Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1956)

9i Jft Coincidence? A& Proyranvminq Problem* SeMt TV, 9ih Studio* Step Up Production Television Has Its Troubles, Too! by LEONARD COULTER Easily the most fascinating phase in the struggle for dominance in the field of popular entertainment is beginning to unfold. It is the television chieftains who are worried now. A year ago the positions were reversed, but one thing is unmistakeable today: the motion picture industry's adversaries are by no means secure in their mighty electronic fortresses. Coming events are casting their shadows across the nation, weaving a pattern which bodes ill for the pessimists who have been predicting that the days of the film theatre are numbered. Now, this is not just airy optimism. During the past few months there have been the clearest possible signs of a slackening of public enthusiasm for television and a marked reawakening of interest in films. No-one seems to be sure of the cause of the change in the situation. Some argue that television programming has lost its pep. TV critics like Jack Gould of the "New York Times" are finding this the dullest television season ever. And apparently the TV public, long wedded to the "new" medium of entertainment, is proving decidedly fickle. It is turning back to movies — even the backlog ones now going out over the air — and is rediscovering the magic of Hollywood. There are others whose explanation of this trend is that stimulation of interest in movies is due to an entirely different factor — the phenomenal successes scored by blockbuster films like "Around the World in Eighty Days", "The King and I", "Giant", "The Ten Commandments". Then there is another group which claims that television's current woes stem from the dawning recognition that it is inadequately equipped to satisfy its own voracious appetite and that the only way out of this dilemma is to fall back on the traditional skills and talents which Hollywood commands. Why. TV Captains Are Worried The broadcasters' anxieties have not been eased by the knowledge that it is becoming harder than ever to satisfy some of their biggest sponsors with routine fare. Cancellations are flying thick and fast. Coca-Cola is getting out of the Eddie Fisher show. Ford is cancelling at least one of its million-dollar programs and is cutting down on its spectaculars. And simultaneously there is developing along Advertising Row a feeling that televised films — even vintage ones dating back to the 1940's — are doing better than many costly and complex "live" shows. The result is that the TV moguls are attempting to shunt the best backlog films into time slots in which they will not compete with "live" broadcasts, lest their carefully built-up program departments are brought to a state of ruin. Jack Gould of the "New York Times" has openly stated as much. He wrote recently : "The impact of films would be greater than it is but for an extraordinarily shrewd move by C.B.S. in the New York market, the showcase of video, the network has bought up the prize Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer package, which it can show at hours that presumably won't interfere with network operations. But advertisers, who welcome films because they are ready-made attractions and do not require all the time-consuming effort and expense that is part of original programming . . . may bring enough pressure to upset the current way of life of the chains." Such is the transformation which has come over the scene. The TV networks are on the defensive for the first time. The Search for Quality Gould thinks TV is approaching its testing time. He believes that, to a great extent, the unfortunate dilemma in which it now finds itseif is due to the fact that it simply cannot afford to assert its independence from advertisers who, because they pay the bill, determine what shall and shall not be broadcast. In the result, program quality has slipped to a low level. Adds Gould: "In his own way and to the extent that it is possible, today's viewer is pursuing TV quality. 'How Green Was My Valley' happens to be better than the average half-hour situation comedy or the patently staged quiz show . . . Because the mass of viewers never will rise to complain about any free show does not mean it does not want substance and quality . . ." There is the nub of the situation: quality — Hollywood's freedom and ability to provide it and TV's failure to maintain it because the network programmers have lost control (Continued on Page 12) Film BULLETIN November 24. 1954 Page 11