Kinematograph year book (1950)

590 The Kinematograph Year Book. Overseas Markets UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO the British, 1949 could mean a year of moderate progress for British films in the United States : to Americans it was a year of surprise, uncertainty and indecision which closed on a note of hope. British films, however, apparently did as well in the United States as anyone could have expected, topping even the business of the past days of success when Hitchcock meant a boxoffice bonanza. The success of " Hamlet " and " The Red Shoes " are not two swallows which make the summer, but probably even more significant is the fact that British films other than these two marvels, have been getting booked across the country. However, industry observers believe that there is a long way to go before that rosy coloured mirage of regular saturation bookings is achieved. They point out that " The Seventh Veil " was a success and argued well for general runs on British products, but then that weaker product came along and the weaker product, whether it be British or American, is something which the American public does not want. But there is, especially in New York, new playing time, which has turned to British products. These are theatres which are probably doing so of necessity and not of desire ; houses which are so far back in clearance and run, or which would be so far back in clearance and run, that they prefer a British picture to a fifth or sixth run American film. There are also former newsreel houses which have switched to features as the audience for newsreel theatres has dropped off. However, this ill wind that is blowing the newsreels into stormy weather blew some good to the British industry by providing a new market. That this market will remain in the British sphere is an open question. When the picture is good, the exhibitor will buy it, be it British, French or Indonesian, provided, of course, the terms are attractive. The Americans are in fact very conscious of the British market, both at home for British pictures and abroad for American pictures. It is an important segment of their market and one which has been causing more thinking during the past two years than is usually conceded. At the moment it would seem that the Americans are as puzzled over the British situation as they were last year. They have weathered an ad valorem tax, frowned at a quota which seems tacitly to be upheld by the U.S. Government, who can find no violation of various trade agreements in its imposition ; they have seen J. Arthur Rank, whose expansion into the world field had them all worried three years ago, come a cropper on mass production. Further they have seen th'ir own " B " pool, which was to hold the joint profits of British pictures in America, fail. They believe that Britain, in view of the Rank debacle, will offer a larger market for U.S. films and that there may be a quota cut. But they wonder where Britain can get the dollars, and in the high command of many a film company, it is fairly certain that the question of joint production in Britain is being studied, and the possibility of acquiring theatre interests in both England and Canada is not being ignored. Cutting Costs In this direction there has been considerable progress. Production costs, have come down, with M-G-M estimating that it has been able to trim them from 20 to 25 per cent. A great deal of this is done in more careful preparation of scripts ; more is done in costuming, set building, etc., and by keeping the studios operating only when they can operate at maximum efficiency — when there are enough pictures in work to give the studio full or nearly full plant production. In fact, Eagle-Lion has announced that it will not use its studios unless it can keep them sufficiently busy and other companies seem to be following a system of making a number of pictures and then going into temporary shut down, which lowers the overheads. However, while the major studios seem to be conquering the subject of costs, the precarious foreign market situation, the general industrial picture at home, and the caution which the men with money use when loaning it, has tended to hamper independent production greatly ; but, a group of exhibitors, realizing the importance of the independent, have formed the National Exhibitors Film Company with plans for a S 10,000,000 revolving fund to assist production. That " Divorce " Problem Meanwhile the industry continues at loggerheads. Though the Motion Picture Association of America reputedly would like to see a cessation of the anti-trust suits which exhibitors are bringing against distributors and circuit affiliates, and though the major producer-distributors, have been coming up in favour of arbitration and conciliation and other measures which might stop these suits, the prospect of any success there is next to nothing. The exhibitor temper does not seem to favour arbitration, though Warner Bros, is making an effort to set arbitration up in the Government anti-trust suit and the court seems to approve a voluntary plan. Whether an arbitration system will be finally set up when the Government anti-trust suit ends may be an open question. The distributors are moving to that end and such a system might help on minor matters. But there doesn't seem to be much uncertainty over what the end of the Government anti-trust suit will mean. Without attempting to read a final decision into the words of the present court or anticipate what the U.S. Supreme Court will do, if an appeal is carried, divorce seems to be the answer. It is so accepted, apparently by Warner Bros., and 20th CenturyFox, who are still fighting it. The impact of divorce has already begun to make itself felt. Paramount and RKO have accepted it by a consent degree and Paramount has started to put the divorce machinery into effect. The general opinion in the industry is that divorce will bring the exhibitor into greater importance and prominence, and that it will bring outside capital into the theatre field.