Motion Picture Herald (Oct-Dec 1956)

Statutory Eady Levy Protested by CEA . . . Already adamant against release of features to BBC, British exhibitors take militant stand on Government's Eady proposal by PETER BURNUP LONDON : CEA’s militancy persists, to the dismay of other sections of the industry, in regard to the proposed controlled release of feature films to the BBC. The intransigents on CEA’s General Council have now poured more oil on troubled flames in their declaration of “the strongest possible protest” against the Government’s announced intention to introduce a statutory Eady Levy. An abortive attempt was made at General Council’s meeting in behalf of the association’s London branch to have the question of cooperation with the BBC reopened. But General Council took refuge in procedural practice. Will Attend ‘ Big 4” Meet The debate was abruptly stopped. CEA’s officers will, nevertheless and perforce, attend the meeting of the Four Associations joint committee which has been convoked for October 31 and at which the matter will be discussed again. Adroit manoeuvring will doubtless then occur on the part of exhibitor delegates. As a preliminary to the Four Associations’ meeting, CEA’s finance and management committee have put on record its view of the situation to date. After expressing its pious regret that KRS and BFPA should have elected to go forward “in regard to an important issue of this kind” without CEA consent, the record refers to the presumed intention to supply the BBC with “better films than are at present being shown.” The record concludes in the following high-sounding though extremely vague terms: “If this turns out to be the case and exhibitors’ box offices suffer, your committee thinks that exhibitors will inevitably be forced to consider what other steps they should take to recoup their losses.” A Matter of Conjecture What forms those “other steps” might take is a matter of considerable conjecture here. The suggestion is made in some quarters that CEA tacticians have in mind — if and when the BBC agreement is finalised— singling out some luckless distributor who finds himself in a weak trading position and imposing a vengeful boycott on him. The suggestion may be discounted. For, clearly, any such action on the part of the association would set the spark to a considerable civil war in the industry. None wants, in the currently difficult conditions, a spiteful cutting-of-of-noses exercise. It is still generally believed that in due course and following the meeting of the Four Association’s committee, CEA’s present proud policy will fall into diplomatic abeyance. In spite of the views of the production end of the industry, CEA appears to be on much stronger ground in its now formally declared opposition to a statutory Eady Levy without a substantial reduction in entertainment tax. General Council had before it a comprehensive and analytic survey of the Eady position prepared by the association’s finance and management committee, but few were prepared for the exceedingly bitter debate which ensued in General Council. Tenour of many speeches was that a subsidy was necessary for British production whether derived out of Government funds or from the box office; but agreement was general and most forcefully expressed that the box office cannot sustain the Levy unless a prior and substantial cut in the tax were assured. Adopt Resolution From the floor of General Council a resolution was moved and unanimously adopted in the following terms: “That having regard to the disastrous effect on the box office of the present excessive entertainment tax, the General Council registers the strongest possible protest against the introduction of a statutory levy and instructs the officers to make known such protest and to take such further steps as they think are in the best interests of exhibitors.” It is an open secret that the officers are waiting for just such a lead from rank and file exhibitors. Steps have already been taken toward a small deputation going down to the Board of Trade to talk things over with the board’s president. CEA’s leaders are well aware that president Peter Thorneycroft cannot speak for the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the latter’s intentions when he opens his Budget next April. But the officers will make very clear to Mr. Thorneycroft the parlous condition of exhibitors under present conditions and the certainty that many more theatres will assuredly shut down unless tax relief comes their way. How then, the officers will ask, can the necessary subsidy be provided unless there’s money left? They will also have alternative sugges tions to make; namely: (1) That the subsidy come directly from Government funds; or (2) that, in any event, the amount of levy paid by a given exhibitor should be regulated by the amount of the net admission prices ultimately left with the exhibitor and not on the actual price of admission. CEA’s officers also plan a pamphlet getting out the position for every Member of Parliament. Significantly, the Rank Organisation is seizing the time and opportunity for an extensive advertising campaign with a two-fold aim; one urging the merits of Britain’s films, the other pressing tax reduction. ACT PRESENTS DEMANDS TO LABORATORY GROUP The Association of Cinematograph and Allied Technicians has presented the Laboratory Association with further substantial demands for increased wages and revised working conditions. The demands include: A 40-hour week in the laboratories and 35 hours in offices (the present working hours are 44 and 40, respectively) ; 100 per cent trade union membership; a 30-shilling cost-ofliving bonus — with £ 1 for juniors under 18 — to be consolidated in basic wages; full cost-of-living bonus to be paid at the age of 18 instead of, as now, at the age of 21; double-time payment for Saturday work, instead of time-nad-a-half as now; and an industry pension scheme. The laboratories here two and one-half years ago faced a complete shut-down when employers threatened to dismiss laboratory workers who indulged in restrictive tactics in support of the union’s then demands for a 40-hour week, a weekly payrise of 30 shillings and a “closed shop.” At that time the Ministry of Labour intervened to investigate the dispute. Its Court of Inquiry found the union in the wrong on all major counts. • The European premiere of “Moby Dick” has been set for Wednesday, November 7, at the Warner theatre here. The production will be shown to the trade at 3 P.M. on the same day, and will start the concurrent public run at the Warner and Studio One, Oxford Street, on November 8. Suit Filed on TV Use of Song in Picture The Jerry Vogel Music Co., Inc., has filed suit in New York Federal Court against AB-Paramount Theatres, RKO Teleradio, Inc., and Sunset Securities Co. alleging an infringement of rights to a song used in the film, “Lulu Belle,” owned by Sunset and exhibited on TV by the other co-defendants. According to Mr. Vogel, the song “The Ace in the Hole,” sung in the picture, was licensed to the original producer, Benedict Bogeaus, Inc., under conditions excluding TV exhibitions. 26 MOTION PICTURE HERALD, OCTOBER 20, 1956