Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1950)

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.

flL Vol. 18, No. 16 July 31. 1950 Page Five ft THINK IT OVER ONE of the greatest labor saving inventions of today is tomorrow . — VlMCENT T. FOSS. ft BULLETIN FILM BULLETIN— An Independent Motion Picture Trade Paper published every other Monday by Film Bulletin Company. Mo Wax, Editor and Publisher. BUSINESS OFFICE: 35 West 53rd St., New York, 19; Circle 6-9159. David A. Bader, Business Manager. PUBLICATION EDITORIAL OFFICES: 1239 Vine St., Philadelphia 7, Pa., Rlttenhouse 6-7424; Barney Stein, Managing Editor; Jack Taylor, Publication Manager; Robert Heath, Circulation Manager. HOLLYWOOD OFFICE: 659 Haverord Ave., Pacific Palisades, Calif., Hillside 8183; >ay Allen, Hollywood Editor. Subscription Rate: >NE YEAR, $3.00 In the United States; Canada, !4.00; Europe, $5.00. TWO YEARS, $5.00 In the Inited States; Canada, $7.50; Europe, $9.00. CM UNITED ARTISTS REGAIN ITS FORMER GLORY ? Reports from Hollywood in recent days have told of a "rebellion" in the ranks of the independent producers distributing through United Artists. These impatient gentlemen, hungry to see the color of the new coin that will be ploughed into UA's coffers, and demanding a full explanation of future plans of operation, seem to expect that the company will be rebuilt in a day. Their action is not only impulsive and ill-considered, but rankly unfair to the new McNutt-McNamee-Kravetz regime. In our view, those producers have more cause to be jittery about whether they will be acceptable to the new management than about the latter's program for the rehabilitation of UA. Smart men hardly expect that Mr. McNutt and his associates, in control only two or three weeks, would have all their future plans tucked up their sleeves to be revealed at will like some master Houdini. It's going to take time to work out all the details of reorganizing a mighty company like UA, which has been falling apart at the seams for years. One can onl) wonder what sort of reasoning impelled the producers to take such an aggressive stand against the new UA regime after their docile acceptance of the inept old. At the very least, the present leadership is entitled to sufficient time to get its bearings and to establish some signposts indicating the direction it will take in management of its affairs. The task will not be easy. It will take a lot of doing to restore the faith of exhibitors and to regain the confidence of top production people in a company that has been going steadily downward. The bright glory of the old UA became tarnished in recent years as leading independent producers, who considered this company the logical distribution outlet for their product, were alienated by the advent into UA's ranks of inferior producers. Men of the stature of Goldwyn and Selznick were justified in their reluctance to have program pictures eomingled in deals with the top grade product they were delivering. The Hollywood rebellion points up the golden opportunity that beckons to the men who have now assumed command of UA's affairs. It is an opportunity to lift this once-proud, once-great film organization from the trough of mediocrity into which it has slipped, and to re-establish it in the front ranks of our industry. With the imposing leadership of a man like Paul V. McNutt. and bolstered by a production nucleus like the brilliantly talented Stanley Kramer, we can foresee a glowing future for the new United Artists if the aim of its new management is to recapture its former glory. A Samuel Goldwyn, who himself has been slipping of late, and a homeless David O. Selznick might once more recognize the wonderful potential of a U\ dedicated to the best in motion pictures. MO Vi \\.