| AN
OPEN LETTER TO USCF August 14, 2000 To:
Glen Peterson, Editor Chess Life Magazine, United States
Chess Federation Dear Mr. Peterson, Last week I received a phone call from Diana Krautter informing us of USCF's decision not to carry "In The Open" in your catalogue. When I asked her whose decision it was, she said that Frank Porcelli, the purchasing manager had decided to pass on it. When I asked her what the specific reason was, she could not tell me, but instead advised that Laura Sherman and I contact you directly. I must say that to hear this bad news from an assistant, after months of communicating personally with you via long distance phone calls at our expense, was not only extremely rude of you, but what I consider to be an utter avoidance of responsibility on your part. After all the work and time Laura and I dedicated to this project, I am frankly shocked and disgusted at the way we have been treated by you. Here are the reasons why: In the summer of 1998 Laura Sherman, a filmmaker and former top ranking American woman chess player, contacted USCF and spoke to Eric Johnson, who was working at USCF at the time, regarding the proposed $7,000 chess film project, "In The Open". He was really excited to hear about the project and offered to help us by loaning us chess equipment to use in the film in exchange for our placing a USCF banner in various tournament scenes. In addition he requested that we alter the script to include a line or two mentioning USCF, which we were happy to do. Two weeks later Laura spoke to Lisa Graham, as well as to yourself about "In The Open". Lisa expressed strong interest in supporting the project and purchasing 50 copies of the movie for the catalogue, as well as placing a full-page ad for it in Chess Life. In fact, Lisa had mentioned featuring our film on the inside back cover. Naturally we were very excited about this offer and were eager to accommodate USCF in any way we could. In November of 1998 we commenced shooting "In The Open". As USCF had been so generous in its offers, we chose to feature USCF above and beyond what was originally planned in the script. I, as the director of the film, agreed to the proposed changes. For example, we prominently placed the very large, blue USCF banner in almost every tournament scene in the movie. We featured the Chess Life magazine in a key scene between two main characters. In addition, we gave USCF top billing in the "special thanks" section of the movie credits. In short, we revolved our feature film to a large degree around accommodating the requests made by your organization. One of the things that makes this film very unique is that, unlike other films which feature chess, the boards showing chess positions, problems and games are completely accurate. We have received many comments from chess enthusiasts praising us for this accomplishment. Another key factor in this film, which Laura was very clear about from the beginning, was that she wished to honor her father, Christopher Becker, the well-known chess problemist and historian, whose studies and articles were featured in many magazines around the world, including Chess Life. In her own words, Laura's original purpose for writing the script was, "As a tribute to my father, Christopher Becker, and a way to make my own personal contribution to the chess community." Apparently, USCF does not consider this tribute and contribution to be of any value. In the August 1999 issue of Chess Life, you printed a two-page article about the filming of "In the Open" on pages 50 and 51 that was very well received by your members. By this action it is clear that USCF was continuing to show their support for this project. In September of 1999 we had the premiere black tie screening of "In The Open" attended by 170 people, chess players and non-chess players alike, who, as one, stood and applauded at the end of the film. In Feb 2000, we were invited to screen "In The Open" at the prestigious Burns Court Cinema, which is Sarasota Film Society's independent theater. The screening was very successful. We have surveyed over 100 people who have seen the film. More than 90% said they thought it was excellent, or words to that effect. We have also received a number of favorable reviews, one of them written by Eric Johnson himself after seeing the film (see attached review). Directly after the release of the film, Laura submitted a copy of "In The Open" to you for review. After a substantial lag in time, Laura was given the impression that USCF was trying to renege on their implied agreement to carry the film. She tried to talk to you personally about it many times, but never received a response. She reminded Lisa Graham numerous times that the deadline for the Christmas 1999 issue of Chess Life was approaching rapidly. Still she could get no definitive answer. By November 1999 our advertising campaign, which had been largely built around USCF carrying the movie in their catalogue, was being adversely impacted by this delay. As a result, we missed the Christmas of 1999 market, which was devastating for sales. In February of this year I called you and spoke to you about this matter. You said the only reason you were not going to carrying "In The Open" was because more than 50% of your readership is children and you did not feel the film was appropriate for young viewers. In order to accommodate this concern, I asked you if I re-edited the film to make it "more suitable for children", taking out any possible objectionable material, would you then carry the film? You said "I don't see why not." You clearly stated, when I asked you, that that was indeed your only objection to carrying the film. March 2000, Laura and I spent the next several weeks re-editing and surveying the new version of the film at an approximate cost to us of $2000, not to mention our work and time. We would never have embarked upon this alteration of our original vision had I been in any doubt whatsoever that what you had told me was true. April 2000 we mailed you a copy of the new version. Over the last three months, I have called you numerous times to ask you if you have viewed the "new version" of the film. Each time there was an excuse given as to why you had not done so, for example, "I left it at home," or "I'll get to it next weekend." August 2000 I receive a call from Diana Krautter, as I stated in the first paragraph of this letter. We are yet again at a critical Christmas deadline stage and once again the ultimate success of our film is at risk. When we embarked on this project, we were counting on USCF coming through on their offers, specifically a full-page ad in Chess Life. Now we are in a position where due to the extensive delays, we have spent our critical advertising money and cannot afford to purchase a full-page ad at your rates - approximately $4000. Ironically, last week we received another phone call, just a few days after receiving yours, offering us a contract for the distribution of "In The Open", covering the territories of North America and Canada, and including such outlets as BLOCKBUSTER, TARGET and K-MART, to name just a few. On Wednesday of this week, Laura leaves for a tour of several European and Middle-Eastern countries which have expressed interest in purchasing the foreign rights. What this means is that within a few short months, USCF will be enjoying world-wide exposure - FREE PUBLICITY worth thousands of dollars, provided at the expense of OUR time, money, and effort. I would like some sort of an explanation of USCF's position on this matter, because, as it stands, Laura and I feel we were misled into re-orienting the focus of our film to make it more or less a promotion campaign for USCF, with no exchange given for this, aside from the loan of some equipment in exchange for a credit in the movie - a promise we made good on in vast abundance. In light of the fact that the subject of sexism in chess was touched upon in "In The Open", I would have thought that USCF would want to take a position against it. I do not want to go away from this project feeling that Laura and myself were in some way used and/or discriminated against by USCF. I would like a satisfactory explanation and conclusion to this matter. It's your move, Mandy Wildman |