The Exhibitor (Nov 1938-May 1939)

EDITORIAL THE NATIONAL Vol. 17, No. 11 Jan. 25, 1 939 A Jay Emanuel Publication. Circulating in Maryland, District of Columbia, Delaware, Virginia, Eastern West Virginia. Covering the film territory served out of Washington, D. C. Published weekly by Jay Emanuel Publications, Incorporated. Publishing office: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia. New York City office: 1600 Broadway. West Coast office: 1119 Poinsettia Drive, Hollywood, California. Jay Emanuel, publisher; Paul J. Greenhalgh, advertising manager; Herbert M. Miller, managing editor. Subscription rates: $2 for one year; $5 for three years. Member of the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Publisher also of The Philadelphia Exhibitor and The New York State Exhibitor. Address all communications to the Philadelphia office. •Just in Passing KING OF THE "B’S” They called Bryan Foy the "King of the B’s” in a magazine article which received national circulation; but no matter what they call him, the said Mr. Foy has been delivering some dough shows on a small budget, which is most important. Another thing about his productions is that they lend themselves to healthy exploitation and handling by the Warner advertising and publicity department. Without stars, exploitation becomes a necessity — which is just the sort of meat the Warner ad and publicity department likes to eat. We wonder, therefore, if Mr. Foy is the "only pebble on the beach?” No offense, Mr. Foy. For a specific example of what happens when a budget-minded producer makes a picture for an exploitation-minded advertising department, please turn to the Better Management section of this particular issue. HISTORY IS MADE IN ONEONTA Theatre history was made in Onconta, New York, last fortnight when a lady patron of a Schine theatre refused to accept the prize money she won in a giveaway. Naturally, the shock being what it was to the management, it has been difficult to clear up all the details, but perhaps a new trend is in the offing. The lady declared that she "only came to see the picture.” Will wonders never cease? Clarification . Indeed ! So Now there will be an additional delay, it seems, in the matter of the industry proposals. The distributors have to get together with their attorneys to determine the exact phraseology of the various clauses which may be further presented for the scrutiny of the trade. We are not greatly enthused by this desire on the part of the distributors to clarify some of the wording. In our opinion, one thing has been clear all the time — the belief by the distributors that it will not be necessary to go too far in the matter of reforms because enough exhibitors will be found to give assent to any proposals which might be advanced. We do not remember the MPTOA, for example, going to great lengths to point out that the wording was not clear when the memorandum was first announced. The MPTOA, for example, insisted that the reforms start immediately instead of waiting for 1939-1940. A few MPTOA locals approved the memorandum as it was, with only slight changes. The Great Problem in connection with the trade proposals is not so much a clarification of wording but rather a clarification of just what the distributors are willing to give. We hear, for example, that score charges will be dropped in the case of outright buys but kept in the case of percentage engagements. An MPTOA deliberator also states that where long term franchises are still running, the score charges will be kept. If this is true, it reveals that the distributors do not intend to budge an inch more than they have to. Obviously, if reforms are to be made, they should be effective for all. Strangely Enough, in all this, no reflection has been cast on the personal sincerity of William F. Rodgers, Sidney R. Kent or any of the other distributors. As such, they are out to make the best deal possible, and even if some of these men might honestly feel that more concessions might be given, their loyalty to their company makes them, naturally enough, work for the distributors’ interests as strongly as possible. Let Us Save the Applause until we see exactly what is given. We declared once that the memorandum was a step in the right direction. This we still believe, but more than a step is necessary, more than clarification is necessary. Let’s clarify the intent — then things will be easy to understand. NAT