Motion Picture Herald (Nov-Dec 1934)

MOTION PICTURE HERALD November 10, 1934 THE CODE QUESTION BOX By JAMES P. CUNNINGHAM NO. 86— CUT RATES IN GROUPS FOR THEATRE PARTIES QUESTION — Occasionally we have requests for reduced admission prices for theatre parties of, say 15 to 30 people. Our inatinee prices are 20 cents for adults. Would it be a violation of the code to make about a 15-cent rate for a theatre pc^rty of 15, 20 or 25 persons, in no instance cutting under the price set in the contractf— SOUTH CAROLINA. ANSWER — -The proposal to make a 15-cent rate — when the regular adult admission is 20 cents — for a theatre party of 15, 20 or 25 people, would not be a violation of the motion picture code if it did not prove to be unfair competition to a competing theatre. By this is meant that such a practice would be unfair to a competing theatre, and would be prohibited by the code, if the exhibitor widely publicized and ballyhooed the fact that he would grant a special wholesale cut-rate for special theatre parties. Another probable form of unfair competition would be for the exhibitor otherwise to solicit the patronage of groups with a cutrate admission as a lure. However, in no case must the admission even to the group be less than the minimum admission specified in the contract. The clause in the motion picture code ( Part 3, Section 1, Article V-E), says: "No exhibitor shall lower the admission prices publicly announced or advertised for his theatre by giving rebates . . . which . . . are unfair to competing exhibitors. . . ." V V V No. 87— CONTRACT MAHERS WHICH DO NOT COME UNDER CODE QUESTION — Perhaps this is not a code question, as tlie contract was signed before the code became effective, but not knowing who to ask about the problem I am writing to you. In July, 1933, / signed a contract for 37 pictures, which contract was accepted on July 31, 1933, and was to go into force October, 1933. There are four allocations in this contract, namely, $25, $15, $12.50 and $10. In this contract there is a clause which reads: "The exhibitor jyay reject not exceeding 15 feature pictures, such rejections to come from the lowest allocated licensee fees only, and at a rate not to exceed five pictures every four months. Acceptances or rejections by the exhibitor must be given within 14 days from the notice of availability." To date I have rejected only three pictures and have 12 more to play. The company with which I am under contract Jias not released enough pictures for me to take advantage of the claiise quoted above. The following questions arise: (1) Since the year is up. may I reject the entire 12 pictures "en bloc"? If so, does that complete my contract, though I have not played the 37 pictures? By taking advantage of rejecting 12 pictures I will have disposed of all features released to date on the 1933-34 contract. (2) A feature was booked for February 21 and 22 and was confirmed to me at $10, the lozvest allocated class. A few days before I ivas to play same a second invoice came through raising it to $12.50. As I had advertised this feature I paid the extra $2.50. Does this constitute a breach of contract? (3) / never signed the code. Am I subject to the rules and regulations of the various code boards?— IOWA. ANSWER — Questions number one and two are purely contractual matters that do not have any bearing on the motion picture code. They are subjects of contract interpretation and are matters requiring adjustment by arbitration, if arbitration is provided for in the contract, or else they are matters to be litigated in the courts, if the exhibitor believes that the distributor is in violation of the contract. Again, none of the problems mentioned in the first two questions has any bearing on the code. Regarding question number three : All exhibitors are bound to abide by the code, and, regardless of whether or not they signed the code they are subject to any rulings of the local code boards. V V V NO. 88— SUBSTITUTIONS UNDER THE CODE QUESTION — Do we have to take substitutions of star pictures zt/hich we contracted for, even though such substituted pictures are released before the end of the contract year? Or, if we play these substitutions are we entitled to eliminate a like number of the other pictures if we wish? We have contracted for all of this company's pictures. ANSWER — The motion picture code says (Part 3-A, Article V-D) : "No distributor shall substitute for any feature motion picture described in the contract as that of a named star or stars . . . one of any other star or stars . . ." This means that the exhibitor is under no obligation to accept any substitute picture for a star picture, which star picture is specified as such in the contract as that of a particular star or stars. However, the question next arises as to what constitutes a star picture or who is a star and who isn't. A player may be named in the contract, not as a star, but merely for the purpose of identifying a particular picture. The Local Grievance Board would have to determine whether the specific case involves an actual star substitution where there is any doubt over the status of the player. The code does give distributors the right to substitute named players for other players when such players are not stars, and also to make changes in the cast, when such changes do not involve a star or stars. However, if a definite star picture which was named as such on the contract is not delivered and another picture is delivered in its place with another star, then the exhibitor is not obliged to accept the substitution. But, if the exhibitor does accept the substitution and plays it, the matter ends there. Heywood-Wakefield Cuts Loss HeywoodWakefield Company and subsidiaries has reported net loss, after all charges, of $46,435 for the nine months ended September 30. The figure compares with a loss of $533,215 for the equivalent period in 1933. Charles Hawthorne Dies Charles Evans Hawthorne, 62, Paramount attorney handling real estate matters, died last week at his home in New Rochelle, N. Y., of pneumonia. A sister, Mrs. Adelaide H. Woodin, survives him. Krimsky Rapf Assistant John Krimsky, New York theatrical producer, has been placed under contract as assistant to Harry Rapf, executive producer for MGM. Mr. Krimsky is a member of the stage producing firm of Krimsky and Cochran. Immediate reply is being made direct to the many letters which Motion Picture Herald is receiving from exhibitors and distributors in the field, and from others, in which various questions are asked concerning certain doubtful phases of the Motion Picture Code. In addition, such code questions and the answers submitted are published as a regular service. For obvious reasons, the letters will appear anonymously. However, the originals will remain on file. Answers to questions about the Code are submitted only after consultation with authorities familiar with the technicalities of the document. This service Is available to everyone. Send questions to the Code Editor, Motion Picture Herald, 1790 Broadway, New York City. Final Report Made in Picture Epics Bankruptcy Irving Trust Company, trustee in the bankruptcy of Talking Picture Epics, Inc., of New York, last week filed its final report and accounting with Oscar W. Ehrhorn, referee in the case. The report listed gross receipts of $8,779.33 and disbursements of $2,579.90, leaving a balance on hand of $6,199.43. A final meeting of creditors was held in the referee's office last week for final disposition of the matter. Sennett Loses Suit Mack Sennett last week lost his $35,000 suit against Myrtle Mack for injuries he suffered in the motor crash in which her husband, Charles E. Mack, was killed in Arizona in January of this year. Sylvia Froos With Educational Sylvia Froos, radio star, has signed a contract to make a series of short subjects for Educational. Production will be in New York. She is now making "The Girl from Paradise." Kahn Forms Kameo Pictures Henry W. Kahn, formerly Fox managing director in Central Europe, has formed the Kameo Pictures Corporation, with offices in New York, for world distribution of American and foreign product. The company will finance production. Wilmington Without Vaudeville The Aldine, StanleyWarner first run downtown theatre in Wilmington, Del., has discarded vaudeville. The action leaves the city without a theatre playing vaudeville. George Kann with Pioneer George Kann, former MGM unit manager, has joined Pioneer Productions on the Coast as business production manager. Named Radio City Producer Vincente Minnelli, art director at the Radio City Music Hall, last week took over his new duties as a stage producer.