King Kong Won't Be in Houses This Term

You won't be seeing Jules, Jim, Charles Foster Kane, Rashomon or King Kong around the Harvard Houses this semester.

In a verbal agreement with Brattle Films, Inc., which controls four Cambridge movie theatres, a major distributor of foreign films has promised to stop supplying movies to Harvard and M.I.T. film societies for the rest of the academic year.

The agreement is the latest development in a running battle between the societies and Cyrus I. Harvey '47, owner of Brattle Films. For a long time, but especially during the past two years, Harvey has complained that the societies are competing unfairly with his theatres.

Harvey's company, Brattle Films, owns the Brattle Theatre, the Harvard Square Theatre and the two Central Square Cinemas.

Harvey made the arrangement, effective from January to June of this year, with Janus Films, which distributes 66 movies, including most of the films of Ingmar Bergman and Francois Truffaut, such famous movies as Rules of the Game, Citizen Kane and The Blue Angel, and other, less well-known films. According to Carl King, executive vice-president of Janus, the company has the exclusive distribution rights to about 90 per cent of its films.

Last term, the Kirkland Film Society alone ordered six Janus films. Because M.I.T. has no film societies comparable to Harvard's, the agreement will primarily affect Harvard House societies. M.I.T.'s Lecture Series Committee, which does show movies, has no plans to order Janus films. Harvard's Ivy Films also does not intend to show any Janus movies. At least one House society did try to obtain Janus films this term, however, and its orders were refused.

Harvey plans to have a Janus Film Festival in the spring, shuttling the films through his different theatres. While he has scheduled many other Janus festivals in the past, Harvey said this would be his biggest one ever.

In 1955, two years after he opened the Brattle Theatre, Harvey, with a partner, founded Janus Films. Although he sold out his interest in the company 10 years later, Harvey has remained one of Janus' largest customers.

Harvey said he will show most, but not all, of the films in the Janus catalogue. A student trying to order any Janus film for a Harvard or M.I.T. film society will be told by the booking agent that no films are available.

However, King and Harvey both said, if a society wants to obtain a film that will not be shown by a Brattle-owned theatre, it can contact King and procure the film directly through him.

The agreement affects only film societies. Study groups of 60 or fewer students which neither advertise nor charge admission can order Janus movies.

Unfortunately, Harvard does not supply its film courses with money for ordering films. Many courses-such as Humanities 197, "Film Analysis" -work with film societies. The society orders the films that the instructor wants to show and then charges admission to make back its costs.

The legal status of Harvey's arrangement with Janus is unclear, especially since it is a verbal rather than a written agreement. Two Law School profes-sors-one an expert in anti-trust law, the other an authority on film law-said that this might be a case of "coercion from the buyer's side" and thus in restraint of fair trade. Both said they would need more information to make a judgment.

Harvey has complained that societies affiliated with Harvard Houses "show films for commercial purposes on tax-free property." Calling this "unfair competition," Harvey objects to societies that advertise in the Square or in newspapers, show popular, frequently seen movies such as those starring Humphrey Bogart, screen first-run films, or schedule movies at playing dates close to those Harvey has set for the same movies.

In a March 1969 letter to Robert B. Watson, former Dean of Students, Harvey complained about a House showing of Citizen Kane. He wrote that films shown at Harvard should not be open to the public, bursar's cards should be required at the door, and series tickets should be sold. Advertising should be restricted to the Harvard community, and films should not be used to raise money for organizations other than the societies themselves, he said.

Finally, Harvey asked that the societies show only those films not available to commercial theatres.

19 at Once !

That April, Harvey wrote another letter to Watson. This time, he complained that 19 films were screened at Harvard Houses over one weekend. Harvey warned that "if present University policy continued," he would "be forced to take action."

Harvey wrote the letters after a series of telephone conversations with Watson. "I told him my hands were tied and he'd better write a pretty strong letter on this thing," Watson said Saturday. "Obviously, if it is a strong letter, everyone involved will pay more attention than if it's not a strong letter."

Watson described his conversations with Harvey as "very friendly," saying, "Harvey has been extremely generous and understanding. I think he's extremely broadminded." Harvey described Watson as being "very sympathetic."

Due to Circumstances...

Watson distributed copies of the two letters to members of the Faculty Committee on Student Activities and the Committee on Houses. During the University Hall sit-in and the strike, however, the matter was forgotten.

After the summer, in the fall of 1969, Zeph Stewart, Master of Lowell House, discussed the situation with Harvey over the telephone. "I thought he was being a bit rigid in his feelings," Stewart said, "and the talk was unsatisfactory."

By that time, the Committee on Houses and the Faculty Committee on Student Activities were being phased out. The new Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life took up the controversy during its early meetings. A subcommittee began consideration of the issue but was interrupted by the Cambodia strike.

Last October, the subcommittee drew up two resolutions, which were approved by the CHUL in November. They met two of Harvey's demands: that film society advertising be limited to the Harvard community, and that the societies work closely with House committees.

The Regulations for Undergraduate Organizations in Harvard College say that "bona-fide film study groups" organized "on a membership-fee basis" are authorized to show "motion pictures of historical, technical or artistic significance, where such films are not currently in circulation in commercial theatres."

Virtually all film societies at Harvard violate these regulations. In a telephone interview, Watson said he viewed them as "guidelines rather than rules." Noting that "you've got to be understanding," Watson said, "You can't just say 'You do this or else.' You've got to convince people that it's fair."

Watson's successor, Dean Epps, said he does not plan to change this policy. "We have no machinery to see what's being shown in the different Houses," Epps said. He added that the CHUL resolutions would also be considered guidelines rather than rules.

Watch It !

Laughing, Epps cautioned, "That's not true of all the regulations in the book."

Epps did not consider the film question during his first term as Dean of Students. Harvey said he has not complained to the Harvard administration this year because "things have gotten a lot better."

Societies no longer paste posters in the Square, and no giant moneymakers -like Jean-Luc Godard's Sympathy for the Devil shown by the Lowel Film Society last year-were screened during the past term. Because Harvey had not complained this year, news of the agreement surprised most people.