Harrison's Reports (1955)

Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879. Harrison's Reports Yearly Subscription Rates: 1270 SIXTH AVENUE Published Weekly by United States J15.00 New York 20 N Y Harrison's Reports, Inc.. U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 WeW York '2U' T* Publisher Canada 16.50 A Motion Picture Reviewing Service P S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico^ Cuba, Spain 16.50 Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Great Britain ............ 17.50 Established July 1, 1919 Australia, New Zealand, India. Europe, Asia 17.60 it8 Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial „ . _ ,„„ 35c a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. wrcie <-4b^ A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXXVII SATURDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1955 No. 44 PRE-RELEASES, OLD STYLE AND NEW In its discussion of the proposed arbitration draft in the October 1 issue, this paper called attention to the fact that the draft is essentially the same as the 1952 arbitration draft, but that it contained modifications that appeared to offer even less to the exhibitors than the earlier draft. Cited in particular was the modification of the definition of clearance, and the provision permitting each of the distributing companies to pre-release two pictures per year, which pictures "in nowise shall be subject to arbitration" until such time as each distributing company announces that such pictures are ready for general distribution. That these portions of the draft are highly detrimental to the interests of the exhibitors was expressed in no uncertain terms this week by Abram F. Myers, National Allied's general counsel and board chairman, in a talk before the convention of the Independent Exhibitors of New England at Winchenson, Mass. Declaring that he could not understand why any exhibitor representatives, particularly the Theatre Owners of America, should approve the plan, Mr. Myers had this to say in the following excerpts from his talk: "PRERELEASES, OLD STYLE "The fast-growing practice of prereleasing pictures in its essence is nothing more or less than a palpable attempt to evade the provisions of the decrees entered in the Government's big anti-trust case. "Despite all the protestations of the film companies and sophistries of the Department of Justice, the clear purpose and effect of the practice is to raise and maintain admission prices and to impose new and increased clearances on subsequent run and small town theatres. "At the hearing before the Senate Small Business Committee in 1953, we submitted evidence which in my opinion proved unlawful admission price-fixing on 'Peter Pan' beyond a doubt. "We not only adduced testimony showing attempts to induce exhibitors to raise their admission prices, but proved that theatres in many scattered locations not only increased their prices but raised them to a uniform level. "And since prereleasing involves the superimposing of a new run ahead of the established runs it disrupts the established clearances upon which, I insist, the subsequent run and small town exhibitors have a right to rely. "A new clearance is established, consisting of the waiting time between the prerelease run and the established first run. This is an indeterminate clearance which is not specified in the contracts and rests in the whim of the distributor. The word 'availability' has virtually supplanted 'clearance' in many areas and often is measured in days after the territorial release of a picture. The inevitable effect of prereleasing is materially to increase and make uncertain the waiting time of the subsequent runs. "There is authority as well as reason for saying that unreasonable clearance by any other name smells just as bad. "In the teeth of the showing made by the exhibitors Judge Barnes, head of the Antitrust Division, reported to the Small Business Committee that no violation of the decrees or of the law had occurred However, the printed record stands and is available to all who can read and I am confident that it will rise to haunt the members of the Department's staff and Committee members who joined in the whitewash. "Judge Barnes did intimate that if this prereleasing business was carried too far there might be danger in the practice. This I interpreted, jocosely, to mean that a few cases of murder should be overlooked but a massacre might be questionable. "Evidently the film companies have construed Barnes* attitude as a license to commit wholesale murder because prereleases are increasing in number and all companies seem to want to get into the act. If Barnes' reservations concerning the practice, if carried too far, mean anything, then he should consider that he has been challenged and put the practice to test under the decrees and under the law. "PRERELEASES, NEW STYLE "Since Judge Barnes and the Committee gave prereleases what amounted to a clean bill of health (unless there were too many of them), something new has been added. Barnes' report was based on a record which indicated that the prerelease runs were awarded on competitive bids or, at least, were open to all theatres if they could afford such luxuries. So far as the record disclosed the prereleased pictures were offered 'theatre by theatre." "In this part of my address I must confine myself to one company — Paramount — and refer to only two pictures concerning which I have authentic information, namely, 'Strategic Air Command' and 'Desperate Hours.' " 'Strategic Air Command' was given a preliminary run in seven selected theatres which, according to Louis Phillips, Paramount's General Counsel, were modified in certain respects in order to show the picture to the best advantage. I pass over this special run in seven hand-picked theatres in order to deal with something vastly more important. "Thereafter the picture was shown on another special run, inserted ahead of the regular first runs, in 601 selected theatres. These showings were called 'merchandising engagements' and that was the first time that I ever encountered that term. So this picture, made with the cooperation of the United States Air Force, and using its personnel and equipment, was given two prerelease runs, in hand-picked theatres before it was put on regular release. "Coming to 'Desperate Hours,' which is of current interest, it is being given a special prerelease run in 128 theatres in the United States, again under the name of 'merchandising engagements.' "Isn't it amazing that in the whole United States Para^ mount has chosen only 128 theatres as suitable for showing this picture on prerelease? Assuming there are 18,000 theatres in the United States, this method deprives 17,872 of all opportunity to play on this preferred run. "I do not know how many theatres there are in the Boston exchange territory, but I am told that only eight theatres therein were tapped by Paramount for the honor — eight theatres scattered through five states "Now the question I pose and would like to have answered is this: How does Paramount, and how can the Department of Justice, reconcile this hand-picking of theatres for these 'merchandising engagements' with the provision common to all the decrees which enjoins the defendants — " 'From licensing any feature for exhibition upon any run in any theatre in any other manner than that each license shall be offered and taken theatre by theatre, solely upon the merits, without discrimination in favor of affiliated theatres, circuit theatres, or others.' DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO LEGALIZE PRERELEASES "The District Court resolutely denied all moves by the defendants to write into the decree an exception in favor of roadshows, which are, essentially the same thing as prereleases and 'merchandising engagements.' The judges who heard the evidence and decided the case insisted that all (Continued on bac\ page)