Harrison's Reports (1949)

April 9, 1949 HARRISON'S REPORTS 59 "Massacre River" with Guy Madison, Rory Calhoun and Cathy Downs (Allied Artists, April 1; time, 78 min.) Good. It has drama and considerable melodramatic action. Some of the scenes are tensely dramatic, the result of friendships torn asunder by the love of two men for the same woman. There is considerable shooting, and there are some scenes of Indian raids to enliven the action. The camera work is excellent; it imparts bigness to the outdoor scenes of the rough western country, and the sepia-tone photography is easy on the eyes. The direction and acting are good: — Immediately after the Civil War, Guy Madison, Rory Calhoun, and Johnny Sands, inseparable friends, serve as cavalry officers at a western army outpost. Johnny, a West Pointer, is the son of Art Baker, commander of the fort. Rory, too, was a West Pointer and came from an eastern family of socialites, but Guy had risen from the ranks. Both Rory and Guy love Cathy Downs, Johnny's sister, but she eventually announces her engagement to Guy. Rory takes the blow like a man. Shortly afterwards, a detachment commanded by Guy is sent out to subdue a party of Indians on the war path, and Johnny, disregarding orders, enters forbidden Indian territory and is shot down. Guy, risking his own life, rescues Johnny and takes him to a saloon in a settlement nearby, where Carole Mathews, half-owner with Steve Brodie, extracts the bullet from Johnny. While nursing Johnny back to health, Guy defends Carole from an attack by her ruthless partner, killing him. He comes in contact with Carole often, and the two soon fall in love. Johnny, recovered, learns of their affair; he considers it an insult to his sister and determines to kill Guy. He starts shooting at the unarmed Guy as soon as he finds him, and Carole, to save Guy's life, kills Johnny. Guy, unwilling to state that he had not killed Johnny, resigns his commission and marries Carole. Both head west to live a peaceful life as pioneers. Rory, believing that Guy had killed Johnny, sets out after them. He catches up with them in the heart of the Indian country just as they are attacked by a party of Indians who believed them to be white Buffalo hunters. The three forget their feud to defend themselves, and during the battle Rory learns the truth about Johnny's death from Carole, who had been wounded mortally. Guy eventually convinces the Indians that they are not buffalo hunters, and the braves ride off. Carole dies in Guy's arms. Guy heads west with a caravan, forgiven by Cathy and Rory, who had become sweethearts once again. It was produced by Julian Lesser and Frank Melford, and directed by John Rawlins from an original screen play by Louis Stevens. Suitable for the entire family. COLUMBIA REVIVES OLD PRACTICE Pete Wood's Ohio bulletin No. 425 for March 21 contains an interesting exchange of letters with Abe Montague, General Sales Manager of Columbia. Montague confirms the rumor that Columbia will not produce some of the pictures that it has offered. Here's what Montague says: ( 1 ) "It is quite possible that we will not produce several of the pictures listed in our Form S-14-P." (2) "It is also true that some of the pictures that we may not make were sold in the lowest bracket. . . ." Montague offers the unsound argument that since Columbia sold its product "as individual pictures," and "exhibitors have not attempted to buy nor have we sold on an average," they will not be "materially hurt." Moreover, he says, "every exhibitor has an unrestricted 20% cancellation," from which he argues that this could be used on the high price pictures to restore the balance. Montague ignores the obvious fact that the exhibitors must necessarily buy "on an average"; that they must keep their film rentals at an average level in order to stay in business; that when an exhibitor buys high price pictures and low price pictures and the low price ones are not delivered, his average film rental is thereby increased and he is "materially hurt." The cancellation privilege applies to pictures that were not trade shown before licensing and the exhibitor must exercise it "in the order of release within 10 days after there has been an opportunity offered to the licensee to inspect the feature." Thus an exhibitor cannot intelligently exercise the privilege for the purpose suggested unless he knows exactly which pictures Columbia will deliver and which it will not. Moreover, cancellation of higher price pictures may not be the solution to the exhibitor's problem. It may be more advantageous to him to accept the high price pictures and seek replacements for the undelivered pictures elsewhere. Here again he is hamstrung unless Columbia tells him exactly what he can expect in the way of deliveries. This action by Columbia is simply a revival of a long discredited practice and the evil effects are not greatly reduced by individual selling and a cancellation right. Montague's letter implies that Columbia knows pretty well which pictures will not be produced and it should frankly and openly declare its intentions so that its customers will not be groping in the dark. Unless it does, it may find that its customers hereafter will postpone buying until the pictures are released or in an advanced state of production. In that event Columbia will be deprived of the privilege of looking over its contracts before deciding which pictures it will make. — Allied Bulletin, March 31. ALLIED BLASTS 20TH CENTURY-FOX CAMPAIGN FOR HIGHER RENTALS (Continued from bac\ page) "The answer to the producers' problem," asserts Mr. Myers, "is not to raise prices but to eliminate waste, to increase efficiency, to cut out the dead wood (especially executives who live only in the past), to make pictures for the customers and not for the critics or to salve their own vanity and, above all, to increase production. The producers no longer can survive on a few lavish pictures which are given extended runs in their own theatres and then sold to the independents at exorbitant prices. Hereafter profits will be geared to production in the motion picture industry as well as in all others. The movie producers have been slow to learn the importance of volume and turn-over, but, happily, some of them are learning. . . . "If the distributors really need additional revenue in order to function under the new order of economy, efficiency and increased production, we know where they can get it. This suggestion has been made before and has been shrugged off as often as made. In cases brought by the Government and by private parties, in cases where independents have had access to the contracts and in trade publications it has been often revealed that the large circuits, especially the affiliated circuits, have been buying their pictures much cheaper than the independent exhibitors. This claim has been greeted by heated denials but the disclosures go relentlessly on. Pertinent and (to the troupers) embarrassing at this time are the revelations concerning the double billing of 'A' pictures by Fox Theatres in Milwaukee and on the Coast. Does anyone in his right mind suppose that those theatres could afford to double-bill such pictures if they were paying the same rates that are demanded of the independents? If they are paying a proper film rental and taking a loss, then the purpose must be to drive competing theatres out of business. "The affiliated exhibitors, many of whom are facing disaffiliation, are banded together in their own trade association for the obvious purpose of perpetuating, as far as possible, their special advantages and privileges after they are cut off from the producers. It will be interesting to observe whether the producers, when they no longer have any monetary interest in those theatres, will continue to pamper them at the expense of themselves, their stockholders and the independent exhibitors. From every point of view the producers arc confronted with an opportunity rather than a problem. Will they grasp it or will they continue the archaic and futile gesture of trying to squeeze more out of the independents? . . ." Mr. Myers closes his remarks by reproducing in part the comments of exhibitor organization leaders throughout the country whom he had wired for an expression of their views. Although numerous reasons are cited, all resent the Fox attitude and declare in no uncertain terms that they arc determined to oppose strenuously any plan that would mean increased film rentals.