The Film Daily (1935)

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.

THE ■%tl DAILY Friday, Aug. 16,1935 FOX STOCKHOLDERS VOTE FOR MERGER {.Continued from Page 1) off arguments on a show cause application filed by the William Fox interests, until 2 p. m. yesterday. Late in the afternoon Judge Alonzo McLaughlin granted a temporary injunction to All-Continent and Eva t'ox staying consummation of the merger ipenaing a hearing on a motion to make the injunction permanent. Murray Becker, counsel for Fox, has until tonight to file supporting papers. Attorneys for Fox Film must file their answer by tomorrow. Another show cause order filed in behalf of Alex Gilbert to prevent holding of the meeting was withdrawn. Less than 100 stockholders and their attorneys were present at the meeting, at which Kent presided. Total of 2,018,053 shares of Class "A" stock were represented and 14,557 of Class "B". Objection to the merger was raised on the grounds that Fox was getting no important assets from 20th Century and also in regard to compensation of executives involved in the plan. The major attack on the move occurred when Henry J. Sperling, counsel for the Committee for Fox Stockholders, submitted an amendment to the motion ratifying the plan, authorizing the appointment of Class A stockholders to confer with the management on a revised merger deal. After much discussion, mostly in opposition to the merger, a vote was taken with the results that the amendment was killed, 2,032,610 to 184. After the meeting had formally approved the merger, Kent retired and W. C. Michel, executive vicepresident, took the chair as the matter of the stock agreement came up for consideration. Schenck, in advocating adoption of the resolution authorizing the move, paid high tribute to the Fox distribution organization. He said that the company is selling 9,500 accounts, the greatest number of theaters ever sold by a film company. He complimented Kent as a great executive. Attendance at the meeting included: Richard Dwight, Fox attorney; Sydney Towell, Charles C. McCarthy, Dan Michalove, George Skouras, Felix A. Jenkins, Fox secretary, Clayton P. Sheehan and Sol Lesser. R G. Katz Mae Clarke Lucien Littlefield Miniature Gable Photos Click in Tieups Miniature photos of Clark Gable being used by the M-G-M exploitation department have attained exceptional popularity throughout the country. These small pictures are being used effectively on radio programs by music stores, department stores, beauty shops, newspaper classified ad promotions, drug stores and dozens of other channels. One tie-up involves 200 stores handling Salada tea. Special window and counter cards are being used announcing a free picture with each tea purchase. A New York City tie-up was arranged with Dell Publishing Co. by which a photo was given in 90 stores with each copy of "Modern Screen." » » » TIMELY TOPICS « « « Opposes Cooperation With the Legit Stage pOR the past twenty years or more Mr. Walter Prichard Eaton has made a special profession (or has it been merely a hobby?) of attacking the motion picture. Those familiar with this age-old attitude of Mr. Eaton must have been surprised, perhaps even bewildered, on reading his seemingly friendly overtures in "The Times" Magazine of July 14. A close inspection of this article reveals, however, that Mr. Eaton is at least as obtuse as ever, and the theory on which he bases his proposals should be demolished for all time. What, precisely, does Mr. Eaton propose ? In a word, he proposes that the motion picture industry — that same industry which he has so passionately desired to drive out of existence for the past two decades — should cooperate with the Federal Government. To what purpose— for the greater advancement and glory of the cinema, perhaps? Not a bit of it. He proposes cooperation for no other purpose than to restore the so-called legitimate theater, the stage, "to the rest of America beyond Broadway." He adds, and several times emphasizes, that he "thoroughly believes that (this) should be accomplished for the good of all, the screen no less than the stage." As a champion of the cinema, I will answer Mr. Eaton first by assuring him that in the light of the best interests of my art the cooperation he urges is neither desirable nor logical. It would, on the contrary, prove detrimental to the motion picture in the long run, and it would be the most absurd, the most insanely illogical thing the Hollywood movie magnates have ever done if they contributed one cent to any program, governmental or private, that has for its object the "restoration" of a branch of the drama which is now virtually extinct and which, even at best, bears only a thin, superficial resemblance to the cinema. Probably few people who read Mr. Eaton's article appreciated the motives that inspired it — namely, the commercial restoration of the speaking stage through the good grace and financial support of the screen (what a joke on Hollywood this would be!) and, coupled with this, an attempt to undermine the growing prestige of the cinema in this country by depicting it as a mere counterfeit of the so-called legitimate theater which naturally cannot hope to compete with the theater on the latter's own grounds. If I were not so familiar with Mr. Eaton's tireless campaigns against the motion picture, I should not find an unpleasant, hollow sound in his adjuration that "the older type of living theater must not be allowed to die, not only for its own sake but quite as much for the sake of the new art of the screen." It is quite inconceivable to any one who has kept in touch with his perennial prejudices on this subject that Mr. Eaton should be ever so slightly concerned over the "survival" or the "artistic growth" of the screen. It would have been so much more to the point had he come straight out with a smashing frontal attack against the motion picture, as he used to do in the old days when the movies were still struggling with the stage for artistic and financial supremacy and the struggle, despite D. W. Griffith, had not yet been absolutely decided in favor of the screen. Instead of this, he chooses a new line, a camouflaged line which actually amounts to nothing more than whining to his enemy (after twenty years of unsolicited attacks) for "cooperation" — "just as much for your sake as for mine." For all this, it is doubtful whether Mr. Eaton will fool any friends of the living cinema as to his true position, least of all as to his true motives, in offering the movie magnates the dubious honor of performing an emergency operation, at their personal expense, to save the dying theater. — Seymour Stern, in New York Times. KENT SAYS MANPOWER IS PRINCIPAL ASSET (Continued from Page 1) Fox is getting the worst of the merger. Compared to creative power and imagination, asserted Kent, physical assets mean nothing. Talking straight from the shoulder, Kent, at the opening of his remarks, said that in April, 1932, Fox Film owed $40,000,000, of which $30,000,000 was long past due. The company was in a "live or die" situation, explained the Fox president. Justifying his compensation requirements under the merger move, Kent said that when he entered the company, he "could have written his own ticket." However, in view of its acute financial condition, he only drew $66,000 in salary one year and $77,000 the next, he stated. "I have no apologies_to offer for the job I've done," declared Kent. Going into the value of manpower, ne said that Loew's is the best company in the business because it has men like Nicholas M. Schenck, Louis B. Mayer, J. Robert Rubin, David Bernstein and others. By the same token, he declared, Columbia has made an important success. Defending salaries paid by Fox, Kent said that his company pays Will Rogers $8,000 a week and that the star is worth that much money. Darryl Zanuck, too, deserves $5,000 or more a week, asserted the Fox jhieftain. "You don't buy manpower in bunches like bananas", Kent told the stockholders. He outlined the records of Joseph M. Schenck and Zanuck in 20th Century, describing the producing firm's success as "the finest record ever established" in the film industry. All but two of the pictures produced by 20th Century have showed a profit, stated Kent, who reiterated his statement that the consolidation brings the Fox outfit $4,000,000 added capital. Since the merger plan was drafted, he explained, 20th Century pictures have brought in $1,100,000 in revenue during a twomonth period. Product of the Zanuck forces has grossed two and one-half times its negative costs, it was stated. Further listing the advantages Fox will derive from the consolidation, Kent said that while Rogers is not a big draw abroad, players under contract to 20th Century have big followings there. Kent also stated that dropping of the Fox name had been under consideration for some time. Fox Holds Will Rogers Reports that Winfield R. Sheehan, who recently resigned as head of Fox production, has a personal contract with Will Rogers were, in effect, denied by Sidney R. Kent yesterday at the Fox stockholders' meeting when he stated that his company has the star's exclusive services for motion pictures.