Motion Picture Daily (Jan-Mar 1934)

MOTION. PICTURE DAILY 6 Contend Code Fails to End Malpractices (.Continued from page 1) was broken but once, when Chairman Clarence Darrow clashed with Alida C. Bowler of the Children's Bureau of the Department of Labor, on the question of censorship, raised indirectly by her denunciation of block booking as making it impossible for exhibitors to show pictures suitable for children on those days when youngsters make up a large part of their audiences. As the hearing came to a close tonight, Mason announced the Code Authority members were expected to reach Washington about 2 o'clock Monday afternoon and that, after conferring with them, he would probably ask for an immediate hearing, at which they would be questioned regarding alleged producer domination of Campi. At the same time, a number of company sales managers are expected to be grilled over interlocking contracts. Yamins Report as Testimony At the opening of the session this morning, Mason introduced in evidence the testimony submitted to the Senate Interstate Commerce Committee in 1928 on the Brookhart Bill and the minority report of Nathan Yamins submitted some time ago on the question of membership on the local boards. The first witness to testify was Harry Brandt of New York, President of the I.T.O.A., called for the purpose of showing that at one of the informal conferences on the code when Jacob Schechter, attorney for the Federation of the M. P. Industry, began to take notes, Deputy Administrator Rosenblatt informed him that unless he quit the meeting would be ended. How he walked from floor to floor in the Film Center Building in New York in a fruitless attempt to buy pictures for his Leonia (N. J.) Theatre was related by Julius Charnow of New York. Charnow began on the 12th floor and walked down until he reached United Artists, every exchange refusing to sell him, according to his testimony. 'And what did you do then?" Mason asked at the end of his recital. "I went home," the witness replied. "Have you noticed any improvement since you began to operate under the code?" he was asked. "None whatever." Reports Forcing of Shorts His difficulties began, Charnow said, when Fox turned back his house, which he had leased, and he attempted to get pictures in competition with other affiliated theatres. Forcing of shorts after the code became effective was reported by Irvin P. Gerber of New York, owner of three houses, who testified he now is tied up for 976 shorts, or two and onehalf years' supply for his three changes a week programs at his Eagle Theatre. When he went to Paramount for features, he said, "Paramount did not want to sell me their features on account of not buying their shorts and up to this day I have not got a play from Paramount." Only about six of the members of the T.O.C.C. of New York are inde pendents, it was asserted by Leo Brecher of New Rochelle, formerly a member. The I.T.O.A., with which he is now associated, has about 200 members operating 350 houses, he said. Overbuying by the Baker Theatre made it impossible to secure product for the Dover (N. J.) Playhouse, it was testified by Edward Frieberger. "In the past two or three years," he declared, "Business has become almost unbearable because of the restrictions imposed by the 'Big Eight'. Conditions are worse under the code because of the added burden of increased costs and the decrease in audience. From the standpoint of the film situation it seems that the code has given a certain amount of credibility to the buying of pictures under block booking. "We have striven as independents to overcome the block booking plan. We did not succeed in overcoming it in the code. On the question of shorts the code has a definite provision that I have to buy a certain percentage of shorts, based on the number of pictures I play during the year ; the code tells me that when I buy Metro pictures I must also buy a certain percentage of their shorts. In that way I am worse off than" I was prior to the code, when we bought shorts from any company we wanted." Percentages Discussed Bringing before the Board the selling on percentage, Mason called Bernard S. Barr of Brooklyn, who introduced a chart analyzing operations with 38 percentage pictures shown over a period of a year. Selecting one, "No Man of Her Own," Barr stated this called for a 25 per cent guarantee, which, on an intake of $240.70, with a second feature for a double feature program, made his film cost $145. The average percentage for the programs carrying the 38 features was 50 per cent, he said. Barr told the Board that under the code the payroll in his three houses has increased 24, 19 and 18 per cent, respectively, while producer-owned competitors have had increases of six to nine per cent. A missent bill, intended for an affiliate competitor, showed Albert Cooper that he had paid $40 for the last run of "The Bowery" for his Long Island City Idle House, while his competitor got the same picture for first run for $25, he testified. This was one of several instances reported during the day where independents said they found what the producer houses were paying through carelessness in mailing and affidavits were promised in support. Shut Out, He Says It cost Nicholas Palley something like $470,000 to put up and equip his Scarsdale theatre only to find he could not get product, according to his story. Why did you build a house when you knew this situation existed?" Board Member Sinclair asked. "I had so much money I didn't know what to do with it," Palley replied. The independent theatre in most cases is a better house and represents a greater investment than its "Big Eight" competitor, it was asserted by Brandt, recalled to the stand. Referring to a number of court suits, which, he said, the independents won, Brandt declared that the code threw all the decisions "out of the window." "The independent cannot live if he makes a deal with the 'Big Eight' and he cannot live under the conditions imposed by the 'Big Eight.' " he said. At the same time, he added, "the independent theatre owner cannot live on independent production." Production costs of some of the big producers are high, he explained, because of their "high executive salary costs," while other companies which keep executive salaries down can produce for less. "The independent theatre owners of the United States looked upon the code as a life saver," he said in discussing present conditions. "We felt that with the promulgation of the NRA and the setting forth of the principles of the NRA by the President, at least we were going to have a chance to do business on some sort of equal footing. Instead, we find ourselves so much further down in the rate of our business that there are hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of employes in jeopardy and a monopoly set up that you will never break through." In no instance, he asserted, have the independents been permitted to participate in the selection of the local boards. Practically all of the trade publications of the industry depend for their existence on the advertising they get from the Hays office, he charged. "I'm afraid that there will be wholesale closings this summer, and there are considerable already," he concluded. Calls Code No Help Asked why, with the tremendous majority of theatres, the independents have not gotten together to produce their own pictures, Brandt pointed out the average exhibitor is not a financier or promoter. "The only thing the independent exhibitor ever promotes is a mortgage for his theatre," he said. "The mortgage and title companies should be at this hearing protecting the independent because they do not know how near they are to owning a lot of theatres." Asked by Chairman Darrow what the effect of the code has been, the witness declared that, as written today, it "has made our condition very much worse. Things look so black for the independent exhibitor I am frank to admit I do not know what the outcome is going to be unless there is drastic revision of the code." "The code," he said, "was made by Mr. Sol Rosenblatt who, it appears to us, was srettinp; all his advice from Mr. Charles O'Reilly, president of Theatre Owners' Chamber of Commerce, who today is doing most of his business with the 'Big Eight' and gets most of the dues for his association from the 'Big Eight.' " Sees Child Needs Ignored Outlining the efforts of the various organizations with which she cooperates as director of the delinquency unit of the Children's Bureau to secure better pictures for children, Miss Bowler expressed great disappointment with the code's failure to give the independent exhibitor a "fifty-fifty selection of pictures" so that he could buv pictures which were good for children. "Can vou state what is good for children and what is bad for them ?" Darrow asked. "How about leaving them alone? Don't you think you are speculating a good deal to sav what kind of shows they should see?" "Don't you think it is better for them to go to the wrong movie and even see block booked pictures instead of keeping them away?" he con Friday, March 30, 1934 Things Worse Under Pact, Indies Hold tinued. "Do you think block booked pictures are any worse than the others ?" Dating is the most vicious of all the practices pursued by the distributors, is the view of Louis F. Blumenthal of Yonkers, chairman of the board of the New York I.T.O.A. "Under the code they semi-legalized the demand of distributors for the right to insist on preferred playing time," he declared. "Previous to the code we could say whether we wanted to or not." "I attempted to help draft the code but my help was discarded," Milton C. Weisman of New York, attorney for the I.T.O.A., told the Board. "I pointed out that the monopoly of the so-called 'Big Eight' was perpetuated and the importance of its being broken down." He pointed out that the fact that the Code Authority was constituted eight to two against the independent exhibitor and asserted that "there was in this code something that was utterly reprehensible — it set up a dynasty" through the provisions for the appointment of alternates, so that "the 'Big Eight' could continue forever in control of the industry." Weisman Hits Rosenblatt "I also pointed out that, evidently not satisfied with the small representation of the independent exhibitor, by another provision it went one step further and said that this code committee can from itself appoint subcommittees which can do anything that the Code Authority can do," he asserted. "I received a direct promise from Mr. Rosenblatt, which has not been fulfilled, that in the event of a controversial issue between the various branches of the industry the committee should be evenly balanced. "We independent exhibitors begged of Mr. Rosenblatt that in the so-called 'poor man's court,' the local boards, we should have some word in the designation of those people to whom we look to protect our interests. Up to the present time every recommendation of ours has been wholly disregarded." For the purpose of showing that the complaints are not confined to the New York territory. Mason called H. A. Cole of Dallas, president of Allied States of Texas ; R. C. Glass of Beaumont, Tex. ; H. M. Ritchey of Detroit, and Fred J. Herrington of Pittsburgh, to discuss protection and overbuying in those areas. Budget and Extras Up for Parley Today Two code committees will meet today. One is to work on the budget for maintaining the authority and the other is the one dealing with the Hollywood extra situation. S. R. Kent and J. Robert Rubin are working together on the extra matter and today will pass on recommendations sent in by the Hollywood group. Fred Schussler, casting director of Radio, has replaced B. B. Kahane on the coast extra standing • committee. Kahane resigned because of business.