The Independent Film Journal (1953)

Jubilant Reaction To Bluenose Rule ( Continued from preceding page) defiance of the industry’s own system of solfregulation,” the Legion declares that the film ' on tains “grossly obscence, suggestive and ndecent action, costuming and dialogue.” It adds that “it is gravely offensive to Christian and traditional standards of morality and decency and is capable of grave evil influence upon those who patronize especially youth.” From Maryland come wrord that the Su¬ preme Court decision will probably not af¬ fect materially the state’s present censorship aws. Sydney R. Traub, chairman of the date’s censor board, stated that he sees ‘nothing so far which in any way indicates we cannot ban or delete a picture on grounds ;hat it is immoral.” At the same time the state of Maryland re¬ ceived $551,303 from its Board of Motion Picture Censors during 1953, according to die annual report released by Traub. Fees, which were $6,813 less than the previous pear, were paid for the reviewing of 2,172 films during the year. Traub stated that deletions were ordered in 50 films while one feature and one clinical series were entirely rejected. In Memphis the local censor board has aanned Columbia’s “The Wild One” in the rity of Memphis and all of Shelby County. N orman Colquhoun, Columbia branch man¬ ager, said that the company would try to show the film across the Mississippi River in West Memphis, Ark., where “Miss Sadie Thompson,” also banned by the Memphis board, is said to be doing record business. As for New York, state which lost its case in the “La Ronde” decision, its censor¬ ship statutes will probably be re-examined, according to Dr. Hugh M. Flick, director of the film division of the state’s board of edu¬ cation. The regents are likely to “redefine” the statute and “make specific what is deemed immoral,” he stated. The court decisions were a major topic of discussion at the meeting of the six state censor boards called by Dr. Flick for late this week. Attending the first such meeting called in three years were representatives from Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kansas, Maryland, Virginia and New York. It was suggested by Robert A. Wile, executive secretary of the Independent Thea¬ tre Owners of Ohio, that someone distribute a completely acceptable film in Ohio without a seal. This would force the court to decide on whether a state has the right to impose censorship at all. However, Wile admitted that such action was unlikely as no dis¬ tributor would be willing to run the risk. Magna Postpones Action The Magna Theatre Corp. board of direc¬ tors decided this week to postpone action on the offer of 20th Centurv-Fox to take over distribution and production rights to films made in the 65 mm. Todd-AO process. It is reported that one major reason for post¬ ponement is that Magna has acquired an additional $1,000,000 to go ahead with its production of “Oklahoma!” Michael Todd, theatre producer concerned with the new process, stated that his group wanted more time so that Joseph Schenck, Magna head, and other company officials could study the proposed deal. Todd ex¬ plained that perhaps at some later date Magna would be interested in the offer. THE INDEPENDENT FILM JOURNAL— January 23. “Mixer” Test Agreement Ends Stereosound Feud The hectic controversy over the use of a sound “mixer” with stereophonic sound prints of “The Robe” was temporarily dis¬ continued this week following a series of heated developments between the film com¬ pany and Walter Reade Theatres. Resolution, which came about during a late evening conference held at press time between Spyros P. Skouras, 20th-Fox prexy, and Walter Reade, head of the circuit which bears his name and president of Theatre Owners of America, provides for: 1. Regional tests of the film company’s “The Robe” utilizing both full stereophonic sound and sound amplified through one loud speaker by means of a “mixer.” 2. Test situations to be determined by a committee of equipment manufacturers, 20thFox representatives, officials of other pro¬ duction companies filming in CinemaScope, and TOA representatives. 3. Reade’s withdrawal of “The Robe” from his Morristown, N. J., theatre (where sound was amplified through a “mixer”) and consent not to play any other 20thFox CinemaScope product in theatres not equipped with full stereophonic sound. 4. Consent by 20th-Fox for Reade to show “The Robe” in his Perth Amboy and King¬ ston theatres with “mixer” amplified sound. Tests In 30 Days It was pointed out by Reade that the re¬ gional sound tests will begin in 30 days. Two theatres will be picked by the commit¬ tee in each of the following areas : east, mid¬ west, far west, south. In each area, one house will run the pic¬ ture with full stereophonic sound and the other with “mixer” amplified sound. Houses would be competitively situated. Reade said in a statement prepared after his talk with Skouras that he regretted his Morristown action, sharing his belief with Skouras that CinemaScope has proven a tre¬ mendous business stimulant wherever shown. He said also that both Skouras and him¬ self are of the opinion that CinemaScope films must be shown in the largest number of houses possible. A1 Lichtman, 20th-Fox distribution chief, stated earlier that his companv had taken court action against Reade in order to “safe¬ guard” the new medium. The action was later vacated. The official stated that Reade had advised the company that his houses were fully equipped with complete CinemaScope equipment. Another major complaint of the film company was that Reade’s advertising claimed to the public that he was showing the film with stereophonic sound. The company’s CinemaScope contracts are to be revised so that they will specifically state the stereophonic sound requirement. Reade’s contract did not mention stereo¬ phonic sound by name, but the company felt that it was understood. Lichtman disclosed that Reade had even requested easier amorti¬ zation terms for his equipment. Warner Bros, last weekend noted that “The Command” will be available in four track magnetic stereophonic sound and in single photographic track sound. The Warner announcement came from Ben Kalmenson, company’s distribution chief. He stated that he was making the announce 1954 See Tax Hearing Start By March Washington. — The problem of repealing or reducing the Federal 20 percent admission tax on film theatre tickets will not be con¬ sidered before late February or early March, according to the latest estimate from the House Ways and Means Committee. Chair¬ man Daniel A. Reed (R., N.Y.) did state that the committee will act on the corporate and excise rate reductions before the sched¬ uled April 1 deadline. It is conceivable that admission and other excise levies could be taken up at the same time. Meanwhile, the committee is working on an omnibus bill revising the Internal Rev¬ enue Code, and it is thought that this work will consume approximately six weeks. Another exhibitor group has announced its determination to enter the campaign with notice coming from the Southern California Theatre Owners Association that it will con¬ centrate its efforts on eliminating taxes on admissions of 85 cents or under. The group, headed by Harry C. Arthur, states that it feels it unwise “to attempt to convince the Congress . . . and the President that all ad¬ mission taxes should be removed.” It is reported that the COMPO tax repeal committee will continue to work for complete elimination of the tax rather than some such figure as an 85 cent exemption. The COMPO committee has been authorized, however, to accept the best compromise possible if it (Continued on page 26) ment at this time in order to provide an answer to many exhibitor inquiries. Wilbur Snaper, National Allied president, commented that although the Warner policy “doesn’t go all the wav in providing regular prints for the theatres without a special lens and screen, it does much in a positive direc¬ tion that will aid exhibition and their own company.” He declared that he was sure the decision “came about after balancing po¬ tential revenue for their company.” While speculating on the CinemaScope policy of the film companies, Snaper stated that “it is unlikely that they will make the stereophonic, non -stereophonic and also the regular prints.” He therefore suggested that exhibitors “prepare themselves with the lens and wide screens.” The Allied head noted that M-G-M “has yet to define its policy.” The Walter Reade house was making use of a mechanism described as a “mixer” by Snaper. The instrument is said to take the regular CinemaScope print and channel the sound through one horn. The Allied chief compared the operation to four spigots be¬ ing opened into one funnel from which comes a single stream. Cost of the equipment runs about 35 per¬ cent of full stereophonic sound material, according to Snaper’s estimate. He pointed out that the method does not give the effect of stereophonic sound as only one horn is used, stating that the sound is the equivalent of one-track sound, which Allied has been requesting from 20th Century-Fox for a long time. 5