The Film Daily (1941)

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.

Thursday, July 17, 1941 ^ DAILY 19 Mich. Allied Survey Shows Construction Gain State Gained 83 Houses; Circuit Seats Increase, ThreeYear Survey Shows By H. F. REVES .. FMJM DAILY Staff Correspondent I =— ^troit — The growth of theater ' construction in Michigan during the past three years is strikingly summarized in a survey completed by Allied Theaters of Michigan, which has carefully totalled seating data I for the state. Evidence strongly confirms the many reports of heavy theater building in both Detroit and I upstate areas, as published from ■ time to time in The Film Daily I during this period. The state has gained 83 new theaters, over and above the loss of houses closed and dismantled, during the three years since the last similar survey was made. Even more striking is the increase in seating capacity, with the increase totalling 52,296 seats. Breakdown of figures compiled shows that bulk of increase in seating capacity has been among the circuits, both affiliated and independent, with the actual increase in number of houses about evenly spread between the two classes of circuits and independent exhibitors — owners of one or two houses. Indication is clearly that while the independents are holding their own in adding new theaters, the circuits are definitely gaining in total seating capacity by the construction of larger houses. Outstanding in the figures for increase is the record of the Butterfield Circuit, which added some 18,000 seats during this period. The other drastic change shown among the circuits is in the substitution of Raymond Schreiber's group of houses for the former Advance Theatrical Operation Circuit, whose five houses he acquired. In Detroit itself, the outstanding increase is in the Wisper & Wetsman Circuit, which added some 8,000 seats in this period. The general summary of gains is: 1938 Type of Operation Theaters Seats Affiliated circuits ... 110 133,112 Unaffiliated circuits . 66 61,117 Independent exhibitors 404 209,517 Crescent Defense Scoring Judge Rules Evidence is "Too Speculative' Totals 580 403,746 Type of Operation Theaters Seats 1941 Affiliated circuits .... 133 153,597 Unaffiliated circuits . 81 75,487 Independent exhibitors 449 226,958 Totals 663 456,042 The circuit figures are broken down by each management group including a total of four affiliated theater circuits — two of them operating a single house each — and nine unaffiliated: Affiliated Circuits' Seats 1938 1941 Butterfield Theaters 88,282 106,267 (Continued Crescent Amusement Company and affiliates — from an observer's viewpoint, was very much in favor of the defense. First of all. Judge Elmer D. Davies ruled as "too spec| ulative and too remote all evidence j bearing upon Bank Nights, Amateur | Nights and Hot Seat Nights," although very little testimony as to these methods of competition has as yet been given. In an equally important, if not more important, decision, Judge Davies stated that he was inclined also to eliminate all evidence as to methods employed by Crescent Amusement or other defendants in acquiring theaters in small towns whether by fair means or foul, but that he was concerned about the issue of whether "by the acquisitions, defendants did build up a monopoly in restraint of interstate trade in films, through the use of circuit building power." Lengthy argument by Government counsel that any and all methods used by Crescent were an integral part of the defendants' conspiracy with film distributors resulted in an agreement by the court to continue to accept evidence regarding theater purchases by defendants. J. D. Henry a Witness On the stand at the time above decisions were made was J. D. Henry, now operating the Hickman Insurance Co., Hickman, Ky., but who had previously for many years operated theaters in Hickman and for a short time in Union City, Tenn. Henry was questioned for the entire morning by attorneys for both plaintiff and defendants. He was questioned exhaustively by D of J attorneys concerning the opening and operations of a theater in Union City involving contracts for films with United Artists, Columbia, and Universal. Henry testified that he opened the Roxy Theater there in March, 1939, but that three months and nine days later he sold out to United Detroit Theaters 36,472 38,972 Fox Theater, Detroit 5,500 5,500 RKO Theaters .... 2,858 2,858 Unaffiliated Circuits' Seats 1938 1941 Associated Theaters 5,012 8,255 Advance Theatrical Operation Corp. . . 4,719 .... Samuel J. Brown . 3,522 3,522 William A. Cassidy 3,505 3,505 Ben and Lou Cohen 8,701 8,155 Fred De Lodder . . 6,432 6,432 Krim Bros 3,765 3,524 William J. Schulte 7,491 10,156 Ray Schreiber 5,921 Wisper & Wetsman 17,970 26,015 from Page 1) Crescent Amusement Co. for $8,000 and signed an agreement not to eni gage in the moving picture business 1 in Union City for 25 years. This was followed by testimony revealing that Henry contracted for a total of 175 pictures out of the 1937-38 and 1938-39 seasons, contracting with United Artists, Columbia and Universal, altogether more than $1,000 worth of films in rental value, using only a small part of these pictures before selling the Roxy to Crescent. Questioned on cross-examination by both Edward C. Raftery, representing United Artists and Universal, and Louis D. Frohlich, attorney for Columbia, Henry admitted to considerable controversy with the exchanges due to failure to meet his part of the contracts. He revealed to the court that, according to his interpretation of his contracts with exhibitors on pictures played on percentage he was not obligated for anything where he didn't play the picture. Had Large "Bank" of Film Although the witness testified that he sold out largely because he foresaw difficulty in contracting for United Artists, Universal and Columbia pictures for 1939-40, Attorneys Raftery and Frohlich drew from him evidence that he had a I large "bank" of films to draw from ! when he sold out and had no dif| ficulty in obtaining pictures up to that point. Under questioning by Raftery, he identified a letter bearing his signa! ture, addressed to United Artists, j in which he proposed co-operation j in competing with Crescent Amusej ment Co. with this distributor's products in Union City and nearby i towns. j Questioned about a letter which indicated his failure to keep the agreement with Sudekum to stay out of the theater business in Union City, Henry testified that films he sought to get for exhibition in a tent theater was "for PTA (Parent Teachers' Association), probably during Fair week." At the conclusion of the crossexamination defense attorneys , stated to Judge Davies that it was their opinion that Henry opened the Roxy Theater in Union City j with the intention from the beginning to sell out to Sudekum. It I was brought out in the testimony that none of the pictures contracted for by Henry for the Roxy was ever shown by Crescent's theaters in that city. Joe Wiley on Stand Following Henry on the stand was Joe Wiley, also of Hickman, I CLXflDE LOCKING IN Editor's Note : The opinions expressed in this resume of critical and columnar comment on industry matters are essentially those of the writers quoted; they do not necessarily reflect those of THE FILM DAILY. ANGELO PATRI (Knoxville Journal) : "The movies are a part of the daily life of this country. They are an educative force to be reckoned with and used for the good of the people. For the most part they are light entertainment and that, too, is educative and to be used for our good. "We complain about the effect of movies on children without making the complaint specific. That we have a just complaint is beyond question, but it is not a blanket complaint and should not be offered as one. My specific complaint is that "all movies are open to everybody from infants in arms to the aged. I would prefer a little discrimination in this particular. I would not allow children of certain stages of development to attend certain movies. I would exclude babies in arms on the ground of health reasons. "When a movie has to do with questions beyond the understanding of children ... I would keep children who might be affected by them out of the theater. But I would do that myself, being the responsible parent, and I would not expect the police to do it for me." 10 Cents Straight for Kids At the Temple, Rochester Rochester — Ten-cent admission for kids at all times has been put in effect by the Temple theater here. Admission formerly was 15 cents on Sundays and holidays. Move has resulted in increase in kids business. Ky., and associated with Henry, both in the Roxy Theater at Union City of which he was manager, and at present working for his insurance company. He was questioned closely about what he knew about the operation of the Roxy, but little was developed of interest to either side. After Government attorneys had drawn from Wiley considerable testimony concerning the fact that the witness began remodelling a building for a theater at Hickman, but gave it up when W. F. Riffin, of the Riffin Amusement Co., began constructing a competing theater, Judge Davies ruled it all immaterial since Ruffin is not a defendant in this suit and has no direct connection with it.