The Exhibitor (Jun-Oct 1943)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

EDITORIAL I I i Reg. U. S. Pat. Office VoL. 30, No. 10 July 14, 1943 A Jay Emanuel Publication. Covering the film terri¬ tories in the Metropolitan East. Published weekly by Jay Emanuel Publications, Incorporated. Pub¬ lishing office: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia 7, Pennsylvania. New York office: 1600 Broadway, New York 19. Coast Representative: Samuel Lindenstein, 425 South Cochran Avenue, Los Angeles 36, California. Representatives in Washington, D. C.; Albany, Buffalo, Boston, and New Haven. Jay Emanuel, publisher; Paul J. Greenhaigh, business manager; Herbert M. Miller, managing editor. Rates: Each edition, one year, $2; three years, $5. Address communications to publishing offices: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia 7, Pennsylvania. Please notify the Circulation Department of any change in address. While every effort is being made to handle changes as fast as possible, sub¬ scribers should allow at least three weeks. Jn Oku O ddue SECTION ONE Advance Shots . C Arbitration Cases . 19 Editorial Page . 3 For Your Guidance . 18 In the Newsreels . 19 In the Spotlight . 4, 11 Late News Highlights . 5, 6 National Legion of Decency List 19 National Mirror . 9, 10, 14, 16 National Release Date Guide . Inside Back Cover News of the Territory . NTl, et. seq. People You Know . 4b Production Periscope . 17 The Scoreboard . 18 Territorial Highlights . 4a Territorial Trade Screening Guide, . . . 18 The Tip-Off . 20 SECTION TWO REVIEWS (The Exhibitor’s Pink Section) SS-l-SS-8 “Best Foot Forward,” (MGM) ; “The Law Rides Again,” (Monogram) ; “The Right Man,* (Monogram) ; “Isle Of Forgotten Sins,” (PRC)j “The Renegade,” (PRC) ; “Submarine Base,” (PRC); “Wolves Of the Range,*' (PRC); “Bor¬ der Town Gun Fighters,” (Republic) ; “Fugitive From Sonora,” (Republic) ; “Bomber’s Moon,” (20th Century-Fox) ; “Victory Through Air Power,” (UA-Disney) ; “Yanks Ahoy,” (UARoach) ; “Gals, Inc.,” (U) ; “Hit the Ice,” (U) ; “Constant Nymph,* (Warners) ; “Under Secret Orders,” (Guaranteed). Material contained in the Late News Highlights section often represents newest developments in stories found on other pages of this issue. The Lote News Highlights section of THE EXHIBITOR goes to press last, with all the latest news as available. No Need For a New Bill Disclosuhe in Washington that Senator Harley M. Kilgore, West Virginia, has re-introduced the Neely theatre divorcement hill under agreement with the Dejiartment of Justice, may prob¬ ably prove good news to some exhibitors hut confusing to others. The bill, S-1312, would “prohibit producers and distributors of motion picture films engaged in interstate commerce from owning, controlling, managing, operating, or having any interest in motion picture theatres in the United States.” Senator Kilgore was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Suh-committee haiKlling the Neely hill, and it is understood that he had agreed with the Department of Justice to keep the measure alive in order that the consent decree parties might he kept in step. In effect, the measure is practically the same as the Neely hill. Divorcement of theatres would hardly bring to independent exhibitors the relief they seek. If the Department of Justice is really interested in the plight of the independent theatreman it would review the situation, and find out that through the consent decree the Department has been responsible for the highest jirices in motion picture history. No sales manager of any com¬ pany would have ever dared hope, before the decree went into efifecl, that such terms could he secured from theatre accounts as are now in vogue. The block type of selling proved to he a banner system for the distributors. If the latter ever intend to go hack to the old form it will he a surprise to most of us. ^Actually, the exhibitors were not parties to the consent decree, hut they have been affected most of all. With five com¬ panies selling by blocks, with more high allocation shows than ever before, and the other three majors selling in the old line system to advantage, the exhibitor has been caught in the middle. We noN’r know who the so-called theatremen might be who are supposed to have intluenced the re-introduction of the Neely hill, hut we think they are harking up the wrong tree. The evils of aftiliated-circuit operation are one thing. There is no certainty that placing these houses in the hands of operators who have no producer connections will bring any relief. Indebendent circuits, without jiroducer affiliation, may he found that are as guilty of alleged unfair practices as the pro¬ ducer-affiliates. If the Department of Justice wants to merit the sincere support of exhibitors, it knows what to do. Sponsoring another Neely bill is not the solution. QTJTN.