Cinema News and Property Gazette (1913)

Al'KIl 1913. fHE CINEMA. 23 o' inquiry has been formed and conducted in a Judicial and legal form in ever) respect, witnesses have been called and the case has proceeded in exactl) the same form as if t >i< trial were being conducted in the Law Courts at New York. This has naturally taken 1 considerable time, because the whole of the commission ha had !<■ travel from city to city, and hence the prolongation of the trial for a period of, up to the present , aboul one year. If the Patents ('<>. and General Film Co. !<>-e their ease, it is the opinion of many of the leading barristers in New York that the Patents Co. will !»• compelled to return the taxes of 8s. per week, which they have collected for the last five years from some 5,000 exhibitors; this would probably necessitate the solving of a rather difficult financial problem for the companies in question. The whole trade is waiting with extreme interest the outcome of this problem, and when the judgment of the courts is given, every word, in view of the present unrest in the trade, will be scanned with the utmost interest. From this history of another country, lessons even at this •stage, can be learned here. Kxhibitors a few days ago mooted that arrangements will be made with certain American and other manufacturers that the exhibitors as a body should act as their agents, and even set up themselves, if necessary, as manufacturers. I am afraid this will not get over the difficulty without very serious fighting, which will certainly develop into a trade war. And the peculiar part of it is that in our country it looks like there are going to be three fighting factions, and this is bound to lead to many misunderstandings. I really believe that there are a great number of exhibitors who have very little idea of the new agreement, and some of the newspapers who devote a ]x>rtion of their columns to things " cinematique " (not bad, that word; I haven't heard it before) are somewhat misleading, and do not tend to help exhibitors to understand the position. For instance, our esteemed contemporary, The Referee, states this week, Under the heading of " Fighting for Films," as follows : ■"The principal manufacturers, with the notable exception of Path6 Freres, have formed a combine," and then, in bold type in the centre, " To squeeze out the rente, < r middleman by dealing direct with the exhibitor," and goes on as follows : — " And from May 31 onwards exhibitors dealing with members of the combine must use none but films obtained from them. The exhibitors are up in arms against this, as, for the purposes of obtaining •exactly the programme of pictures suitable to their individual requirements, they desire to preserve an open market as provided by the system of renters now in existence. The exhibitors complain that the agreement devised bv the combine contains all sorts of drastic rules and regulations, which will tend to cripple exhibitors in the pursuit of their branch of the industry, and that the combine is a form of Trust, under which they will be seriously hampered. At .1 meeting held at the Waldorf Hotel on Thursday cinema exhibitors from all parts of the kingdom unanimously resolved to fight the combine by every means in their power. It will certainly be interesting to watch future development-." Now, according to this, the squeezing out of the re or middleman is regarded by the exhibitor as seriously detrimental to his interests, but, from what I understand, one of the chief reasons for the agreement is to prevent Unsqueezing out of the renter or middleman. Hence the reason ol their being parties to the agreement. According to the article mentioned, the renters have signed their own death wan-ant, bul this is not the case. Manufacturers who have signed the agreement have not the slightest idea <>f ■ this or of collaring the whole trade for themselves. Tin a desire to leave thin-- a they are, and this certainly redounds to their credit. Exhibitors, h< innot, and will not, think so, because the) were not called into the consultations, and are, therefore, up in arms. If there is 1.1 be war, someone will lose the battle, and there will be much wastage of ammunition. Matty will say it means great competition between three parties instead of, as at present, competition amongsl each particular branch of trade, viz., manufacturers, renters, and exhibitors. There are many ways of looking at all the pros and run-. For instance, how are exhibitors to choose amongst themselves who shall get the first runs in the limited choice they will have at their disposal of their own imported films, and immediately some of them are dissatisfied or annoyed, as sooner or later they will certainly be, will they secede to one or the other of the two camps? Some exhibitors in London I know are great competitors in securing the best films they can get, whatever be the price. They are all looking after No. 1, and it will be interesting indeed to see how many will agree to the new propositions, and what number will stick to the ideals aimed at. It would, indeed, he hard for one to see a fine film showing at a compel house, with the resultant good business, when they may be unable to obtain something just as good from the exhibitor-.' -election. All this will undoubtedly create great competition in the exhibitors' own camp, which would tbly make their own films far exceed in price those films dealt in by the other two camps. Hard indeed it will be then for exhibitors to know that for the asking they will be able to secure a finer selection at a lower figure, but although receipts are dropping, such films are forbidden fruit. Has forbidden fruit ever been resisted by everyone? Exhibitors are but human, and the rent and other expenses must be paid. And then, might it not be the case that history will repeat itself here. As stated above, the so-called Trust in America is not charging any more for its films than the independents are. The independents, mind you, who came to help the exhibitors and obtained their trade on that understanding. Well, well, it's a difficult question at the moment, and with one more fighting army added to the field, in addition to the two already there, is not any the more likely to lead t< the solving of the problem. You are all going to fig'nt instead of adopting peace measures. All rij^ht, in vour present moods your blood is up and I know you will not listen. Very well, go ahead, adopt the good old practice : fight first and make peace afterwards, when you all might just as well have made it first. I know 1, personally, am arguing against the particular interests of our journal, as the more you fight, the more you will expend in our line, but " The Cinema " has never adopted these methods. We are here for the benefit of the trade as a whole, and we ar ot tile trade, but do not stand for war, although bv so doin« we should benefit, to the detriment of other sections of the trade. If any will listen, take to heart the heading of tin articles I have been writing for some time past, of which this is the fourth — the title is "Thoughts that make us Pause and Ponder." Two proverbs can be applied : " Lool* before you leap," and " It's no use locking the -table dooi after the horse has gone "—and please don't forget, even it you have not the slightest doubt in the world that you will win, that "The winning bird loses it feathers." I suppose, however, you will all, as our country lately doein war, muddle through it somehow, and then will do as I have -o often urged, each appoint delegate-, and come to an amicable understanding. Heigh-ho! and so the world goes round. v H.