Harrison's Reports (1955)

182 HARRISON'S REPORTS November 12, 195^ RUBE SHOR'S INTERESTING REVELATIONS In his militant keynote speech in which he urged the Allied convention to follow an aggressive policy and spurn "neutralism" in exhibitor affairs, Rube Shor, president of the organization, centered much of his fire on the leaders of the Theatre Owners of America and lived up to his promise to name names. Space limitations do not permit full reproduction of Mr. Shor's fine 10-page address, but his comments on why the joint Allied'TOA committee was unsuccessful in its efforts to secure relief from harsh distribution policies, and on the vacillating attitudes and actions of TOA's leaders, should be of interest in view of the fact that several TOA front men have been highly critical of Allied's plan to seek legislative relief. Here is what Mr. Shor had to say, in part: "The film companies knew that the presence of the TOA men on the (joint) committee meant that there would be no joint action by the two exhibitor bodies in case they did not meet the committee's demands. They know that no matter what occurred at the conferences the TOA men would remain true to the do-nothing policy of their association. They knew that the TOA representatives were front men for the big circuits that support that organization and that, no matter how bravely they spoke, they would not be permitted to join in Allied's aggressive measures. Yes, the distributors knew from long experience that the TOA emmisaries would live to return another day, hat in hand, to make another try at settling the exhibitors' critical problems by friendly negotiation. "This parting of the ways was from our standpoint bad enough, but the aftermath was appalling. When the big circuits, whose contributions make TOA possible, intervened to calm down some of the TOA boys who had been talking like Allied men, they really cracked the whip. And they did it so effectively that those same boys have now turned against Allied's entire program and threaten to oppose it all down the line. "Now you may ask, why did Allied allow itself to be caught in such a trap? Since all this happened in my administration as president of Allied, and since 1 was head of the Allied contingent on the joint committee, I am in a position to give you the facts. "It was simply because I and my associates were accustomed to dealing with men who say what they mean and mean what they say. Also, we were used to dealing with men who, when they say they will follow a certain course, have first ascertained whether they are free to do so. Because of the false light in which Allied and I have been put by the sudden about-face of the TOA members of the joint committee, I will trespass on your time for a few minutes to tell you exactly what occurred at the first meeting here in Chicago. "Alfred Starr did most of the talking for the TOA committee men and he stated that if the negotiations failed to produce the desired results — and I am using his words — 'Desperate men would do desperate things.' Allied's EDC program was under discussion and Starr's declaration was concurred in by Martin, Reade and Blank. And since resort to legislation was a prominent feature of the program, the Allied men interpreted the statement to include legislation and it was similarly interpreted by some of the trade papers. "Now our erstwhile comrades in arms from TOA would have you believe that the joint committee did not exhaust the possibilities of friendly negotiation. When we entered into this alliance there was no thought, much less agreement, that there would be a second or third round of visits if the first did not produce results. Allied could not agree to a program of long continued dalliance for a very definite reason. "Under the EDC program there had to be a time limit. If this was not explained to the TOA men, as I believe it was, they must have realized it anyway. Allied could not in good conscience carry on friendly negotiations with the distributors and attack them before a Congressional Committee at the same time. And so throughout the visitations, with the frequent postponements and delays, Allied held its legislative program in abeyance, and it remained in moth balls while the 1st session of the 84th Congress passed into history. Any further delay would amount to an abandonment of the program. "So far as TOA is concerned, we need not speculate as to what its future course will be. While frantic efforts have been made to hide the shame of the betrayal in Los Angeles, by excluding reporters from the room, we know now that TOA has wholly reverted to type. So far as its attitude toward pressing problems is concerned, there is not a bit of difference between the TOA of today and MPTOA of 1928, whose capture by the affiliated chains led to the formation of Allied as the independent exhibitors' only shield and defender. "And if any of you are curious to know what TOA proposes to do about film and film rentals, I can relate to you some information given us by a disgusted exhibitor who attended their recent convention in Los Angeles. He tells us that after much time had been wasted at the much advertised closed session, one exhibitor inquired when they were going to get around to film rentals. Mitch Wolfson, who was presiding, said smoothly that TOA was holding its convention in New York next year and, the distributors being located there, would attend the sessions and such problems could be ironed out. "TOA has claimed to be a forward looking organization and I am compelled to agree to this. It looks far, far into the future for exhibitor relief." On the subject of arbitration, Mr. Shor had this to say, in part, about the TOA leaders: "Now E. D. Martin, Alfred Starr, Walter Reade and Myron Blank knew perfectly well what Allied s attitude was toward the only kind of arbitration that the film companies would agree to. Moreover, we discussed the subject in the joint committee and I got the clear impression that at least some of them had come around to Allied's way of thinking. But I don't want to stand on this generalization. My recollection of what took place is as follows: "Martin, Starr, Reade and Blank were in complete accord in their opposition to the proposal to legalize the prereleasing ot two pictures per company per year. Starr and Reade felt that arbitration of film rentals was desirable; and Martin was all out in favor of all-inclusive arbitration and so stated to the press. In fact, I was assured that such a draft as was then under negotiation would never be approved by TOA. After meeting with Skouras and Gehring, and prior to our visits with the other sales managers, Martin insisted that we should not accept anything less than the Fox proposal for arbitrating film rentals of $100 or less. "Despite all this big talk by Martin and his associates, TOA has approved the Levy-Schimel draft and has congratulated its arbitration committee consisting of Herman Levy, Mitch Wolfson, Si Fabian and Bob Wilby, on a great accomplishment!" THE NATIONAL ALLIED CONVENTION (Continued from bac\ page) to a divorced circuit's application to acquire or construct a theatre; (b) that if the Department of Justice recommends to the Court that it approve an application, despite the opposition of affected exhibitors, then it shall also recommend that such exhibitors be given full opportunity to present their facts and arguments to the Court; and (c) that the Attorney General be requested to see that the provision of the decrees permitting acquisition of theatres by the divorced circuits with Court approval is not used as a device to build and strengthen the circuits to the end that they regain the monopoly power they formerly enjoyed. The resolution adds that, in the event "adequate and satisfactory assurances" cannot be obtained from the Attorney General in this vitally important matter, National Allied shall endeavor to secure the necessary protection for its members, either "by seeking to intervene in the case of United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. et al. (if that be legally feasible) or by bringing the subject to the attention of the appropriate Committee of Congress with a view to securing legislative relief." As in previous Allied conventions, a principal highlight was the report made at the closing session of the conclusions reached by the various film clinics. S. J. Goldberg, co-ordinator of these clinics, reported that the attendance and participation in the discussions were the most outstanding in the history of the clinics. Among the conclusions reached were these: The most disliked company because of unreasonable dealings with the exhibitors is Warner Brothers, with Paramount a close second for this dubious honor.