Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1945)

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.

Collect To The Last Day The Motion Picture Industry Red Cross War Fund Week ends this Wednesday, March 21st. You theatremen throughout the nation have been doing your bit by collecting contributions jrom patrons. Keep it up right doum through that last day. The Red Cross faces a tremendous task and every dollar and dim? is important. Vcl. 13. No. 6 M ARCH TO TRIAL, THEN The anti trust suit filed on June 20, 1938, by the United States of America against Paramount, Loew's, 20th Century-Fox, RKO and Warner Brothers will finally come to trial on October 8th, next. Once before, on June 6, 1940, the case was scheduled to open, but before any evidence was heard settlement of the issues was put off by the entrance of the Consent Decree for a three-year period. This time there appears no likelihood of avoiding a show-down in the courts. Federal Judge Henry W. Goddard, who has been sitting on the case since its filing almost seven years ago, set the trial date at a hearing on March 5th, during which Government counsel applied for a temporary injunction to restrain the distributors from granting unreasonable clearance. Evidence of the irreconcilable positions held by the opposing counsel was contained in the bitterness with which arguments were presented. This led observers to the opinion that there was scant hope for any further negotiations looking toward a new Consent Decree. Previously denied any voice in this momentous case, despite their large stake in its outcome, independent exhibitors finally were permitted to make known their views to the court through the medium of a brief as amicus curia (friend of the court) submitted in behalf of the Conference of Independent Exhibitors on the Consent Decree, by A. F. Myers as counsel. This document (part of the text is reprinted starting on page 17 of this issue) traces the history of the suit and the consent decree and suggests means by which the interests of independent exhibitors might be protected in any action the court takes. Perhaps there is no solution other than a trial, but we cannot resist the thought that a revised consent decree would provide a more palatable and practical remedy for the afflictions that beset the industry. The film lawyers appear to have crawled too far out on the limb to be of much aid in negotiating an out-of-court settlement. It is evident, therefore, that any reasonable compromise which might be effected must come 7 19, 194 as the result of negotiations between distribution executives themselves and those who speak for the independent exhibitors. HOW CONFIDENTIAL? It was inevitable that exhibitors should look askance at the new theatre-checking organization formed by five major distributors, Paramount, Universal, RKO, United Artists and Columbia. Despite the announcement by Confidential Reports, Inc. that there would be no exchange of information about receipts between the member companies, our mail indicates already that more than a grain of doubt exists in the minds of some theatremen. One letter from a mid-western exhibitor expresses the opinion that "this new checking outfit is merely another gadget by which the film companies will be able to 'fence us in' still further. The casual exchange of dope on theatre receipts between film salesmen has become a notorious practice in recent years and this new outfit simply will put it on a scientific basis", he writes. The current bulletin of the Ohio ITO, issued by Pete Wood, declares that "under the new set-up, boxoffice grosses will be as confidential as a front page story in the New York 'Times'. Wood says, further: "Evidencing that in the future checking (either 'on-the-level' or 'blind') will become more popular — with the five above named distributors — we note a story in one of the trade papers that while the eight major film companies are presently spending four million dollars per annum for checking, Confidential Reports, Inc., will alone spend ten million dollars a year. As it is estimated that Metro, Twentieth Century-Fox and Warner Brothers each spend $750,000 annually, checking costs for the 'Big Eight' will rise from four million dollars per year to $12,250,000. "As we have been informed that there is no checking of percentage pictures as between the 'Big Eight', therefore all of this checking expense is chargeable ( Continued on Next Page) FILM BULLETIN, an Independent Motion Picture Trade Paper published every other Monday by Film Bulletin Company, Mo Wax. Editor and Publisher. BUSINESS OFFICE: 509 RKO Building, Rockefeller Center, N. Y. 20, COIombus 5-2123. PUBL I CAT ION -EDITORIAL OFFICES: 1239 Vine Street, Philadelphia 7. Pa., RITtenhoose 7424; Barney Stein Publication Manager; Isobelli Weoner. Circulation Manager; Frank Leyendecker, Staff Representative. HOLLYWOOD OFFICE: 8580 Sunset Boulevard, Hollywood 46. Calif., CRestview 6-2061; Sara Salzer, Hollywood Correspondent. Subscription Rate: ONE YEAR, $3.00 in the United States; Canada, $4.00; Europe, $5 00. TWO YEARS, $5.00 in th« United States; Canada, $7.50; Europe. $9.00.