Talk:Box Office Poison (magazine article)

Jan 2022 Update
I've spent some times tidying up the references in this article and doing more research into its contents. It appears that an earlier version of it conflated an editorial by Time Magazine about this advert with the original advertisement itself. To be clear: Three contemporary sources state that the advert only ran in The Hollywood Reporter. Brandt is even quoted as saying it costs the association $300 for the ad. He got the publicity he desired, including making front page news in at least one newspaper. There was talk of court action, specifically libel. It caused a significant stir, leading several of the stars mentioned to defend themselves. Someone could improve this article by adding quotes from Brandt and John Mannheimer to show their reasoning in more detail. From the Sydney Morning Herald article:

"John Mannheimer, the executive secretary of the Independent Theatre Owners' Association in New York, declared that the organisation was not attacking the stars personally. These stars, if given the right kind of vehicles, he said, would be the same stars as of old. He added: 'Pictures are being ground out regularly on the same old big scale, under the system of long-term contracts, with stars who eventually wil1 become obsolete, and we have to foot the bill.'"

WikiMane11 (ThunderPeel) (talk) 17:25, 23 January 2022 (UTC)