Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1939)

FILM BULLETIN O H i— 1 1 PQ h— II X u H W Q W u Q 5 col <\ U i— 1 1 crj U < O u O M o > u H ISSUES, NOT MEN, MATTER! At the outset of the negotiations to formulate a eode of fair trade practices for the film industry some months ago, we advised the major distributors that no plan had a chance of bringing peace and harmony to the industry if it failed to satisfy Allied. That is still true and anyone who pretends it is not merely makes himself look like an ostrich. When he finally does pull his head out of the sand, the same basic issues, the same friction, the same complaints of thousands of independent exhibitors will be staring him in the face. The average independent doesn't care a hoot in hell what satisfies Ed Kuykendall or Harry Brandt. Those men do not speak the same language as the thousands of theatremen who are convinced that the ills which afflict this industry cannot be cured by a haircut and shave. Anyone in position to eke out the honest opinions of the timid rank and file independent kows that he approves of Allied's contention that cleaning up the face will not cure the body. So, when William F. Rodgers strode in anger to the dais at the Alhed Convention and declared that the majors' proposed code was "'withdrawn" from Allied and that no further negotiations would be carried on with that organization, because it had rejected the code, we must assume that the usually level-headed Metro executive had merely alowed himself to be carried away by the heat of passion. For, if Mr. Rodgers meant what he said, he, himself, closed the door on all hope of ever attaining harmony and fair play in the industry. Rodgers charged that he had been personally affronted by the report of Allicd's Negotiating Committee (which appears elsewhere in this issue), yet all that report does is recite, item by item, fact by fact, the reasons for the rejection of the^code. On the other hand, speaking of insults, contemplate what abuse Allied's leaders, especially Abram F. Myers, are constantly subjected to by spokesmen for the majors and often by certain sections of the trade press, which seems almost gluttonous in its desire to print anything damaging to Allied. "Professional agitators" has long been a favorite term of those who like to toss bricks at the independents' leaders and Mr. Rodgers used it himself in his opening address at the convention. Much as the film man may resent an insult, so much might the exhibitor. There is no exclusive license tor personal feelings. But, this pique on one part or another has nothing WHO IS THIS MAN BRANDT? Editorial Pa ye 3 to do with the fundamental issue as stake. A start and an effort was made to correct some of the faults in our industry formula. We honestly believe that there was real sincerity on the part of Allied's negotiators and on the part of the men representing the distributors. The Allied men with whom we discussed the negotiations from time to time spoke glowingly of the frankness and seeming eagerness of Messrs Rodgers, Montague and Sears to work out the problems. We know, definitely, that in the early weeks of the negotiations the allied group was most enthusiastic and hopeful.. What happened later to destroy that confidence we do not know. Perhaps Al Steffes was right when he charged the film company lawyers with destroying the original intentions of the negotiators with their legal rigmarole, so that exhibitors would seem to be getting concessions without actually getting them. Regardless of what specifically took place back in the home offices, Allied claims that the hands of the men with whom they were dealing directly were apparently tied and the code they finally were handed was not the code they discussed. The fact that the majors drew up a code did not imply that the exhibitors are compelled to accept it. If Allied saw fit to reject it, it was merely exercising its right. It may be recalled that we printed an analysis of the original code craft several months ago and called it "a step forward ", although we pointed out that it was no cure. We thought exhibitors should accept it. Yet, when we later conducted an impartial and nation-wide poll of exhibitors, we found that while most of those voting said the code, as written, oifered some relief, it was already being circumvented by film salesmen — and the MAJORITY voted to reject the code! Members of the M.P.T.O.A., of unaffiliated regional organizations, exhibitors who did not belong to any group, as well as Allied members, voted in that poll. Allied's refusal to accept the pact that was offered must be answered by the distributors, but it cannot be answered by hurling savage abuse at Abram Myers and the other Allied leaders. This pn blem must be worked out between Allied and the men of authority in the him ranks. Won't Bill Rodgers or some other man ot good will step forward and pick up the slender thread that might still bind the broken branches into a harmonious and prosperous industry.'