Boxoffice (Jan-Mar 1941)

NO SLIDE MAJORS To Walk Cautiously for First Year; Shorts in For Tossing Around New York — Although there were some doubts about it months ago, the impression now prevails in distribution quarters majors will pretty well hold to the same numerical lineups next season as prevails for 1940-41. The reason for the change in prospective is that, with increased manpower in the field under the decree’s system of “five-block” selling, it would be unwise to reduce the number of pictures. Also, there is a feeling each company will continue to make a substantial number of lesser important pictures, as in the past, to absorb as much of each account’s playing time as is possible. To Step Up Quality There seems to be no doubt, according to observers, that shorts will be given a tossing around and that the main problem will be to concentrate on feature selling. After the first year, it is believed majors will make every effort to further step up quality product with an eye to securing even more extended playing time and eliminating the need for a second feature on any program. The elimination of duals will be gradual, if it is achieved at all, it is felt, with the theatres, particularly the major circuits, discarding the second feature on the long half and doubling up on the weaker product for the short half. The latter usually is a two or three-day booking, while the long half runs from four to six days. Year for a Test In some quarters it is believed the first year of decree operations will be more in the line of laboratory endeavor for the producer, exhibitor and distributor. The producer, it is held, must be given a chance to readjust himself and concentrate on as many big pictures as the studio can handle without getting too involved and too concerned about release dates. Meeting releasing schedules will be a thing of the past under the decree, it is argued. Next, it will be up to the distributor to spot the pictures as they come through, demanding more playing time and better admissions. If successful, this is seen eliminating the use of an accompanying picture and building the demand for shorts. Third, the major circuits will be the first to be called upon to follow through on the extended-playing-time, increasedadmission idea so that independents can pick up from there. If the larger houses do not resolve to go for this plan, certainly subsequent houses would not be expected to inaugurate or adopt policies IN PRODUCT SEEN; FOR ’42 SAME AS '41 Seek Film Backlog; Reissue Wave Looms New York — Further confirmation of an earlier and exclusive report in Boxoffice that the “Big Five” will undoubtedly offer a number of reissues toward the summer in order to concentrate production energy on the first blocks of films under 1941-42 consent decree selling is seen in the admission by an RKO spokesman that “Top Hat” and “Bringing Up Baby” are “under consideration” for such treatment. “Bringing Up Baby” is regarded as a “natural” because the leads are held by Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant, two stars who are gaining further national prominence at present through their presence in “The Philadelphia Story.” However and although the impulse is to capitalize on this factor immediately is present, the company feels “Story” is too potent competition to gain “Baby” its greatest possibilities, while the release of the latter after the M-G-M film has more or less dissipated itself would be of far greater value. The company is represented by a spokesman as having mulled over reissue on a national renewed scale of “Top Hat” for some time because “this picture hit grosses that were never dreamed of when it was first released and there is plenty of business yet to be had.” Again, the impulse to cash in on this sentiment is checked through the fact that Ginger Rogers, who plays the lead in the film opposite Fred Astaire, is currently doing very well by herself in “Kitty Foyle,” also an RKO release and simultaneous showing of both would only conflict. Self-Contained Era Seen Close at Hand New York — Reports the Wall Street Journal, authoritative financial newspaper: “The American film industry has already suffered the worst of the decline in revenues from abroad and any further drop from this point will be relatively unimportant in comparison with large domestic revenues. In other words, the industry may be considered very nearly on a domestically self-contained basis.” which the more powerful interests are afraid to tackle. In all, the general impression seems to be that as soon as the new selling season gets under way the industry is in for a year of experimentation in all its branches. Hence, it is assured, production budgets will be increased and, in some cases, like Universal, numbers of pictures may be hiked over the current season. Columbia Considers Blocks-of-5 Sales New York — Probability that Columbia will soon be selling in blocks of five which may terminate the government’s antitrust suit against it was disclosed during the week when, at the conclusion of an argument held before Judge Henry Warren Goddard in the federal court, Louis Frohlich, attorney for the company, told the court his company was being forced into an acceptance of such blocks against its will. The argument, with Columbia, UA and Universal seeking a dismissal of the government’s anti-trust suit against them or a restatement of the complaint with all items referring to the five producerexhibitors eliminated, was a complete loss for the film companies. Sees Issues for Trial Judge Goddard, at the conclusion of two hours of argument, told Robert L. Wright, special assistant to the attorney general who argued for the government, “I am convinced there are issues here for trial and the motion should be denied.” Frohlich then asked for 30 days to file an answer, stating that later in the week he was arguing the dismissal of the Crescent suit in Nashville. The court granted him only 20 days. At the outset, Frohlich repeated his reasons for asking a dismissal which had been denied to him before. The reason for the repetition was that in the previous plea he had asked the government be denied the right to file an amended complaint. Judge Goddard asked the Columbia attorney if he expected him to reverse his former ruling and Frohlich replied, “Frankly, no.” Floor to Pepper Then Benjamin Pepper took the floor for UA and repeated some of the history of the case before getting to his main argument which was that there is no statement in the complaint which states how in any manner Universal, UA, or Columbia violated the anti-trust laws. The attorney mentioned the suit is being brought under the Sherman act, but does not contain allegations of an anti-trust character. He remarked that the three companies in combination did not have sufficient power to disturb the industry or, more importantly, the power to restrain interstate trade or commerce. Hit told the court that in the beginning the government had a case under the Sherman laws when it sought divorcement, but now had authorized and sanctioned the control of theatres by the “Big Five” and was trying to force the “Little Three” into a selling agreement which would put them out of business. 4 BOXOFFICE :: February 22, 1941