Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (Sep 1934 - Aug 1935)

WEDNESDAY, MAY 29, 1935 3 ALLIED URGES SUITS AGAINST CHAINS INDEPENDENT EXHIBITORS FILM BULLETIN Vol. 1 No. 38 May 29, 1935 Issued weekly by Film Bulletin Company, at 1313 Vine Street, Phila., Pa. Mo Wax, editor and publisher; Roland Barton, associate editor; Ben B. Cohen, business manager. Telephone: RITtenhouse 4816. Address all communications to Editor, Film Bulletin ADVERTISING RATES Write or call us for our Advertising Rates. Weekly circulation 1000 copies, covering every theatre owner in the Philadelphia and Baltimore-Washington territories. tinent remark that there has been no more serious time than the present for the nation's independent exhibitors. The elongated Allied leader said: me f ALLIED PRESIDENT SAMUELSON " . . . I look for no millenium." "We are facing many serious problems. I look for no millenium. I look for this convention to devise a program with which Allied can campaign for other independent exhibitors." There followed a short pause in the meeting activities, while Mayor James Key said a few •ords of welcome. He had risen from a sick bed to appear before the visiting theatremen. Myers On the Code . . . First serious issue of the convention — the code — was entrusted to soft-spoken, former Federal Trade Commissioner Abram F. Myers, Allied counsel. Thoroughly learned in the interstate commerce phase of industry, Myers (still called "Commissioner" by his associates) was among the first to predict that the NRA, in those portions applying to intrastate commerce, was unconstitutional. Now Congress and the Administration are beginning to agree with him. "The status of the NRA is so suspended in air, it is impossible to predict the outcome," declared Myers. He did, however, express the belief that the House and Senate may "lock horns" on the NRA issue and allow the act to die "without benefit of clergy" on June 16th. Trickery in Approving Code . . . Myers charged the major producers with employing trickery in approving the code after it was drawn. Each of the major producing and their affiliated theatre firms appeared on the list of concerns okeying the document under two, three or four different titles. For instance, Warner Bros, signed as Warner Bros. Pictures; Warner Bros. Theatres; Stanley Company of America; Vitagraph; First National, etc. Every theatre that approved the movie code was a member of the MPTOA. Allied labored on the drawing of the code in the hot summer months of 1933 in an effort to get a decent break for independent exhibitors, only to find, when the code was completed, that their suggestions had been ignored completely. A few of the independents working with Myers deserted the ranks, giving the Deputy Administrator the claim that the indies had no official representation. Two of the men who opposed the code at first, then switched, later brought suits against the NRA, charging the very wrongs which Myers predicted from the beginning. "In the future, Allied must be represented only by independent exhibitors, and exhibitors who can be trusted and relied upon." Dependent on Schecter Ruling . . . The future of the movie code, he said, depended largely on the outcome of the Schechter Poultry case, decided on Monday by the Supreme Court. (See NRA article.) Myers finally denounced the movie code as the "most scandalous, most fraudulent document ever framed." Buyer's Strike Urged Barrist On Film Company Practices . . . Stocky, forceful Dave Barrist was next on the rostrum to discuss unfair film selling practices and means of combating them. He said he misses the old year books, because, at least, they listed some of the titles, stories, stars, directors, etc. "Now, they sell you the first four letters of the alphabet — A, B, C, D." In any other business, stated the Philadelphia premium dealer-exhibitor, when a seller fails to deliver the quality product he represented to the buyer, the latter promptly returns it. In this movie business, however, the exhibitor seldom gets what is promised him and he is without recourse to protect himself from loss. 3 Protective Measures . . . Barrist cited three weapons in the hands of theatre owners to combat unreasonable film prices and unfair terms. 1 — A buyers' strike. 2 — Enlistment of public support and sympathy, utilizing the most effective propaganda medium available — theatre screens. 3 — Legislation. Sue! Sue! Sue! "On a Hundred Fronts" . . . Urging the nation's independent exhibitors to take their grievances into Federal courts, Abram Myers offered what many considered the soundest counsel given during the entire confab. HSSHHi &■ 0 ^4Ht0 Jr } * I \ i ALLIED COUNSEL MYERS " . . . Lick them in Federal Courts." "Pick a hundred of your strongest cases in various parts of the country and take them into court. I wonder what the situation would be if there were a hundred suits pending against the producers at one time?" Myers stated that Hays has proven his value to the major producers by reducing the number of cases brought against th< m. He said that far too many chain theatre "depredations" go 'unchallenged." The independents have been successful in th^ overwhelming number of cases taken into Federal courts. He found fault with Allied's unit leaders for not bringing more cases and for failure to consult him on those they have instituted. Many suits are filed in the wroni; courts and others languish and die for lack of proper preparation. The organization's general counsel urged that all future cases be submitted to him after they are prepared by local counsel, but before filing. Explains Anti-Trust Law . . . Concisely and simply, the erudite lawyer explained the fundamentals of the anti-trust law.-, to the attentive exhibitors. He pointed out (Continued On Next Page)