Canadian Film Weekly (Aug 19, 1942)

Vol. 8, No. 34 Address all communications—The Managing Editor, Canadian Film Weekly, 21 Dundas Square, Toronto, Canada. Published by Film Publications of Canada, Ltd, Sth Floor, 21 Dundas Square, Toronto, Ont., Canada. Phone ADelaide 4310. Price 5 cents each or $200 per year. What Now? Almost a year has gone by since the National Advisory Council was formed to work with R. C. McMullen, the government’s appointee as director of the Theatre and Film section of the Wartime Prices and Trade Board. Launched in an atmosphere of strife, it has never lived down its belligerent background. On the contrary, differences between its delegates, brought together in the interests of industry harmony, seem to have come almost to the point of an open break. While it was supposed that the Council would be the forum of all disputes, this being part of the plan, a certain section of the Independents, ignoring this agreed function of the body to which they subscribed and on which they are represented, have organized outside action right across Canada. Members have made separate pleas and moves for modification of regulations proposed by the Director before the Advisory Council. So have others, who apparently feel themselves to be outside the jurisdiction of the Advisory Council. One hears informally from these Independents that what they are doing is in self-defence and was begun only when it became apparent that the distributors and circuits had taken that course earlier. If this is true, it can be easily assumed that the National Advisory Council is serving a limited purpose and certainly not the one for which it was formed. Where’s Harmony? Inter-industry quarrels have from the first borne heavily on the Council and made the Director's task a busy one. To begin with, there were the differences as to who should be ranked as Independent. One group, headed by Barnett E. Laxer, president of the then newly-formed Independent Motion Picture Exhibitors of Ontario, claimed that exhibitors with even the most limited circuit connections, must surrender their standing as Independents. This was contested by the Independent Theatres Association, seven years old at the time. The ITA claimed the Council was not truly representative, since none of its type of Independent exhibitor was represented. It disclaimed representation, either by the Independent or circuit delegates. This controversy, which might have been continued endlessly because there is a great number of Independents of that ilk. was removed when Nat A. Taylor. president of the Independent Theatres Association, said: “The ITA will not endanger industry unity in wartime by insisting on what it considers to be a more ecuitable state of affairs. Time alone will decide whether the administrator has made a happy choice in disregarding our protest.” This was the first contribution to harmony. Time is beginning to make it look like the only one. Good Intentions A. J. Mason and others on both sides of the fence agreed that the best plan at any time would be to have the industry settle its differences inside. Now Mr. Mason and others are active in invoking outside authority to secure what they consider to be justice. No doubt they can provide logical reasons for their actions, just as the ITA was able to explain clearly why it considered the Council to be Canadian FILM WEEKLY August 19, 1942] A9th Pa rallel HYE BOSSIN, Managing Mditor a SSS SSS Barred in S.A. The Columbia film about Canada, “49th -Parallel,’’ most of which was filmed here, was forced off Argentine screens by the protest of Axis envoys. Shown everywhere but Canada as “The Invaders,” the film has been doing tremendous business. It is a Canadian panorama, its story showing why Canadians are at war in defence of Democracy. Raymond Massey, a Canadian, is a featured star, as are Leslie Howard, Laurence Olivier, Anton Walbrook and others. Crowds went to the box office of the Grancine Rex Theatre, Buenos Aires, to buy tickets for the last two days’ showing. The manager of the Fox Films distributing office said Mayor Carlos A. Pueyrredon had also suspended indefinitely the exhibition of the film, “Secret Agent of Japan,” as the result of a protest made to the Foreign Office by Japanese Ambassador Baron Shu Tomii. Showing of ‘‘The Invaders” was permitted for the last two days when the theatre manager told the Ministry of Interior that advance seats had been sold. United States embassy sources said Charge D’Affaires Edward L. Reed had made official inquiries immediately regarding the suspension of the two films. It was pointed out that no official suspension order was issued, but that the theatre managers had been informed that the showing must be halted as a result of the diplomatic protests. The managers of the Columbia and Fox Films offices said both films had been passed by the city censors last week and therefore the companies would protest the mayor’s suspension order in an effort to lift the ban. “The Invaders” has attracted (Continued on Page 5) not truly representative. If, as the case appears to be, Laxer, Mason and others disagree with certain proposed rulings, it would seem to isolate the Director and his judgement, as represented by the draft now in the hands of Ottawa authorities. To what extent the distributors and chains agree with the Director we can’t say, because of the nopublicity policy of the Council and Director. But this is evident—there’s trouble afoot. And plenty of it. However, we spoke to Mr. McMullen about the state of the industry and it was his opinion that things were quiet and going along fine. August 19th, 1942 (Plenty Trouble A-Cookin ? (Continued from Page 1) ject of wartime regulation to each and all who have something to do with it. Affiliates of a recently-organized Independent exhibitors’ organization in each province have had meetings and aimed resolutions at Ottawa, at the same time interesting members of the House of Commons in their cause. The most recent instance of the latter was the statement in Parliament by W. E. Esling, member for Kootenay West, British Columbia, who said that all B. C. members had received telegrams charging that distributors were raising film rentals to Independent theatres, apparently for the purpose of putting them out of business and getting control of them. This, needless to say, angered distributors, very much, though no official reply has come from them as yet. All this would seem to reflect on the National Advisory Council, supposedly composed of representatives of every section of the industry, as a successful idea. It was understood by all that this Council would be the depository of all new ideas for regulating the industry in wartime and that all differences would be placed before it for discussion and possible agreement. Whether this has been done is hard to know, since the Council and Director issue no publicity or news of its meetings. The squabbling being carried on outside the Council and the direct appeals being made to outside authorities is evidence that the Advisory Council, formed last fall, is creaking and at present is enjo. ing a limited usefulness. All this outside disputation has caused the news of the Council’s differences to become the subject of common discussion and in this way it has become apparent, from time to time, that almost no single ruling, in effect or proposed, has been found satisfactory by all. Rulings seem to become law at the judgement of the director and not by unanimous consent of the various delegates. Among the proposed rulings being opposed by the Independents are (1) the moving forward of the basic period so that 1941-42 contracts will provide the basis of future prices, (2) the lumping of top features with specials, (3) forced buying and (4) frozen runs. The three-cornered battle between the distributors, Independent exhibitors and the Director has brought out many arguments for and against. The quietest on the subject at the moment are the circuits. It looks like a rough time ahead before some form of regulation satisfactory to all will be worked out—if at all.