Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1957)

Some Views on Joe Exhibitor's Query: "IS THIS NOW A 2-MONTH BUSINESS?" To the Editor: Joe Exhibitor's real name could be Legion because the complaints he voices are the same as those made by virtually all the exhibitors I hear from. Brave words concerning a glorious future for the business are occasionally uttered by spokesmen for the film companies but most of the company executives seem to be terrorized and ready to abandon ship. It is understandable that they would want to capitalize on the summer months when the drive-ins are at their peak and television is at its lowest ebb. But not«a single company can survive unless its earnings are spread over a twelve months' period, and their leaders know this. They are experimenting with all manner of roadshows, merchandizing, engagements and protracted runs; in some instances, I gather, with considerable success. But what I would like to see is an experiment in the nature of a restoration which would consist in releasing some good pictures during those neglected ten months and supplying them to the theatres on their customary availabilities. I would like to see those pictures given the same advertising and exploitation as the specially handled ones. Last but not least, I would like to see the exhibitors, incited and encouraged by their associations, really extend themselves to sell those pictures to their potential customers. Not until such an experiment has been tried and failed should Joe Exhibitor despair. Let him join in urging the film companies to make the test, not neglecting to pledge his own best efforts to insure its success. A. F. MYERS Allied States Association of Motion Picture Exhibitors * * * * To the Editor: I thoroughly agree with your article "Is This Now A Two-Month Busi ness?" appearing in your June 24th issue. Whatever the cause or reason behind the present grouping of releases for mid-summer and year-end holiday seasons, it must be apparent that continuation of this system can create only a tendency toward further deterioration of this business. The present selectivity of audiences is a direct result of this plan. Furthermore, this plan has created a distinct decrease in the former movie-going habit to the point leading up to the present selection of pictures by the public. Furthermore, it is responsible for a definite decrease in attendance, especially on pictures played between the two peak seasons. There can be no doubt that this system must change in order for this business to prosper. Even the big pictures that are released during these two peak seasons would develop bigger grosses if released at regular, spread-out intervals. As it is — three, four or five big pictures "bump their heads" against one another in seeking the amusement dollar. If released on a regular pattern they would have considerably less opposition for themselves, and consequently would develop more business. Furthermore, these big pictures are needed when the competition is strongest in order to offset that competition, such as the more acceptable TV programs. TOA along with others has been advocating this for a number of months. We still intend to pursue this thinking in the hope that the entire industry will recognize the necessity for an orderly release of good product. The production of more good pictures and perhaps, too, the industry promotion campaign may have a tendency to develop a release pattern of the desired type. With reference to the promotion campaign, exhibition in general and TOA in particular is interested in this campaign involving as its major ef fort a campaign to sell motion picturetheatres as a local institution, and also to sell the general idea of going to the movies for your best entertainment. The individual theatre and the individual distributor can still sell the individual picture as it comes along as in the past. What we want done and what must be done in this campaign is to recreate the desire in the public's mind that they should go to the theatre for relaxation, enjoyment and pleasure — the finest in entertainment. Your article in the June 24th issue in connection with this covers in a broad way the thinking as originated and sponsored by TOA. We believe all segments of the industry must support both these ideas if we are to develop the maximum potential this interest affords. E. G. STELLINGS, President Theatre Owners of America, Inc. * * * * To the Editor: Our comments regarding Joe Exhibitor's letter in Film BULLETIN'S issue of June 24, 1957, would contain the same condemnation against the distributors of motion picture films as does Joe Exhibitor's lament. There is no other business in the world that operates quite similarly to the distribution of motion pictures. The utter disregard for the welfare of their customers is amazing when you consider thev ha\e no other available customer. TV is in no position to pay 110 of the money that comes from Mr. Exhibitor. The short-sighted policy of grasping for money from TV in selling them their old libraries, which on the other hand deprives the distributor of many millions of dollars because of this opposition which materially effects the box office and in turn effects the current film rental, is hard to understand. I doubt whether the distributors will realize (Continued on Ptige 10) Film BULLETIN July 22. 1957 Page ?