Manuscript Rejection Notice from 1920s-Era Movie Studio

By John Farrier in Entertainment, Film, History, Society & Culture on Oct 22, 2010 at 4:57 pm

The Essanay Film Manufacturing Company was in business from 1907-1925. It was noted for a series of silent Charlie Chaplin films. Pictured above is a manuscript rejection notice, presumably mailed to writers who contacted the company.

In the comments, make suggestions for disqualifiers that you would like to see on a modern version of this document.

Link via Geekosystem

Previously: Mad Magazine Rejection Letter


Email This Post
Tweet This Post 
Share This Post on Facebook

Tags:


Neat stuff from the NeatoShop:


  1. Pangolin
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Today you’d be rejected if the idea had never been done before. It’s apparently too risky to try new things.

  2. Tigerbitten
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    They need to revive this company–there would be more original movies if there were. Probably better too (shudders at remembrance of Dragonball: Evolution)

  3. Church
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 5:50 pm

    Heinlein apparently took that to heart
    http://io9.com/5048215/robert-heinleins-bizarre-fan-mail-response-lett er

    (Oddly, I did a similar thing in college during summer break.)

  4. Moon
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 7:54 pm

    Your manuscript is returned for the reason below:

    18. It’s just another hack movie based on a comic book.

  5. Moon
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    Your manuscript is returned for the reason below:

    20. The only director who would do this movie is Michael Bay, and we don’t like him.

  6. Moon
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 7:57 pm

    Your manuscript is returned for the reason below:

    21. The Harlem Globetrotters in a remake of Lord of the Rings? Seriously???

  7. Moon
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 8:01 pm

    Your manuscript is returned for the reason below:

    19. While we agree that bacon is delicious, movies require a plot or action.

  8. Frau
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 8:12 pm

    Your manuscript is returned for the reason below:
    22. Scripts based on cartoons from the 80′s never make good movies.

  9. Exxos
    Oct 22nd, 2010 at 10:03 pm

    23. Excessive use of “sparkling.”

    24. Implausible suggestion that a ginger kid could have two or more friends.

    25. Glorifies the use of wind instruments outside their intended use.

  10. Nodelete
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 1:05 am

    23. Written by M. Night Shaylman
    24. Also directed by M. Night Shaylaman
    25. Written by Michael Bay
    26. Film prequel/sequel ruins the expectations that fans have come to love about the original.

  11. A Noun
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 6:33 am

    It’s been done.

    It’s a remake.

    It’s a really bad sequel of a forgettable original.

    Based on the wrong TV show from the 80s.

    Live action version of a comic, cartoon or manga. They always suck.

    Live action version of a game. They suck worse.

    Michael Bay attached.

  12. swissonian
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 6:40 am

    will only be accepted if:

    no CGI

    no romance or love, because it´s cheap filler

    no romantic or good looking vampires

    no actors that encourages anyone to write slash/fanfics

  13. Dena
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 10:57 am

    Your manuscript is returned for the reason below:
    – Sam Worthington

  14. JennBailey
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 11:03 am

    18. Action is not a substitute for plot

    19. Swapping places is not a substitute for plot

    20. Creative dismemberment is not a substitute for plot

  15. RickSch
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 11:54 am

    No connection between the plot and the title, which is based on a forgettable top-40 ballad.

  16. babs
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 12:00 pm

    - Gratiutously filthy use of badgers

  17. alfred fox
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    Sorry but you have died of dysentary.

  18. Slythermint
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 12:21 pm

    At least they GAVE you a reason, back then, haha!

  19. Alexa
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 3:15 pm

    I’ve also seen a Disney letter from the ’30s rejecting an artist because she was a woman.

    Nowadays Pixar lets their female directors get halfway through their own project before firing them.

  20. Matt
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 3:30 pm

    I’m pretty sure that these are the requirements for making a movie these days…

  21. Anestis
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    27. Remake of a Japanese movie and not as good as the original
    28. Remake of an existing Hollywood movie that should be left alone as it’s a classic
    29. A shot for shot remake of Psycho will fail
    30. A series of movies with related themes/characters should be limited to three (adaptations of a book series exempted)
    31. Book adaptations will remain faithful to the original material (Blade Runner exempted)

  22. Robert
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 6:38 pm

    Any movie that uses 3D to boost marketability and theater prices but isn’t actually improved by 3D views should be rejected right away.

  23. Filmteknik
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 9:41 pm

    1333 Argyle St. in Chicago still exists. There is a plaque at the door.

  24. Hugo
    Oct 23rd, 2010 at 11:31 pm

    All of the above.

  25. Scooter
    Oct 25th, 2010 at 10:24 am

    Any publisher at 1333 Arygle St. should only publish Horror.


Keep track of the comments with Comment RSS

Don't Miss: New Stuff | Bestsellers | The Cute Store
                   Funny T-Shirts | Zombie Shop

Need a gift? Get unforgettable gifts for:
Geeks | Pranksters | Kids | Hipsters | Shutterbugs

Lijit Search

Old school? Bookmark us! RSS Feed Twitter Facebook Page