Read Online Indecent Exposure by David McClintick - Free Book Online Page A

with "independent" producers who in turn hire the talent. But the change is hardly revolutionary. The studios still put up most of the money for movies and retain the considerable power that resides with the money. With few exceptions, the studios still have a major voice—
    * The statem ent actually was made by Fitzgera ld's character Ce cilia Bra dy in The Last Tycoon
    frequently veto power—in the producer's assembly of a film project and in the production of the film itself. Most "independent" producers in fact are dependent producers.
    Myth: Studio bosses used to have absolute power but are impotent today. Truth: The heads of the film studios have—and always have had—less power to function independently of their corporate parents than has been commonly portrayed. Louis B. Mayer was one of the most famous figures in America from the twenties until the fifties, and was thought to have absolute power over his Hollywood domain, the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer studio. Fewer peopl e had heard of Nicholas M. Schenck (pronounced Skenk), the president and chief executive officer of Loew's Incorporated. Loew's Incorporated, however, owned MGM. and L. B. Mayer did not function in a vacuum. He reported to Nick Schenck. They talked by telephone two or three times a day in an age when coast-to-coast telephone calls were not made so casually as they are today. Nick Schenck was the "undisputed boss of the whole shebang." reported Fortune in 1939. and had an "uncanny eye for profitable pictures." It was Nick Schenck. not L. B. Mayer, who spoke perhaps the most prescient sentence ever uttered about the movie business: "There's nothing wrong with this business that good pictures can't cure." The two men railed at each other constantly. Mayer referred to Schenck variously as "the genera l." "Nick Skunk." and "the smile r and the killer."
    "That Nick." Mayer once said to MGM production boss. Dorc Schary, "he always has to be the big 'I am.' The big cheese. All he knows about movies you could stick in a cat's ass."
    David Begelman and Alan Hirschfield were saying comparable things about each other in the seventies, although not to each other's face. Their rivalry was subtle and their relationship actually was quite cordial and reflected a strong mutual grasp of the truths of Hollywood. They understood that power in Hollywood resided where it always had—in the top echelon of the film studios and networks and their parent corporations: that power rarely was absolute and usually was shared among the two or three or four top people in each company; that a degree of rivalry and jockeying for position was inevitable;* and that when all the acclaim had been handed out, and
    · Although t hey usually keep their feelings to themselves. it was mutually irritating to Hirschfield a nd Begelman that long-stand ing corporate nomenclature enabled each of them to call himself "the president of Col umbia Pictures." Hirschfie ld's official title was president and chief executive office r of Columbia Pictures Industries Inc. He referred to the corporation" motion picture studio as "the picture division." to the telev ision production company as "the television division.' and to Begelman as the "president of the picture and televi sion divisions.' Bege lman actually bad thre e titles: president of Columbia Pictures, the official name of t he st udio: president of Columbia Pictures Television, the official name of the TV production company: and senior executive vice prevalent of Columbia Pictures Industries Inc.. the parent of both the st udio and the TV company. The abbreviation "president of Columbia Pictures." therefore, was convenient for both men , each of whom was eager that his titl e convey his status as a major entertainment mogul.
    all the executive titles bestowed, ultimate power in Hollywood was financial power, vesting in the people who owned, or were perceived to own. the controlling interests in the big entertainment companies. Lew Wasserman at