American Cinematographer - June 1991 - 39

and I think it should be 100%

painting) and that all
picked up while Hitchcock is
shooting the scenes in the picture proper, I can't con¬
ceive how it could cost anything more than a small
fraction of what we have been talking about."
On July 15, Johnston proposed an approxi¬
mate budget of $20,000 "with no allowance for Dali".
Though his calculations were "based on Mr. Selznick's
statements," he was careful to point out that "there is
no formula at
present to guide in giving you a true
estimate." The real problem was that, though every¬
body was aware that Hitchcock wanted Dali to design
the sequence, his deal had not been finalized and no¬
body knew what his ideas would be, nor what kind of
work would be needed to implement them. On July
18 Felix Ferry sent David O. Selznick a telegram:
"Please make up your mind and let's sign the Dali
shots for it should be

contract."
A week after receiving FeFe's telegram,
Selznick was still trying to get a firmer grip on the total
costs of the sequence itself: "I again call to your at¬
tention that the lack of an intelligent and tenable esti¬
mate on this sequence is holding up the Dali deal and
plans for the sequence; and that this in turn is inter¬
fering Hitch's original idea of picking up all the shots
with the players that is necessary during the produc¬
tion proper. The cost of this sequence will be materially
increased if this is not done-so the whole thing hangs
on

the estimate."

Against his better judgment, Selznick allowed
negotiations with Dali to begin. The first draft of Dali's
contract was finally completed on August 2, immedi¬
ately setting off a whole new set of problems. Selznick
was now

in New York and Daniel

O'Shea, who

was

handling the negotiations for the studio, had to keep
him informed of the progress by telegram. In addition,
Felix Ferry was not beyond bypassing O'Shea to take
his case directly to Selznick. Lastly, and perhaps most
importantly, Spellbound was already three weeks into
principal photography.
and counting. Western
Union was kept busy: From O'Shea to Selznick, Au¬
gust 2: "Was able to get Dali down from five to four
thousand for the job, flat sum, with well defined
working conditions calculated to have us get our
money's worth. However, made as additional condi¬
tion that all prints and sketches be our sole exclusive
property." From Ferry to Selznick, same date: "Had a
very constructive meeting with Dali, Hitchcock, your
artistic, technical and scenic departments and every¬
thing is all set to everyone's satisfaction. The only
objection is that Dali must remain the owner of the
sketches which have a great commercial value. He has
always retained ownership of his sketches whether
.

.

made for theater or ballet for the same reason. Whole
work will necessitate ten or more sketches and he plans
to show them at his exhibition in London next fall and
he will give you credit as you require on each of them.
I think this is much cleverer for exploitation purposes

than to have them locked up in a drawer in your stu¬
dio. Please advise O'Shea as soon as possible as the

June 1991

time element is

important. Dali will be delighted to

dedicate to you personally any one of the sketches you
like best."
Selznick to O'Shea, August 4: "I think the Dali
deal is absurd, that we have been jockeyed into a silly

Painting by Dali

for the rooftoP

sequence.

position and that this is probably the first time in his¬
tory that an artist has been paid more than top price
for his work in order for him to keep his work, the more
so since you can
get even money out of me that none
of Dali's work, or at the very most very, very little of
it, will remain in the finished picture... I suggest that
you get Basevi [James Basevi, production designer!
and Kern [Hal Kern, editor] to assist you in coming to
a conclusion as to whether this is
just a smart aleck
stunt that has no practical value...
"If it is a publicity stunt, this is all right with
me
provided we actually can get the publicity and
provided further that we do not operate in connection
with the sketches as though it is more than this and find
ourselves spending 40 to 50 thousand dollars on a
publicity stunt... I see no reason why Dali's sketches,
if they have a value, should not be sold to reduce this
probably untenable expenditure; or if they do have a
value, why the cost couldn't be reduced further by
letting Dali keep all the sketches." O'Shea to Ferry,
August 5: "David has admonished me not to go ahead
with the deal on Dali in view of the fact that we cannot
own the Dali sketches. We are
having a production
meeting here at noon Monday, meantime tell Mr. Dali
not to go ahead until this matter is straightened out."
Neither side was willing to fully concede the
point and the final contract, agreed to at last on Au¬
gust 18 dealt with the problem as follows: "It is agreed

that (Selznick) shall own the sole and exclusive title in
and to, and shall enjoy the exclusive property rights
of every kind and nature, tangible and intangible, in
and to fifty per cent (50%) of all paintings, prepared

American

Cinematographer

37
American Cinematographer - June 1991

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - June 1991
