Showmen's Trade Review (Oct-Dec 1949)

SHOWMEN'S TRADE REVIEW, October 1, 1949 V 13 neighborhood houses. (Any neighborhood owner admits a substantial portion of his weekly revenue as being derived from the above source.) In practically all large centers there exist clearly defined competitive zones in which two or more theatres compete for patronage. The extension of run in such zones by one house would greatly diminish the potential of a picture in all other houses. This is important because it is reasonable to assume that the owner of the neighborhood exploitation house will secure the best possible pictures obtainable. If other houses are forced to adopt a similar policy as to lesser pictures, the effect on those unable to pay the rentals would be pretty close to disastrous.. The crucial problem underlying acceptance of this alternative is "Who gets these top pictures and for what length of run?" The fight for product would become desperate because it would be a battle for survival. Somebody would have to qualify to get the top pictures and distributor revenue is certain to mount in such a competitive struggle, whether resulting from competitive negotiation or competitive bidding. Second Alternatiye If the method of day-and-date playing arrangements in several neighborhood houses, stragetically located were adopted it is hardly conceivable that, in large centers, functions 1, 2, 3 and 5 can be performed. The foregoing comment on exploitation in a single house would apply with greater force and the question "Who gets the run?" become more acute. To say that this encourages competition is fallacious because the competitive struggle between such houses is the struggle for product and not the direct struggle for the customer's dollar. Until the industry produces enough good pictures to assure all competitive houses equalization of product, in kind and number, the struggle will go on with ever increasing intensity. Third Alternatiye First-run in a downtown house, constantly used as a "show case," on a day-and-date basis with one or more neighborhood houses, clearly performs all of the functions specified except (6), an adverse effect due to breaking of the institutional habit would eventually be obviated. In order to fulfill all other functions it must be assumed that all exhibitors involved advertise and exploit the attraction. However at least two effects — aside from the effect on the large investment in the downtown house, which is being ignored in this argument — might well counter^balance some apparent advantages of this method. First, it would divide the patronage flowing to a single house between two or more houses and deprive the public of a variety of available motion picture entertainment. If all pictures, good and bad, were thus exploited the effect on the neighborhood houses of poor quality product would be marked and more dangerous than the effect of such product under present policies of frequent change. Second, it is hardly conceivable that any exhibitor, whose house is selected as a first-run, exploitation unit, would be willing to pay top rentals for even the best pictures without protection of clearance to insure his investment against a competitor paying and charging less in rentals and admissions. The ban on fixing admission prices by contract emphasizes this premise of reasoning. Fourth Alternatiye The argument is frequently advanced that a move-over from a downtown first-run to another downtown house does not effect the revenue of the first-run engagement. This is probably true under current practice but what would happen if the move-over house were owned by a different operator without restrictions on his advertising in advance or the admission price c'harged ? This question is also important in considering the prospect of move-over to a neighborhood theatre. Any aggressive exhibitor would, if given any choice, avoid opening such a picture "cold." More than likely he would design exploitation calculated to draw his normal patronage plus whatever he could entice from the downtown theatre. The other effects under this plan, such as those previously mentioned as stemming from extended runs or higher prices or both and the difficulties as to choice of the move-over unit are as acute here as in the other alternatives. A very cogent argument could be advanced that if clearance is eliminated between downtown and first neighborhood run it should also be eliminated between first neighborhood and all subsequent neighborhood runs. That last goes further than the Supreme Court and the Trial Court were willing to go in the Paramount case. In both decisions reasonable clearance was concluded as necessary to protect an exhibitor in the enjoyment of what he buys. Put another way, the Court states it is to protect the license fees paid by the prior run. Under any or all of these alternatives there Battleground {Continued from Page 10) and courage indomitable. As played by Van Johnson, John Hodiak, Ricardo Montalban, George Murphy, Guy Anderson, Bruce Cowling, Jerome Courtland, Douglas Fowley, James Whitmore, Don Taylor, Richard Jaeckel and Brett King, this motley assortment of Americans gets inside of you and stays there. As performances go, these are all sincere and masterly, but to each individual spectator there will be one or two who stand out from the rest. In all likelihood they will be James Whitmore as the laconic, tobaccochewing Kinnie — a truly fine characterization, and Douglas Fowley as "wise guy" "Kipp" Kippton whose clicking dental plates will probably become celebrated in screen history. But whomever one chooses, there is the stamp of excellence on the portrayal of every individual player. Undoubtedly much of the credit — perhaps most of it — for the quality of performances is due to the splendid direction of William A. Wellman, who has been responsible for some of the screen's better entertainments, but none more memorable and impressive than "Battleground." It is a picture that will thrill men and women alike. Little wonder that MGM is putting into use every resource at its command to herald this notable film through advertising. 'They Live By Night' Held back simply because of a title conflict, this is no lame duck. STR's review on June 26, 1948, when the film was called "The Twisted Road," said it had universal adult appeal, would have good word of mouth, in fact "just misses greatness." Excellent business, of course, was predicted. It's a drama of escaped lifers, the youngest of whom "finds himself" through marriage to a farmer's daughter. Like the others, he eventually pays the; supreme penalty. The romantic leads are Cathy O'Donnell and the now potent box-office Farley Granger. Howard Da Silva is magnificent in a supporting role. It's an RKO release running 95 mins. is no man wise enough to foresee all the results or wise and courageous enough to guarantee the industry against disaster, local or national, under any method varying greatly from the established practices on which it was built and under which motion pictures became so large a part of our cultural pattern. Any change in the basic structure of exhibition and distribution methods seems fraught with hazard. Even the Government, in the Paramount case, took the position that it did not desire to establish a new method of doing business. It sought certain remedies designed to destroy certain evils found to exist but avoided,: — more, it even refused — to suggest a method of distribution, leaving the choice to the industry, within the law. That's all there is to this two-episode chronicling of basic reasoning of points to consider before attempting — through process of law — to effect changes in run and clearance practices. If your personal peeve is outside this pattern of reasoning go hire a lawyer. But my guess is that — if you study and analyze in line with the reasoning advanced — there will be a wholesale cancelling of Country Club memberships by lawyers who have been eating high off the hog at the expense of the industry. publicity and exploitation. It will be seen and talked about, and box-offices will prosper. Flame of Youth RepubUc Drama 60 mins. AUDIENCE SLANT: (Family) Routine juvenile delinquency yarn. Poorly acted. BOX-OFFICE SLANT: Subject has pull, but picture itself has little. Best in support of a comedy or a bigger picture of its own type. Cast: Barbra Fuller, Ray McDonald, Danni Nolan, Tony Barrett, Carol Brannan, Anita Carrell, Michael Carr. Credits: Associate producer, Lou Brock. Director, R. G. Springsteen. Screenplay, Robert Libott. Frank Burt and Bradford Ropes. Story, Albert DeMond. Photography, John MacBurnie. Plot: A teen-age girl persuades a bookie to back her in a hand-book racket to collect the kids' money. When one of the kids wins a sizable bet on a long shot, the girl resorts to robbery to pay it off. She gets several other kids involved, admits her guilt and is packed off to an institution. Her daddy gets a lecture on his negligence. Comment: This is a story of juvenile delinquency, with betting on the horses, carstripping, robbery and heavy petting entering into the picture. The subject, and the title reflecting it, have pull, but there is no other advance attraction and the" film itself has little strength, being routinely scripted and poorly acted. "Flame of Youth" would probably be best used in support of a comedy with youth appeal or with a bigger picture of its own type. Nuns Volunteer Help On 'Stable' Kid Show When Alanager Milt Baline of the Glove at Gloversville, N. Y., told the 37 nuns and seven priests attending his advance promotional screening of "Come to the Stable," that he was going to hold a special after-school screening for children on the Monday after opening, the nuns volunteered to tell their students about it. One priest said he would mention the picture. BOX-OFFICE SLANTS