Boxoffice (Jan-Mar 1945)

STOCK FATE OF MANY HANGING ON DEFINITION OF "PRODUCER" Staggered Releases , Use of Backlogs , Cuts in Minor Product Visualized ■ Newer Independents Must Turn to Prewar Firms For Their Necessities By AL SHERMAN WASHINGTON— It has been definitely established that new producers, such as the recently organized Frank Capra-Sam Briskin company, will have to get their raw film stock allotment from established distribution companies. Meantime, says the War Production Board, through Spokesman Stanley B. Adams, chief of the consumers durable goods division, the problem of the new producing companies will be tackled within the next few days. Attorneys for the various film companies are now huddling with WPB lawyers to decide just how new producing companies will be apportioned raw stock allotments, also as to the method through which the stock will be allocated to foreign producing organizations, such as that headed by J. Arthur Rank. This step followed a meeting between Adams and Arthur Kelly, American representative of the various Rank enterprises in this country. New Firms Not Considered Now In an interview with Adams, it was pointed out that “for the time being, independent producing companies not included in the allocations alignment may obtain needed raw stock from those distributing companies already allotted such film. For example, there is nothing to prevent a producer from obtaining stock from Paramount, if that company has the stock available for him.” “Just now,” said Adams, “we cannot consider new companies, because of the short supply of raw stock available. We are limited insofar as allocation is concerned. We cannot tell what we can do for importers of foreign pictures, or how these producers can be allotted stock except through established producing or distributing organizations.” Adams added that the WPB is still working on what constitutes a producer, and until official definition is given, “we will have to assume those producers now established constitute the companies already engaged in business.” (A full statement from the WPB on this status is expected some time next week.) ITOA Protests Against WPB Raw Stock Ruling New York — Declaring that the cut in raw stock promulgated by the War Production Board would result in “irreparable damage to the subsequent run independent exhibitors of the country,” the ITOA has sent telegrams to WPB executives and S. H. Fabian, theatres’ division chief of the War Activities Committee, demanding relief. In almost identical telegrams, Max A. Cohen, chairman of the ITOA’s film committee, stated in part: . . Cutting down the number of positive prints will not have any effect on the first run theatres but will definitely affect the subsequent run theatres that will have to face chaotic spread-eagling clearances with resultant financial damage. ... I ask for an immediate hearing to discuss the matter.” NEW YORK — Some independent producers— among them Sam Goldwyn — were admittedly pleased by the new WPB ruling that raw stock allotments would be made to producers, and others were not. In the latter classification were those organized during 1945. They have no allotments. Long distance telephone conferences between production and distribution executives began immediately. United Artists faced the most complicated problem. It is solely a distribution company, and in recent months has taken over distribution of a group of J. Arthur Rank’s British-produced pictures. Barney Balaban, president of Paramount, whose company signed distribution agreements with the Hal Wallis and De Sylva producing units during 1945, said the company would have to make a study of the definition of an independent producing unit before deciding its course. RKO’s independent producers, Samuel Goldwyn and Disney, come in under the wire with their own raw stock allotments, so they can decide how much of their footage will be devoted to prints. Republic, which has just signed an agreement with Frank Borzage, will allot film to him; PRC, which has independent units, will likewise allot to its units. In recent months independent units have been formed rapidly by directors and stars on the coast. Their production and distribution plans will hinge on how much film distributors will be willing to allot to them out of their curtailed allotments, it was stated. Each company will meet the situation as Industrial and Advertising Film Men Discuss Coming Shortages WASHINGTON— The problem of raw stock available for producers of industrial and screen advertising films is being considered by WPB officials and representatives of the newly organized Industrial Film Producers and Advertising Film Producers’ Industry Advisory committees. The quantity is expected to be less than before, with increased demands from the military. Both committees suggested that equitable distribution could be best achieved by assigning each producer a specified percentage of the amount he used in 1944. Committee members stressed that allotment of one picture as against another could not be established, since almost all industrial films and theatrical screen advertising are concerned directly with the war effort in that they further bond drives and the like. Members of the IFPIAC include James L. Baker, Pittsburgh; Frank Balkin, Chicago; Bill Etts, San Francisco; F. O. Calvin, Kansas City; Earl Carpenter, Cleveland; Joseph de Freenes, Philadelphia; B. W. DePue, Chicago; J. Handy, Detroit; Hugh Jamieson, Dallas; E. J. Lamm, N. Y. City; Arthur H. Loucks, N. Y. City; Robert C. McKean, N. Y. City; R. H. Ray, St Paul; Roland Reed, Culver City; I. R. Rehm, Oak Park, 111.; F. K. Rockett, Hollywood; Frank Speidell, W. Y. City; R. B. Strickland, Atlanta; Norman E. Wilding, Chicago; Raphael G. Wolff, Hollywood; Harold W. Wondsel, N. Y. City. Members of the AFPIAC: J. Don Alexander, Colorado Springs; Martin Gottlieb, N. Y. City; W. Hardy Hendren jr., Kansas City; Burton B. Jerrel, Des Moines; William Johnson, New Orleans; Abe C. Karski, San Francisco; R. B. Strickland, Atlanta; W. Ernest Wood, Baltimore. best it can, but none will go into details as to how this will be done. Most of them, as a matter of fact, are still trying to work out arrangements. It was admitted in several offices that reissues, except on those for which prints have already been made, will be scarce for some months to come. Paramount’s “The Sign of the Cross” is not affected. The prints are ready. The same applies to some Disney films and those of other major companies. Film Classics, which has elaborate plans for reissues, in studying the problem. It has been suggested in some quarters that day-and-date openings of new pictures will be cut sharply, and it also may be necessary to stagger releases for subsequent runs. In many cities where it has been the custom for second and third runs to play films day-and-date new arrangements may be necessary. The ITOA in New York has already protested and is seeking a conference with the WPB. Where prints have been made on backlog pictures, it is predicted, these will be put into circulation, and a general reduction of backlogs is foreseen. Distribution executives admit, off the record, of course, that estimates of boxoffice value will be the governing rule. Where allotments of raw stock to independent producers seem likely to be more profitable than to their own product the independents will get it. This may result in cuts of minor product. Nobody admits these days that there are any B pictures, but some say the lesser As or low budget films may be postponed until the situation clears. Cuts Keep Executives On Majors' Pay Rolls HOLLYWOOD — Probably the most drastic effect on independent production that will result from the slash and allocation of film stock for the first quarter of 1945 will be to discourage, temporarily at least, the growing tendency on the part of the film capital’s Thespic and creative workers to resign from various major studios’ pay rolls to set themselves up as producers. Further than that, Hollywood could see little in the allocations rulings, and the various interpretations thereon that have come to its attention, to materially hamper production activities any further than they had been curtailed during 1944. Since the over-all cut amounts to an approximate five per cent and will be absorbed principally by cutting the number of release prints, rather than through the husbanding of negative stock, production schedules should not be affected, especially if they were established or even projected prior to Jan. 1, 1945. This is true of the many newcomers to the independent field, who were listed, along with their plans and releasing affiliations, in BOXOFFICE of January 13, this year. Most of them had established a major outlet for their planned product. BOXOFFICE :: February 10, 1945 23