The Film Daily (1943)

>nday, October 11, 1943 Preferred Playing Time Demands Held Greater arden of Proof on the <hib. Declared Fundaental Decree Weakness (Continued from Page 6) losttion to any return to blind selling as it ■i practiced before the entry of the consent ,^^. Allied in submitting its questionnaire. »i"l%' allow any choice that involved a }Jf to pre-decree practice. Plan (d) inin? of a full season's output of i ciuately identified" pictures with a 20 cent cancellation privilege. The problem adequately identifying pictures and coupsuch identification with a cancellation n so as to avoid a return to blind booking Iiscussed in the report of the undersigned the board of directors of Allied States iciation dated April 30 (pp. 37-39), a \ of which was sent to the Department, 'lie several plans submitted and the votes reon are as follows: (a) The five-picture plan, with trade bowings, as provided in the consent ecree — T exhibitors and 26 theaters. (b) The selling of trade-shown pic<in-s in such groups as the distributor ml exhibitor may agree upon, with rovision that the exhibitor may not be t quired to license pictures he docs not .nit in order to get the pictures he nes want — 60 exhibitors and 148 theters. (c) The selling of trade-shown or i<iequately identified pictures in groups iiiitaining approximately one-fourth of Be annual output, with a 20 per cent .mediation — 84 exhibitors and 286 theers. (d) The selling of a full season's ntput, adequately identified, with a 20 er tent cancellation — 217 exhibitors ■id 627 theaters. (e) Other methods which exhibitors ■ay care to suggest — 11 exhibitors and |t; theaters. bus the consent decree method received j ally no support. The organized extors were opposed to the method when fas adopted and experience has increased r bitterness. As shown under the next ^ling the distributors killed whatever ice of success the plan might have had asing it as a lever for jacking up prices, indicated by their comments, some of <• who voted for (d) were in full reaction \i exorbitant film rentals and wanted to as far away from the five-picture plan •ossible. Those who voted for alternate , s (b) and (C) frequently indicated that would be satisfied with either. Thereit is largely a question of (d) against field. ,jtjr. Economics of the decree. The blunt I 6 revealed by the questionnaires are that , :■ the. consent decree the distributors raised film rentals to levels wholly i by any increase in the cost of ovement in the quality of the product; >i! have increased their net profits beyond I own dreams of avarice; and (c) have (.'merely expanded their theater holdinogs i acquisitions and construction but have l i ived to drain off the greater part of | earnings and dominate and control the jjjlating policies of the independent theaters as of forced percentage playing. ve-Blocks" Said to Have Jpf Pic Rentals Upward 4' ) High film rentals. Question No. 15 ijj-.red whether the five-picture plan had ■ Hhe effect unduly to increase film rentals. J? vote was practically unanimous — 339 tors and 1112 theaters "yes" to 25 tors and 43 theaters "no." ,.,.,.13 vote reflects the deep-seated convic : of the exhibitors that the five-picture is responsible for the intolerable condi that have arisen since the decree was ,ed. The questionnaires show that the ndous increase in the exhibitors' film is due mainly to increased demands for ntage playing. It may be argued that istributors could have brought this about the old system and that they, not the oieture plan, are responsible. The ex 3rs in their comments supply the answer. .' to the decree only one compaay (Metro) * n fixed policy with respect to percentage 'Vrig and it required only a few such ,'ements during a season. The others HOLLYWOOD LIOESL ASSIGNMENTS SALLY BENSON, script, "Experiment Perilous," RKO. WILLIAM PERLBERC, producer, "Louisville Lou," 20th-Fox. IRVING CUMMINCS, director, "Something for the Boys," 20th-Fox. PAUL COX, casting director, "It Happened Tomorrow," Arnold Pressburger-UA. • SIGNED NORMAN TAUROC, termer, M-C-M. MILO ANBERSON, designer, another year, Warners. MARTHA STEWART, termer, M-C-M. CASTINGS WALTER PIDCEON, "If Winter Comes," MC-M; FRED MacMURRAY, "Girls Town," Paramount; SIGNE HASSO, "The Seventh Cross," M-C-M; FERRY COMO, "Louisville Lou," 20thFox; CHESTER MORRIS, "Hell's Afloat" and "Tenderloin," Pine-Thomas, Paramount; ROBERT WARWICK and JOE YULE, "Kismet," MG-M; |0HN LAWRENCE, CHARLES WILLIAMS, EVELYN EATON, NEAL MARX and JIMMY ZANER, "Where Are My Children?," Monogram; HURD HATFIELD, "Dragon Seed," M-G-M; MICKEY ROONEY and JUDY GARLAND, "Jumbo," M-C-M; SYBIL MERRITT, "The Story of Dr. Wassell," Paramount; TEX RITTER, "Cowboy Canteen," Columbia; JANIS CARTER, "The Racket Man," Columbia. MINERVA URECAL, "The Bridge of San Luis Rey." Benedict Bogeaus-UA; JANE DEVLIN, "Since You Went Away," David O. Selznick-UA. TITLE SWITCHES "Louisville Lou," formerly "Blue Skies," 20thFox. SCHEDULED "If Winter Comes,' producer, PANDRO BERMAN; screenplay, MICHAEL ARLEN, MG-M. would occasionally sell a few on percentage, but not many. When they were selling a whole seasons product the distributors had to sell all their percentage pictures at one time. The exhibitor was fortified by a backlog of product and his resistance was high. Under the five-picture plan all consenting companies began to demand one or more percentage pictures in each group. The picture shortage and other factors herein enumerated lowered the exhibitors' resistance. Then there is the psychological factor mentioned by erne exhibitor who commented: Easier to sell an idea on one picture at high percentage in each group of five than to .-ell 10 in a block of 50." Another exhibitor put it this way: ". . . The distributors found they could extort more money when they took it in sniuller bunches. We now play approximately 35 percentage pictures a year. Before the decree we played 8 percentage pictures a year." Preferred Playing Time Demands Declared Greater (b) Preferred playing time. Not satisfied with forcing a percentage arrangement on every picture deemed (in their own estimation) to be above "program" calibre, the distributors have insisted that such pictures be played on Saturday or Sunday, or whatever day or combination of days will be most profitable. Question No. 15 asked whether the distributors had increased their demands for preferred time. The returns showed that such demands had increased in about the same proportion as demands for percentage playing. The result: 273 exhibitors, with !i5i> theaters, reported that demands for preferred time had increased; 64 exhibitors, with 112 theaters, that they had not. Exhibitors usually measure their weekly receipts on a point system — three points for Sunday, two for Saturday, and one for each remaining day in the week. Sometimes week-ends are rated as high as seven-tenths of the whole. Prom this it is easy to understand how enforced percentage playing on week-ends drains off the earnings of the theaters. There is another aspect of these demands for preferred time that directly affects the public. It deprives the exhibitor, who knows his patrons and the kind of pictures they prefer, of any control over the spotting of his pictures. Saturday and Sunday are the days of maximum attendance by children and the exhibitors cannot give them the wholesome action pictures they prefer. The questionnaires contain many examples of this; one will suffice: "Very frequently we are forced to show strictly adult pictures, such as 'Constant Nymph' and 'DuBarry Was a Lady' on Saturday or Sunday, the favorite day for children's attendance." One exhibitor, speaking of a very small situation, said that it did not make much difference to him in dollars and cents but he recognized that it is a step in the growing domination of the independent theaters — "a little more control of my theater that is lost." Claim Hoarding of Pix Continues to Prevail (c) Picture shortage. It was well-known to the Department when it issued its statement dated August 17, 1942, that the consenting companies had on hand approximately 100 completed pictures. While the reporting exhibitors were in no position to supply the facts in the sole possession of the distributors, it is generally known that the hoarding of completed pictures still exists and that sorely needed product is being withheld from release. Thus the difficulties inherent in the five-picture plan have been aggravated by an artificial picture shortage. In response to Question No. 17 120 exhibitors, with 541 theaters, reported that they were suffering from this condition. According to several exhibitors the condition is made still worse by the newly-adopted policy of withdrawing from service prints of pictures already released much earlier than formerly, making it impossible to gain relief from the shortage by licensing older product. The distributors may try to explain the existing shortage by claiming it is the result of extended runs being given many pictures by first-runs in the metropolitan areas. Certainly it is due in substantial measure to the many newly-created "moveovers" cited by the reporting exhibitors pursuant to Question 18. But that does not alter the fact of responsibility, since the distributors control the first-run metropolitan theaters and the cases cited involve affiliated houses. The warranted conclusion is that the steadily declining number of releases, the extended playing time and the creation of additional first-runs by means of moveovers are all a part of a general scheme to milk the pictures as dry as possible before making them available to the independent exhibitors and to squeeze from the latter the last possible penny in the form of film rental. Charge "Blind Pricing" Used To Assure Maximum Rentals (d) Blind pricing. Another device for extracting maximum film rentals from the exhibitors is "blind pricing." This involves selling a group of pictures on a contract containing certain percentage and flat rental brackets, reserving to the distributor the right to allocate the pictures to the respective brackets either before or after they are played. Under this practice an exhibitor cannot estimate what his pictures are going to cost him when he buys them or even when he plays them. The distributor designates the playdates and the terms, based on the prior success of the pictures, and solely in his own interest. The one-sided nature of the device is apparent and its use is another manifestation of the monopolistic power of the defendants. By Question No. 5 Allied asked the exhibitors to indicate whether they thought. (;a) there should be a provision requiring that prices and allocations be written into the contract or (b) that allocations should be made upon notice of availability, or when the picture is booked, whichever is earlier. The vote: Compulsory Block-Booking Said Not Deterred By the Consent Decree (a) In the contract — 313 exhibitors, with 998 theaters. (b) On availability — 46 exhibitors, with 121 theaters. A few exhibitors noted that the choice might depend upon which selling system is adopted. Their thought was that if pictures are trade-shown and sold in small groups, allocations definitely should be fixed in the contract. On the other hand, if they are to be sold in dull-season blocks, and played long after the contract is signed, then the percentage pictures, if any, should be allocated upon notice of availability. The heavy vote cast attests the keen interest of the exhibitors in the matter, as do the many vigorous comments. There is equity in the remark of one exhibitor that "the distributor and the exhibitor should take the same gamble at the boxoffice." "Five-Blocks" Held Menace To Exhibs. Established Runs (e) Threatening loss of run. Buying in small groups at frequent intervals made possible another form of duress, not only in full line forcing, but also in clubbing exhibitors into submission to whatever terms the distributors demand. This is practiced in competitive situations by threatening to "sell away" (i.e., to sell the pictures to a competitor on the same or subsequent run) if the exhibitor does not come to terms. The threat is serious, involving possible loss of the exhibitor's established run of pictures and the prestige and good-will appertaining thereto. As one exhibitor expressed it, "The threat to sell away is a phantom always perched on the distributor's shoulder in making new deals." To the question (No. 3) "Has the fivepicture selling plan had the effect, directly or indirectly, to endanger your established run?" 66 exhibitors, with 336 theaters, answered "yes." It may be argued that this is merely legitimate competition which it is the purpose of the Sherman Law to create and foster. But it is a strange outcome that a decree designed to restore competition among distributors for the protection of the exhibitors should have as its principal achievement the stimulation of destructive competition among the exhibitors for the enrienment of the distributors. The plain fact is that the distributors in many cases, with a total disregard for old customer relationships, have taken advantage of the opportunity afforded by the five-pictun! plan to threaten the exhibitors with virtual ruination as a means of extorting high film rentals. (f) Department's responsibility. In view of what has taken place under the consent decree it can not fairly be argued that the Department's function and responsibility are confined to an insistence that trade practices conform to its concepts of the law. The Department in a legal as well as a moral sense is responsible for the economic consequences of its policies and decrees, and if these have adversely affected innocent parties it owes such parties a duty to correct the condition. The questionnaires show that there is a strong belief among independent exhibitors that the consent decree is responsible for the intolerable conditions that have arisen. Whether that is true in a strict sense may be debatable, but it is undeniable that the decree afforded the opportunity for exploiting the exhibitors and that the distributors gleefully took advantage of it. "Exhibs. Must be Allowed Some Bargaining Power" Therefore, we say that in addition to the legal obligation expressly imposed by the statute to insist upon effective measures for restoring competition in the production and distribution of motion pictures, the Department also is morally obligated to rescue the independent exhibitors from the oppression practices by the defendants under cover of the consent decree. The exhibitors must be allowed some bargaining power if they are to survive in an industry which is so completely dominated by the powerful affiliated interests. They must be afforded the right to select the pictures that best suit their needs and to reject or cancel those which are undesirable (Continued on Page 8)