Motion Picture Daily (Jan-Mar 1934)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

4 MOTION PICTURE DAILY Tuesda/. March 27, 1934 Seek Reopen Code to Aid Minorities (Continued from page 1) companies. The board has no power of subpoena and it will be up to the individuals involved to determine whether they will appear at the Thursday hearing. Indications were that NRA officials would go to the White House with a demand that the board give some consideration to the data they have accumulated before reporting that the code should be amended. Demanding that Division Administrator Sol A. Rosenblatt take the stand as the first witness this morning, Mason made it evident that the board has no intention of asking the cooperation of the Recovery Administration. Acting on the theory that it was set up to investigate agreements negotiated by the Administration, the board has determined to play a lone hand. Rosenblatt Balks Pointing out that he had not been subpoenaed nor requested to furnish information from his files, Rosenblatt refused to testify unless he could first make a statement explaining his position. Permission to do so was denied him, and he declared he would not respond to questions until he had had an opportunity to confer with Administrator Hugh S. Johnson, although promising the board that his files and information were available to it at any time. Rosenblatt is to be called upon again on Thursday, a day set by Chairman Darrow despite an explanation that the Code Authority was then to meet in New York. Failing to get Rosenblatt on the stand, Mason called Russell Hardy, special assistant to the Attorney General in the anti-trust division of the Department of Justice, who was questioned regarding the film prosecutions of the department and its criticisms of the code submitted to the NRA during negotiation of the agreement. Three cases have been brought by the government, two of which resulted in consent decrees, he said, the third not being disposed of. Chief Causes of Complaint "The principal items of complaint received by the department," he continued, "were refusal on the part of the big producing companies to contract with the complainant for any pictures at all, refusal on the part of the big producing companies to contract with the complainant for a sufficient number of pictures, refusal on the part of the big producing companies to contract with the complainant for the right to have a first exhibition of a picture, refusal by the big producing companies to contract with the complainant for second or subsequent showings of a picture until after the lapse of an unreasonable length of time after exhibition by competitors, and refusal by the big producing companies to contract with the complainant for pictures unless theatre admission prices were raised or maintained at a point fixed by the big producing companies. Other complaints involved refusal to sell pictures ex cept in groups, refusal to sell except tor percentage instead of flat lump sum and overDuying by large competitors." "Assume that the Code Authority is controlled by the big producers and that it permits the conditions to exist now wnich were alleged to exist in that bill (a case brought by the department ) would that, if it were not ior the protecting clause of the National Recovery Act, constitute monopolistic practices?" Mason asked. "Yes," the witness answered. Hardy was followed by Abram F. Myers, who said that no accurate figures were available as to the number of houses, which he placed at about 13,000, but declared that about 4,000 were owned, controlled by or affiliated with producers. Myers went into detail as to the drafting of the code and the part played by the independents, declaring that at one meeting, after lengthy negotiation, Rosenblatt announced that he would present them with the exhibitors' code when they next met. No independent exhibitors participated in the drafting of that code, he declared, and, when asked what happened when the code was handed them, said: "We grabbed for it very eagerly." The producers, meeting in the same building at the time, he added, were not given copies "and apparently had no curiosity on the subject." He said he was "not charging monopolistic practices under the code but complaining that the code is designed to permit monopolies." Need Fresh Product Explaining the position of the exhibitors, Myers declared their most important property right now is adequate supply of fresh product, with public good-will second and actual theatre property third, pointing out that the property was of no value unless product was available. Going into the question of booking, Myers declared no independent exhibitors buy other than in blocks, but that producer-owned theatres did not have to take blocks but could select their pictures. He discussed the right reserved by the producer to withdraw pictures and the cancellation privilege given exhibitors. In most instances, he said, when the exhibitor makes a contract, he does not know what he will get in the way of pictures, adding that the Patman bill now pending in Congress requires synopses of all pictures to be given exhibitors whereas "buying today is largely a pig in a poke." Mason went deeply into the activities of the independent group during negotiation of the code, leading Myers to say that Nathan Burkan was present at the August exhibitor conference as attorney for Loew's and also sat in on some of the producers' conferences. Reviews Indies' Stand The witness explained that upon receipt of the first draft of the code, the representatives of the independent producers and exhibitors formed a temporary coalition and withdrew for the purpose of putting their position on paper "because they felt the situation was very serious and wanted to make a record." The meetings were not suspended because of this, he said, but the written objections were later presented to Rosenblatt. He then explained the mass meeting of independents in Chicago October 24 and the resolutions adopted and related how a committee conferred with Johnson. "We filed another written statement of our objections and grievances and our criticism of the conduct of the deputy administrator and our statement that in our judgment he was absolutely biased and prejudiced against the independent interests," he said, adding that Johnson turned the matter over to Col. R. W. Lea, his executive assistant, and that two days later a statement was issued to the press declaring the charges of bias and prejudice to be unfounded. "But when the code was approved by the President it was accompanied by an executive order which contained some very wholesome safeguards against arbitrary use of the power that was conferred on the Code Authority." "Were the provisions of the executive order adequate to the protection of the independent interests?" Mason asked. "I do not say they were adequate," Myers returned, "but I do say they were very wholesome and very welcome." "After the President signed this executive order was there at a later day an interpretation placed on the order?" he was asked. "Yes, in my opinion it emasculated it." Other Objections Myers was led to outline the objections of the independents to the wage provisions of the code, the forcing of shorts, which, he declared, was not prohibited and which merely restricted the producer to require an exhibitor to take such shorts as the former held would be necessary to round out a program ; the designation of play dates and the control of admissions. The power to control admission prices is not expressed but is necessarily implied in the language of the code, he declared, but prohibiting an exhibitor from lowering his admissions beyond a figure which the distributor stipulates in the contract. "Such a provision may or may not be legal under the general law," he commented. Abolition of block booking, he declared, would be advantageous to all. "I do not think the motion picture industry tries to make a poor picture," he admitted, "but there is not enough ability and genius to go round." The situation, he said, could be cured by an amendment to the anti-trust provisions of the Clayton Act controlling film contracts, as provided in the Patman bill. Exhibitors Testify Desiring to show the effect of producer competition upon independent theatres, Mason put on the stand E. Thornton Kelly, operator of the Grant Lee Theatre at Palisade, N. J., and William Biggio, owner of the Grant Theatre, Steubenville, O., who told how their ability to buy was reduced when producer-owned theatres were built in their areas. Without explaining its relationship to the code, Mason had Kelly outline how he had received protests against the showing of his very first picture from producer theatres in New York which had no connection with the companv making the picture in question. He also explained to the board the theory of protection which placed him some 10 weeks or more behind New York first showings. Biggio told how he was first able to get all the product he needed and then _ found himself more and more restricted. Hays Asserts Films Helped To End Slump (Continued from page 1) and kindly humor in its entertain ment. "Historians of the future will no ignore the interesting and significan fact," he continued, "that the movie, literally laughed the big bad wolf o depression out of the public mine through the protagonism of 'Thr& Little Pigs.' " Continuing in this optimistic veii: Hays said theatre attendance ha> gained with increased industrial activity and theatres had reopened. H described stars as the "direct sales men" of the industry and "industr as well as company assets." Wit this in mind he commended taler loaning strongly. Discussing the industry's "goal, he said: "Better pictures are th answer to every unfair charge levele against the screen. They are the ir dustry's bulwark against unfair c confiscatory legislative proposal Screen entertainment is the screen best advocate; it is also proof ur deniable of every error of judgmer or taste that the industry makes. An no right-minded member of the ir dustry, producer, distributor or e> hibitor, can remain content until sue; mistakes are reduced to the minimuil and the individuals who continue 1 make them find no room in the indu try. Can't Risk Public Faith "We cannot afford to jeopardi; public faith in our sincere and coi tinued efforts constantly to impro1 the standard of film entertainmet In that we know we are succeedin Motion pictures are getting better i the time." On the subject of picture improv ment he said the increasing numb of pictures based on literary classi and historical figures was a "signi cant phase of the industry's upwa progress." He also predicted mu: cals would "have a new inning" ai that simple stories dealing with ever day life would "revive in popularity i As a result of the establishment the Advertising Advisory Council, t report read, "advertising and publici is not only cleaner and in better ta: than heretofore, but is better advert ing as well. It has lost nothing frc' the standpoint of sales appeal ; on t j contrary, through the elimination ' objectionable features, it now attra* many persons whom it formerly i pelled." Officers were returned to their c, posts for the next year. Will Hays is president; Carl E. Millik ! secretary ; Frederick L. Herron, tre; urer, and George Borthwick, assi ant secretary and treasurer. Directors are : Hal E. Roach, Ce B. De Mille, Jesse L. Lasky, 5 Lesser, David Sarnoff, Merlin Aylesworth, Robert H. Cochra Jack Cohn, Earl W. Hammons, V I H. Hays, Frederick L. Herron, B. I Kahane, Sidney R. Kent, Joseph Schenck, Nicholas M. Schenck, Alb I L. and Harry M. Warner and Ado' I Zukor. Roach replaced Al Christie.