Motion Picture Daily (Oct-Dec 1958)

Motion Picture Daily Friday, October 24 Consent Decrees Hit and Backed at TOA Meet (Continued from page 1) the flow of product to the nation. Judge Hansen made it clear that the Department of Justice was not in a mood even to listen to further arguments that circuits should be allowed to produce with preemptive rights to the resulting pictures. Only on the subject of production without exhibition rights did be bold the door open. Judge Hansen made it evident that even that permission would not be easy to obtain. Cites National Theatres Case Referring to the request of divorced circuits to enter production and distribution, with pre-emptive rights to their productions, Hansen declared that the Department bad been impelled to deny National Theatres' request "because the direction in which the proposal pointed was back to a system of favored theatres which had led to the Paramount case in the first place. . . . The anti-trust division has the responsibility of not doing anything which impairs free competitive access of producer-distributors to the market." The assistant attorney general further said that even a proposal to produce and distribute without pre-emptive rights "would by no means be free of difficulty." He pointed out that the decrees prescribe 'licensing on the merits" and that a circuit bidding for its own picture could always afford to make the best business proposal because what it would lose as an exhibitor it would make up as a producer-distributor. 'Not Shutting the Door' "Nevertheless," he added, "because the motion picture industry has some real problems and because we are deeply convinced that a strong motion picture industry is a great national asset, we are not shutting the door. ... to production and distribution by the divorced circuits on a non-preemptive basis. I do not say we will go for it. But I do say that the opportunity to convince vis that we should is still there." Obliquely answering critics of the Department, Hansen said, "These judgments have received more continuous attention on the part of the division than the judgments in connection with any other case or any other industry." [Although TOA and Allied States Association are far apart on many issues, there is general agreement that production by former affiliates is desirable. At its recent convention Allied reaffirmed its approval of such production, even with preemptive rights, provided there were suitable provisions to prevent discrimination. So on this subject the Department of Justice stands alone.] Redstone Reply Applauded Redstone, speaking for TOA and especially for independent exhibitor members, delivered an eloquent and forceful reply to Judge Hansen. Pickus, Rosen and Wolfson Win Annual TOA Awards Special to THE DAILY MIAMI BEACH, Oct. 23. Annual Theatre Owners of America Awards have been established, it was announced today by Herman M. Levy, general counsel, at a convention luncheon. Initial presentations went to Albert M. Pickus, Sam Rosen (accepted in his absence by his daughter Mrs. Jack Yellin) and Mitchell Wolfson. The organization plans to honor each year members who have done the most for the organization. Citations hailed the contributions made by the initial three honored. While his tone was polite and his mood restrained, thunderous applause when he finished showed how he was speaking what was in the minds of the assembled TOA delegates. Redstone told the head of the antitrust division that he had served as moderator and chairman of the convention considering the decrees and had been asked by Ernest Stellings, TOA board chairman, to summarize the views. "The fact is that there is not now," Redstone said, "and there has not been for many years, a sufficient supply of those high quality pictures" to which Judge Hansen referred as the prune need of the industry. "The problems are all symptoms of the real disease which finds its source in the decree of the Federal Courts in the U.S. vs. Paramount. Do you think for one moment that we would have the poverty of motion pictures available for exhibition which confronts us today if producers had a vast stake in motion picture theatres throughout the United States? We independent theatre owners, regardless of any affiliation, with or without the help of the major circuits and of the trade associations— we ourselves have to come to grips with the effects of the decree. Our problem lies not only in the fact that there is a disunity between the interests of motion picture production and motion picture exhibition— we are also in the relatively unique position in American industrial life where exhibitors, as suppliers of a product to the public, are restricted from correcting inadequacies of that supply by producing it themselves." Hansen Had Cited 'Movie-goers' Hansen had touched on the requests to the Department to turn the enforcement of the decrees into a path which would perpetuate extensive day and date bookings which in turn would limit a picture's playoff. On criticisms of permissions granted to divorced circuits to acquire theatres, he said, "We feel we must take into account the interest of the moviegoing public. It does not serve the long term interest of the industry unnecessarily to deprive the patron of modern and convenient theatre facilities. The judgment test is whether competition will be unduly restrained. This does not mean the protection of existing theatres against competition." Hansen sympathized with the problems of the industry but he pointed out that these problems have arisen from economic factors and from the growth of television. In this connection he said, "If in the competitive struggle for programming, television is able to command certain product, under our system of competitive markets it is entitled to such product. Accordingly our sympathetic approach to the problems of the motion picture industry must take the form of giving it every possible freedom to compete; we cannot protect it from competition." After defending the decrees as instruments of creating a competitive climate, Hansen emphasized what they do not do, something "that is not always understood." They do not, he said, remove all business discretion from distributors in the marketing of pictures; they do not contain compulsory selling provisions; they do not prescribe how many successive runs of a picture are to be licensed; they do not prescribe to how many theatres a particular run is to be licensed; they do not preclude move-over runs; they do not limit or regulate the length of runs and, most importantly, they do not regulate film rentals. Sees Free Competition "The judgments also do not protect any exhibitor against competition and do not take away the right of any exhibitor, including the divorced circuits, to compete," he declared. Redstone, on the other hand, said, "Somehow we independent exhibitors must find a way to bring home to the Department of Justice the most basic principle that, while fears about discrimination are not without merit and without reason, it will accomplish nothing to protect from the possibility of discrimination an independent exhibitor who is going to go out of business because he doesn't have motion pictures to exhibit." Points to 'Vast Changes' Redstone concluded by urging the Department of Justice "to take into account the vast changes that have been brought about by the passage of time and by new circumstances. . . . the people in this industry with the resources, both material and human, who have a large stake in exhibition must be given an opportunity —at least experimentally— on an economically feasible basis, of producing pictures which they and we now lack . . . neither I nor any other independent exhibitor today wants to be so protected from the possibility of discrimination by major circuits that we are, in fact, destroyed by an inability to operate our theatres at all." Af. P. Daily ft THE SPEAKERS Wednesday: Spyros " ras, top; Mitchell Wolfson, who introjd him; Walter Reade, Jr., and M. A. jW man, Sr. Sees Art Houses' Gr( $10,000,000 Weekl: Special to THE DAILY MIAMI BEACH, Oct. 23. W Reade, Jr., president of Walter Theatres, estimated today thalt present grossing potential of 50 theatres in the U.S. is now $10. 000 per week.