheduled for next season. This means that this organization will distribute less than 50 percent of the number of comedies that it has distributed during each of the past two years.

"The same source of information discloses that there has been an over-production of comedies by practically all companies in the field. Consequently, and this can hardly be a cause for tears, the comedy team (sic) of W.C. Fields-Chester Conklin and Wallace Beery-Raymond Hatton are about to be split up, leaving each of these comics, henceforth to go his own, and probably most profitable, way. The sobering effect of all this upon the unsuspecting movie fan is dreadful to contemplate. It is even possible now that weeks will go by without the screens giving up a single glimpse of Wallace Beery losing his trousers or even Charlie Murray engaged in the screamingly funny business of - losing his trousers."

Michael

[Gary Johnson]

Wow, Michael!
I was joking about the Beery reference and then you go and find an article written back then
in which the writer is even more sarcastic concerning the comic styling of Mr. Beery.

[Chris Snowden]

Wow, Michael!
I was joking about the Beery reference and then you go and find an article written back then
in which the writer is even more sarcastic concerning the comic styling of Mr. Beery.

Gary, I think you were closer to the mark than you realized.

Exhibitors Herald did an annual survey, asking all its subscribers to name the ten films that performed the best for them over the previous twelve months. (The poll was always presented as the top "money-making" films, so the exhibitors could decide for themselves whether that meant the films that drew the most customers, or the films that made them the highest profit.)

I thought I had the results for the 1927 poll, but I guess I don't... can't find 'em, anyway... but I do have the results for the year ending November 15, 1926. Remember that most theaters were in small or medium-sized towns, where tastes were a little different than those of the major urban areas, so in this survey, the results from a 200-seat neighborhood house carry as much weight as the results from a 4000-seat picture palace.

The comedy that drew the most votes was The Cohens and the Kellys, and that was also the second-highest score for any film. Right behind it in third place was the Beery-Hatton comedy Behind the Front.

The highest-ranking comedy of the Chaplin/Keaton/Lloyd tradition was The Freshman in 12th place, followed closely by For Heaven's Sake in 13th.

(Source: Exhibitors Herald, December 25, 1926)

[Rob Farr]

Well, if I were an exhibitor with a family to feed, and I had to rent Gold Rush for $500 only to see it earn $475, I'd call it a flop. But if I rented Behind the Front for $100 and it earned $200, I'd call it a hit. But as a savvy businessman, I'd still rent the loss leaders if only to prevent my audience from getting in the habit of driving to the bigger towns to see the "good" movies.