I. E. Chadwick, Industry Vet, Urges Indie Exhibitors Unite for Self-Preservation (1937) 🇺🇸

Film Bulletin’s Hollywood correspondent went to see I. E. Chadwick with the designated and avowed intention of interviewing him on production plans, problems, faults and virtues, but, instead, we sat engrossed and hardly opened our mouth as this former attorney expounded his interesting views on the industry’s basic economic issues.

Presented by David J. Hanna

For many years (he has been associated with the industry for over a quarter of a century!), Chadwick has been a leading champion of the independent producer’s and exhibitor’s causes, one of the few men who has not kow-towed to the powerful producing interests in return for small favors. And, if one may judge an individual’s innermost beliefs and sympathies by the length of time he displays them, then I. E. Chadwick is independent through to the core!

Started as Distributor

His career in film business began in 1910 as a distributor. His foresight told him that there would ultimately be a concentration of production power in the hands of a small group and, at that time, there would be room and a need for independent producers, so into production he plunged. Ivan Film Productions and Chadwick Pictures Corporation were his personally owned companies. No mass quantity producer, Chadwick’s product was usually above the standard which most independents must set for themselves. To mention only two, The Wizard of Oz and “The Unchastened Woman,” were among the many successful films that bore his name as producer.

He was one of the founders of Monogram Pictures. Only recently he rejoined the company still bearing that name, which was reorganized several months ago by W. Ray Johnston. Chadwick holds an important niche in the new Monogram, his job being to produce most of the specials on the scheduled program. But, while his primary interest is centered in his work with Monogram, even today our Man of the Week finds time to maintain his insatiable interest in the broad problems of the industry and to argue his point that the industry will be healthy only while all legitimate participants, producers, distributors and exhibitors, receive a “square deal.”

Exhibitors Must Run Theatres

One of the principal “planks” in Chadwick’s “platform” is his insistence that the producer or distributor has no right to infringe on the exhibitor’s domain — his own theatre. Matters such as choice of films, playdates and how main features are to be shown on one program — in brief, the manner of operating a theatre — these must rest with the theatreman himself, Chadwick says, and the producers usurp powers not rightfully their’s when they seek to force exhibition policies down the throats of exhibitors.

“The greatest crying need of the independent exhibitor,” he remarked, “is a single, unified national, independent organization. At present there is no single powerful body representing all or most of the independents. They must work to this end, submerging lesser organizations to the development of one great independent unit of representation.” He was off on his pet subject and there simply was no stopping him to ask the questions we had come prepared to ask — nor did we want to.

Producers’ Chains Now Control

“The affiliated chain theatres have the production field in their grasp and hence it is they who dictate the policies to the studios. That situation works both ways. Certain of the major producers, through their control of these huge chains, have the independent exhibitors at their mercy. Although independents comprise a far greater percentage of the nation’s theatres, their failure to unify themselves has been their greatest stumbling block toward having their policies carried out, rather than accepting those ordered by Hollywood studios.

“Support of the independent producer is one avenue of escape. True, the exhibitor will be called upon to make sacrifices, since so much of the independent product, produced as most of it is on the proverbial shoestring, falls short on entertainment and box-office appeal. But, by alignment with these companies through cooperation, the independent exhibitor will keep the film channels open and have access to the type of pictures he chooses to run.

“Only by keeping the film market tree from the grasp of any group who seek to monopolize it can the independent theatre owner save himself from being sold out to the chains controlled by Hollywood. Adoption of the independent producer as his child may be the means of preventing this, for, if the exhibitor supports him today, tomorrow will find him supporting the exhibitor.

Exhibitor Must Be Free

“The theatre owner has a responsibility to his patrons, one from which there is no escape, save failure. To fulfill this responsibility, he must be free to buy and present pictures as he sees fit. Under present conditions, by which the film companies dictate policies, this is impossible.

“Granted that the independent exhibitors are slowly winning a few minor points, they can be forced to accept what the powerful interests want them to have and, ultimately, they may be wiped out. Organization and unification of the independent theatre owners are absolutely necessary to bring about an equalization of the balance of power in this industry. The business structure cannot remain unbalanced and healthy! Complete freedom the exhibitor is essential to the successful presentation of motion pictures.”

Thus spoke a film man!

—

Collection: Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin, February 1937