Showmen's Trade Review (Oct-Dec 1949)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

SHOWMEN'S TRADE REVIEW, December 10. 1949 Wanted: Dog-Catcher The theatre is no place for a dog, especially a big dog who is coming headon at full speed. So charged Mrs. Essie Kitzmiller, 52-year-old, El Reno, Okla, housekeeper, in a $4,100 damage suit against Griffith Consolidated Theatres. Mrs. Kitzmiller claimed that on June 15 she had approached the box-office to buy a ticket but found her way barred by a large dog. Four times, she added the dog dashed around the box-ofRce and into the theatre. The fifth time he dashed into Mrs. Kitzmiller, she says, and knocked her down with leg and hin injuries that incapacitated her. The theatre employes should have herded the dog out of her way, she savs, without going into what employe's jurisdiction the task would come. Supreme^^Court Denies Park-In, Sth & Walnut The U. S. Supreme Court Monday for the second time refused to review a ruling by a Circuit Court of Appeals which apparently invalidates the drive-in ramp patents held by Park-in Theatres. In another motion picture decision the court refused to review the decision of two lower courts against the Fifth and Walnut Corporation in its $2,100,000 anti-trust suit against seven major distributors and two circuit operations. jiDooms Patent? The refusal to review the Park-in case apparently dooms attempts by Park-in which holds the Holingshead patents on ramp construction for drive-ins, from collecting royalties. Park-in had appealed once before and had been rejected, after a Boston Circuit Court of. Appeals had upset a judgment in its favor by a Boston federal court. At the time Park-in had sued the E. M. Loew circuit for failure to pay royalties on a Connecticut drive-in. Parkin won in the lowest court, but the Circuit Court of Appeals overthrew the ruling when it found the patents invalid for "want of invention." May Try Again The Fifth and Walnut Corporation of Louisville, losers in a third round against Paramount, 20th Century-Fox. Loew's (ATGM), Columbia, RKO, United Artists, the Marcus Loew Booking Agency and United Artists Theatres, will ask the Supreme Court asain to review the case. Attorney Monroe E. Stein said in New York \^''ednesday. The suit was originally filed with Fifth and Walnut claiming that its National Theatre in Louisville had been unab'e to get suitable first-runs. The case gained considerable attention in federal court for it was generally accented that the judge's charge to the jury on the law, together with his refusal to permit the introduction of certain material as evidence, had contributed to Fifth and Walnut's defeat. The court had refused to allow findings of fact and conclusions at law made by the U. S. Supreme Court in the Government anti-trust suit, to be introduced as evidence on the ground that this case had not been settled. Defendants apoealed but the Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's finding. Glamor Shortage Drives Away Downtown Trade, Public Says Downtown houses which are short on glamor are falling down on the job when it comes to giving their patrons that "something extra" which will make them travel to see a show and as a result business is taking a dive in several areas, a spot check of theatre-goer opinion revealed this week. The main complaint seems to be that there is not enough diiTerence between what many a first-run house offers now and what the neighborhood house can ofTer to warrant the extra expense and time involved to make the trip downtown. While the difiference in admission is very often mentioned, the main complaint seems to be lack of glamor. In older days, several questioned pointed out, there was a certain sense of a treat when they went to a downtown theatre. The atmosphere was difYerent, the theatre more opulent and even the show offered something different. Sometimes this defference lay in a stage show, an orchestra, or an organ. More often it was in a well-planned bill and a sense of leisurely enjoyment. Today, complaints seem to center about the fact that some downtown houses had dropped behind both in their housekeeping and showmanship. Their freshness seem to be gone, any effort to make the theatre alluring and different through housekeeping or advertising seemed abandoned. Coincidentally some of those queried seem to notice greater efforts made on the part of their neighborhod houses to be spruce and comfortable. Clearance, Too? In some instances this apathy to go downtown could be blamed partly on reduced clerance. New York 'Broadway exhibitors are said to take this view, ignoring the fact that their high admissions may have something to do with keeping public away in a city where it is often more easy to come to Broadway than it is to go to the neighborhood theatre some eight blocks away. Fundamentally, however, the main problem seems to be that while the public is willing to make an effort to see a good movie, they don't see why they have to travel for it and pay more money to see it dowmtown unless there is added reason to go downtown. Interstate Status Facing Showmen If NLRB Accepts Toledo Complaint The question of whether an individual motion picture theatre is engaged in interstate commerce or whether it is a retail service establishment was turned over to the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, D. C, this week. The board, which has heretofore declined to rule in theatre labor cases was asked to assume jurisdiction in a union dispute growing out of the question as to who will represent the projectionists in the Balaban and Katz Princess at Toledo. Significant The board's decision to hear the case will prove significant, because by so doing it stamps exhibition with the label of interstate commerce, a stamp which may prove of trouble in future matters, especially those concerning federal minimum-wage and hour regulation. The case itself carries some interesting possibilities for Toledo exhibitors. The specific argument devolves from the Princess booth situation, where two projectionists are members of Local 228 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employes, and two of whom are not but whose right to work there has not been curtailed. If the Board rules for the non members it may upset the multiple-employer bargaining system through which Toledo exhibitors have been dealing with Local 228 for 28 years. lATSB Opposes The lATSE, through its counsel, Judge Matthew Levy, is opposing the NLRB's jurisdiction on the ground that an exhibitor offers "a visual presentation reflected upon the screen, locally fixed, for emotional, intellectual and spiritual satisfaction." Arguing for the jurisdiction, Philip Fusco, attorney for the NLRB Cleveland office said: "There is statutory jurisdiction in the case, if only because of the distribution-supply practices of the film industry." Elaborating upon this he said that when producers make pictures the object is to get them into theatres all over the country and not merely into the exchanges. This, he says, presupposes interstate commerce and the fact that Toledo theatres get their prints from Cleveland exchanges, which are also within the Ohio statelines, does not invalidate the argument. Further, Fusco points out, B & K operates across state lines. 3 More Ask Theatre Video Hearing Three more petitions by exhibitors asking the Federal Communications Commission to hold hearings on theatre television were filed in Washington, D. C, this week by Attorneys Marcus Cohn and Leonard Marks. Exhibitors File Those filing were the Kansas-Missouri Theatre Owners ; the American Theatres Corporation, which operates 47 theatres in New England, including the Boston Pilgrim, which has experimented with the World Series and Notre Dame football games over television, and Mor ton Thalheimer's 45 Neighborhood Theatres, located in Virginia. In his petition, Sam Pinanski, American Theatres President, stated that the Pilgrim's presentations of the series and Notre Dame games "found a remarkable reception and interest." On the basis of this practical experience, Pinanski said he believed "that this new medium, if given an adequate opportunity by the Commission to develop its full potential, would offer a splendid new service of information and entertainment to the public which will be both technically and commercially feasible."