Motion Picture Daily (Oct-Dec 1933)

MOTION PlcrVKE DAILY Monday, October 9, 1933 $2,000 Weekly Maximum Salary Capitol Seen Insisting on This Figure (Continued from page 1) fists pounding on desks, informed the pruducers tliey would have to arrive at a method among themselves or take as an alternative a method furnished bv the NRA. 'As sensational as this development was, executives of the major companies are declared to have been thrown into further turmoil by a subsequent statement attributed to Johnson in which he is reported to have said the Administration stood ready to itself approve all contracts in a determined effort to see that the $2,000 maximum is not exceeded. Diflficult as it is for the major firms to evolve a workable plan here, unless the industry members can reach an accord among themselves, is a threat of an arbiter to be appointed by the government specifically charged with the responsibility of seeing to it that the separate viewpoints of the industry and the Administration are made one — the Administration's way. Producers met at 11 this morning. Their lawyers an hour later, and tonight the mandate from high quarters again was submitted to arguments which have been almost perpetual for the last three weeks. Indications are now that the salary fixing commission which was written into the original Article 10 in New York was insistent excessive salaries must be curtailed will remain. Majors Not Unanimous Yet there continues to be no unanimity in the major producer ranks. Hays' members are divided on this issue. It is reliably learned that in favor of a salary board are M-G-M, Pararrjount, Warners, RKO and Fox, and opposed are Universal, Columbia, United Artists and individual producers like Samuel Goldwyn, Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks and Charles Chaplin. The" opposing group is believed to be centering its arguments on instances illustrated by a theoretical case such as this: Its members say that if an actor's salary is to be fixed by law at $2,000, they will have little or no chance in the bidding for talent. They insist that since talent's income cannot go beyond a fixed figure it will be the talent's inclination to swing toward the producers who are active in the theatre field on the theory that since their earning capacities are to be regulated for them their next best choice would be to place their future with those companies which can assure them the widest of theatre outlets. While this situation which has no precedent in the history of the business was being gone over and over again those remaininng members on the exhibitors' committee met separately to discuss clauses in the NRA draft which affect them. Differences in the ranks of the MPTOA are not satisfied with the code as it now stands and propose talking it out until its delegates secure the best concessions they can. Among its rallying cries are elimination of score charges, discontinuance of shorts sales tied in with features and elimination of designated playdates. Ed Kuykendall made his stand clear in a statement issued tonight, in which he said: "Many uiniors .Tre in circulation concerning the positoin of the MPTOA in regard to the tentative code submitted by Deputy Adnnnistrator Sol A. Rosenblatt. Let me emphasize the fact that we have from the start of the conferences stood for the following fundamental practices and will contiiuie to do so: Elimination of score charges (liscontimiance of the practice of tieing in shorts with features, elimination of designated playdates, and a labor clause which IS fair and equitable. "More can be accomplished by remaining in sessions and trying to sincerely work out our problems than by running away in schoolboy fashion, as certain groups have done The MPTOA delegation is mindful ot the fact that it must safeguard thousands of small theatres and this trust will not be violated. Confer with Rosenblatt Further indicating the insurgent group proposed playing along was evidenced on Saturday when a second committee composed of Milton C. Weisman, Harry Brandt, Charles L. U Keilly and Calvin Bard saw Rosenblatt and asked for a clarification of the labor clauses. Rosenblatt said they had departed well satisfied. This committee also asked additional light on other clauses which Rosenblatt refused to designate, but in connection with which he remarked they had left him apparently satisfied." On Article 10, Rosenblatt persistently refused to comment except to say that anything adopted in connection with actors also will apply to executives. Cameramen Approve Code Crew Provision Washington. Oct. 8.— E a s t e r n sound and cameramen are in accord with the code provision that camera crews are not to be switched in the middle of production, declared Deputv NRA Administrator Sol A. Rosenblatt. This is the provision being fought by the international photographers on the coast. The Reason Why Washington, Oct. 8.— Eddie Golden supplies a kidding answer to the reason why the independents formed their own code deliberating body. Says he: "Independent producers and distributors have been sitting around the lobby waiting for something to happen. We've been invited to few or no meetings and we got tired of it. We wanted an audience to hear ourselves talk, so we bolted. "Now we have a secretary. We write letters to Sol Rosenblatt and we get answers. Nice, clean fun!" Inequities in Code Subject to Change Washington, Oct. 8.— If inequities in the code assert themselves, changes may be made immediately but only by executive order of the President, Deputy NRA Administrator Sol A. Rosenblatt explained in response to a question of NRA procedure under conditions as outlined. Detroit Exhihs File Mid-States 'Plaint Washington, Oct. 8.— S e v e r a 1 Detroit exhibitors, also members of Allied, have filed a complaint with Deputy NRA Administrator Sol A. Rosenblatt against Mid-States Theatres, the Michigan buying combine, in which H. M. Richey and J. C. Ritter are officers. Rosenblatt said complainants charged Mid-States was attempting to put them out of business. The Deputy Administrator described the development as a case of several exhibitors asking the right to buy from members of their own organization. Agent Tactics Cited to Show Need of Check {Continued from pane 1) SO doing. The actor got the bonus, the producer being unable to replace the part. The incident is also told of a freelance actress, salary $3,000 per week, who had agreed to work for a producer for 10 days, after which she was scheduled for a featured role in an entirely different production. The first producer, however, discovered he required the actress's services for an additional week. At the same time, the second company learned it could get along without her for that length of time. Her agent insisted that both companies live up to the letter of their contracts and pay the performer for both weeks. The matter eventually was settled by arbitration, preceded by threats of action on the part of both producers. Agents and High Salaries Unscrupulous agents are blamed by producers for skyrocketing the income of an actor, described as unknown until the producer who had him under contract developed him, from $1,000, including bonuses, to $2,250 a week. This is how it was done: Ignoring his contract, the actor walked off the set on the day a picture in which he was cast was slated to get under way. The producer was threatened with a loss representing six figures. The actor, acting under instructions from his agent, demanded $2,250 and said he would not work unless he got it. He did. Producers Also Blamed However, the blame for much of the rarefied salaries which admittedly prevail in Hollywood today is not entirely passed on to the agent. The producers have also blackened themselves with Rosenblatt in additional data which tell.i at length interesting incidents which, they assert, have arisen out of secret negotiations conducted by one producer against his fellow-producer. Among what are declared to be actual cases which the producers have compiled themselves and which they argue will be eliminated by throwing future negotiations into the open are these : One actor, employed by a major company on a long-term contract for $1,200 a week, was signed secretly by a competitive producer for five years. The contract called for $2,200 the first year, $2,700 the second, $3,200 the third, $4,200 the fourth and $5,000 the fifth. Part of the secret negotiations had it that if the existing contract could be cancelled, the new one would immediately become operative. If not, it was to start at the expiration of the existing pact. It is claimed the actor turned dissatisfied with his then current contract and gave his employer considerable trouble. Investigation is said to have demonstrated the existence of the secret contract and resulted in the first company making a substantial cash settlement of the second contract and a revision upward in the existing agreement. Thousands of dollars were involved. In Silent Days Also Another instance involved an actor, prominent in the silent days, who was signed secretly by another producer at several times his current salary. The first producer learned of the transaction and, in the belief that retention of the actor's services were necessary to maintain his announced program, signed a new pact at the competition's terms. By the time the actor's contract had run out, the boxoffice had demonstrated the performer was not nearly so indispensable as the original employer had believed. Vet the studio was "stuck" with a contract which eventually cost it over $1,000,000. the charge has been made. Directors' Deals Up Secret negotiations with directors as well are declared to have cost the producers considerable headache as a result of actions of some members from within the producers' ranks themselves. One director, it is alleged, was signed in this fashion by a competing studio at a 100 per cent increase. He was said to have become discontented and a source of considerable concern to the studio by which he was employed. The new offer was matched, but the director refused to accept it. Production delays resulted. Almost Wrecks Company A certain actress and what is alleged to have happened in her case almost caused the complete financial collapse of the employing producer, this incident goes. Employed at $1,500 a week on a 40-week guarantee with a $500 increase agreed upon for a second period, this player was approached secretly by another studio at a substantial salary hike. The employing producer learned what was transpiring. At the same time, the player became an insurgent and was reputedly piling up production cost on her pictures through lack of cooperation with the studio. The first producer eventually reached the conclusion it had better make her happy. The method was via a new contract at three times the original salary for one year and an additional $250 a week the second.