Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1952)

BULLETIN EDITORIAL Vol. 20, No. 7 April 7, 1952 Page Three HARMONY "My idea of an agreeable person is a person -who agrees -with me." —BENJAMIN DISRAELI REVIEWS in This Issue Captive City 9 The Denver & Rio Grande 9 The Narrow Margin 9 The Battle at Apache Pass 10 Mara Maru 10 Faithful City 10 Thief of Damascus 12 Yank in Indo-China 12 Strance World 12 FILM BULLETIN — An Independent Motion Picture Trade Paper published every other Monday by Film Bulletin Companv. Mo Wax, Editor and Publisher. BUSINESS OFFICE; 35 West 53rd St., New York, 19; Circle 6-9159. David A. Bader, Business Manager ; Leonard Coulter, Editorial Representative. PUBLICATION — EDITORIAL OFFICES: 1239 Vine St., Philadelphia 7, Pa., RIttenhouse 67424; Barney Stein, Managing Editor; Dick Newton, Publication Manager; Robert Heath, Circulation Manager. HOLLYWOOD OFFICE: 659 Haverford Ave., Pacific Palisades, Calif., Hillside 8183; Jay Allen, Hollywood Editor. Subscription Rate: ONE YEAR, $3.00 in the United States; Canda, $4.00; Europe, $5.00. TWO YEARS, S5.00 in the United States; Canada, $7.50; Europe, $9.00 TV & THE FCC The call to arms issued by A. F. Myers apainst (lie abuses heaped upon our industry by the television interests and "its" (Government agency, the Federal Communications Commission, should be applauded, and. more important, heeded, by the men who control the film companies. This is a situation that has already pone much too far. It is most unbelievable that a big and powerful industry like ours should quiver and quake so spinelessly when confronted with an obvious shakedown such as it has been subjected to in the past year or two by the video magnates and their political gang in Washington. When the FCC, one year ago, issued its blatant and unveiled threat against our industry ordaining that the film companies must furnish their choice pictures and talent to the TV networks for the profit of the beer, soap and cereal hucksters, the entire movie industry should have roared back with a demand for an investigation into the sources of the pressure that must have been brought to bear upon the FCC. It is doubtful if there was ever in the history of our country a more immoral dictum handed down by an agency of our Government. What it amounted to was a fiat to the motion picture industry to commit suicide. By responding in equivocal, compromising tones, the film people invited the kind of shabby treatment they have been receiving in the current FCC hearings on applications for television channels. Some of the blame for this situation must be placed right on the doorstep of those film executives who have felt that their future welfare will be best served bv playing footsie with the television interests. Hearing these film men talk out of both sides of their mouths at the same time has encouraged the McDonalds, and the Sarnoffs and the Folsoms to engage in all sorts of bulldozing tactics. Let's get the record straight and act accordingly: • Television needs films desperately. • Television faces the serious prospect of being overwhelmed by the cost problem in an effort to get films for their entertainment-hungry channels. • Television cannot begin to pay now. or in the foreseeable future, for even half decent feature films. • If the motion picture studios were to divert their product from theatres to the TV field, they would be reduced to a comparative penny-ante business. The video industry will undoubtedly find means of overcoming its own problems. If it needs 15 or 30-minute film subjects, or even of one-hour length, there will doubtless be plenty of outfits available to produce them within the price limitations of the medium. But it has no right to expect, much less demand, that the established movie industry turn over its multi-million dollar properties to it for a pittance so that it can sell its commercial time. No law is written on the statute books of the United States that requires an industry to destroy itself merely to foster the growth of another commercial enterprise. If the Federal Communications Commission is willing to risk the obloquy of its stand, we should force into the light of public and judicial scrutiny the true intent and the effect of its actions. The motion picture industry is a giant; why does it act like a pygmy? MO WAX