Harrison's Reports (1951)

IN TWO SECTIONS— SECTION ONE Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 187#. Harrison’s Reports Yearly Subscription Rates: 1270 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS Published Weekly by United States $15.00 (Formerly Sixth Avenue) Harrison’s Reports, Inc., U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 v , on w v Publisher Canada 16.50 INew York zo> *• p. s. HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 a Motion Picture Reviewing Service Great Britain 17.50 Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1. 1919 Austral a. New Zealand, India, Europe, Asia .... 17.50 Us EdUoria] Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-4622 35c a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING VOL. XXXIII SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1951 No. 7 THE RAW STOCK SITUATION Speaking at a joint meeting of major and independent producers in Hollywood this week, Nathan D. Golden, director of the Motion Picture-Photographies Products Division of the National Production Authority, warned the motion picture industry that its consumption of raw film stock must be cut by five to ten per cent to avoid a shortage in 1951. Pointing out that raw film stock has become an important weapon in the present national emergency, Mr. Golden stated that the Department of Defense will require approximately six per cent of the raw stock manufactured this year, and that the State Department’s Voice of America will require an additional two per cent. The requirements of other Government agencies are not yet known, added Mr. Golden, but he pointed out that the increase in use of film in television has now reached five per cent of the total output, thus adding to the risk of a shortage. Several weeks ago, Mr. Golden held a similar meeting in New York with distribution representatives at the offices of the Motion Picture Association of America, at which time he urged that “the industry itself can contribute greatly to the avoidance of any critical situation in film supplies by exercising the utmost care in film usage and handling — all the way from studio production to eventual exhibition.” The MPAA, recognizing the need for raw stock conservation, has assigned John McCullough, its conservation director, to make a tour of the country's film exchanges to explain to the staffs the tightness of the raw stock situation and the steps that should be taken to conserve the supply. The significant thing about the tightening raw stock situation is that the production and distribution branches of the industry are holding exploratory meetings and taking definite steps to meet the problem, while exhibition, which has an undeniable stake in every foot of raw stock allocated to the industry, has done nothing. With the defense program gaining momentum with every passing day, the raw stock situation is bound to get worse before it gets better, and once the needs of other industries and of the different Government agencies become known it is quite possible that the Government will once again place raw film stock on an allocation basis. As this paper has pointed out several times in recent editorials, the rationing of raw film stock during the World War II period proved to be a bonanza for the producer-distributors because, without regulatory restrictions on the use of the film alloted to them, they created an artificial product shortage by (a) releasing fewer pictures; (b) controlling the number of prints in circulation; (c) using the rationed stock to make new prints of reissues, which the exhibitors were compelled to buy because of the reduced number of new pictures and of the extended runs forced on the prior-run houses; (d) the practice of consuming rationed film stock for new productions that were not released upon completion but hoarded for indefinite future release so as to force the reissues on the market; and (e) the use of rationed raw stock to take care of the producer-distributors’ needs in foreign markets while the exhibitors at home were “starved” for pictures. All these practices enabled the producerdistributors to maintain a “seller’s market,” and even though the different exhibitor associations eventually woke up to the fact that the system of rationing film stock had placed the exhibitors at a disadvantage, their protests to the Government came too late to rectify the situation. What happened during the World War II years must not be permitted to happen again, Rationing is not only a conservation measure but also a system by which parties of different interests are supposedly assured of equitable treatment. As administered during World War II, the allocation of raw film stock was nothing more than one-sided rationing by which the producer-distributors enjoyed a decided advantage over the exhibitors. It is the responsibility of the exhibitor leaders to concern themselves with the problem now to the end that, in the event raw film stock rationing is ordered, the exhibitor, who is definitely an interested party, receives a just share of the benefits to be had from such an order. Let us not close the barn door after the horse runs away. KRIM-BENJAMIN DEAL BRIGHTENS UNITED ARTISTS’ FUTURE When Paul V. McNutt acquired control of United Artists last July, there was hope that the company would extricate itself from its difficulties, but in the eight months that have passed McNutt has not been able to raise the funds needed to reorganize and revitalize the company, with the result that United Artists’ condition has gone from bad to worse. The company’s future looks promising again, however, now that Mary Pickford and Charles Chaplin, the owners, have entered into a contract with Arthur B. Krim and Robert S. Benjamin to assume operating control of the company and to provide working capital and funds for the financing of independent productions. It is expected that Krim and Benjamin will take over the active management of the company within a few days, as soon as final legal formalities are com