Editing Jack L. Warner (section)

===The Sixties===
In the 1960s, Warner kept pace with rapid changes in the industry and played a key role in developing films that were commercial and critical successes. In February 1962, he purchased the [[My Fair Lady (film)|film rights]] for the Broadway musical ''[[My Fair Lady]]'', paying an unprecedented $6.5 million. The previous owner, [[CBS]] director [[William S. Paley]] set terms that included fifty percent of the distributor's gross profits "plus ownership of the negative at the end of the contract."<ref name="thomas259">Thomas (1990), p. 259.</ref> Despite the "outrageous" purchase price, and the ungenerous terms of the contract, the deal proved lucrative for Warner Bros., securing the studio $12 million in profits. Warner was criticized for choosing a non-singing star, [[Audrey Hepburn]], to play the leading role of [[Eliza Doolittle]]; indeed, the 1964 [[Academy Award for Best Actress]] went to [[Julie Andrews]], who had played Eliza in both the Broadway and London productions of the musical, for ''[[Mary Poppins (film)|Mary Poppins]]'', while Hepburn wasn't even nominated. However, the film won the [[Academy Award for Best Picture|Best Picture]] Oscar for 1964.<ref name="thomas262-263">Thomas (1990), pp. 262–263.</ref>

In 1965, Warner surprised many industry observers when he purchased the rights to ''[[Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (film)|Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?]]'', [[Edward Albee]]'s searing play about a destructive marriage.<ref name="thomas266-267">Thomas (1990), pp. 266–267.</ref> From the beginning, the project was beset by controversy. [[Ernest Lehman]]'s script, which was extremely faithful to Albee's play, stretched the U.S. film industry's [[United States Motion Picture Production Code of 1930|Production Code]] to the limit.<ref name="thomas270">Thomas (1990), p. 270.</ref> [[Jack Valenti]], who had just assumed leadership of the [[Motion Picture Association of America]], recalled that a meeting with Warner and studio aide Ben Kalmenson left him "uneasy".<ref name="coreyochoa216">Corey and Ochoa (2002), p. 216.</ref> "I was uncomfortable with the thought that this was just the beginning of an unsettling new era in film, in which we would lurch from crisis to crisis without any suitable solution in sight," Valenti wrote.<ref name="coreyochoa216"/> Meanwhile, Lehman and the film's director, [[Mike Nichols]], battled with studio executives and exhibitors who insisted that the film be shot in color rather than black and white.<ref name="thomas271">Thomas (1990), p. 271.</ref> These controversies soon faded into the background while Warner challenged the validity of the Production Code by publicly requiring theaters showing the film to post an "adults only" label and restrict ticket sales accordingly, all as a marketing tease to entice audiences to see what warranted that restriction. At this, the MPAA — wary of a repeat of the embarrassment it had trying to censor the highly acclaimed film ''[[The Pawnbroker (film)|The Pawnbroker]]'' — gave in and approved the film as a special exception because of its quality, which led other filmmakers to challenge the Code themselves even more aggressively.<ref>{{cite book|last=Harris|first=Mark|title=Pictures at a Revolution: Five Films and the Birth of The New Hollywood|year=2008|publisher=The Penguin Press|pages=183–84}}</ref> Upon its release, ''Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?'' was embraced by audiences and critics alike. It secured thirteen nominations from the Academy, including one for Best Picture of 1966.<ref name="thomas278">Thomas (1990), p. 278.</ref>

Despite these achievements, Warner grew weary of making films, and he sold a substantial amount of his studio stock to [[Seven Arts Productions]] on November 14, 1966.<ref>Sperling, Millner, and Warner (1998), p. 326.</ref> Some observers believed that Ben Kalmenson, Warner Bros.' executive vice president, persuaded Warner to sell his stock so that Kalmenson could assume leadership of the studio.<ref name="thomas280">Thomas (1990), p. 280.</ref>  Warner, however, had personal reasons for seeking retirement. His wife, Ann, continually pressured him to "slow down", and the aging studio head felt a need to put his affairs in order.<ref name="thomas280"/> He sold his 1.6&nbsp;million shares of studio stock shortly after producing the [[Camelot (film)|film adaptation]] of [[Lerner & Loewe]]'s ''Camelot''.<ref name="thomas279">Thomas (1990), p. 279.</ref> The sale yielded, after capital gains taxes, about $24&nbsp;million<ref name="Thomas3">Thomas (1990), p. 3.</ref> (equivalent to ${{formatnum:{{Inflation|US|24|1967}}}} million today). Eight months after the sale, Warner quipped, "Who would ever have thought that a butcher boy from Youngstown, Ohio, would end up with twenty-four million smackers in his pocket?"<ref name="Thomas3"/> At the time of the sale, he had earned the distinction of being the second production chief to also serve as company president, after [[Columbia Pictures]]' Harry Cohn.

Warner's decision to sell came at a time when he was losing the formidable power that he once took for granted. He had already survived the dislocations of the 1950s, when other studio heads – including Mayer, [[David O. Selznick]], and [[Samuel Goldwyn]] – were pushed out by stockholders who "sought scapegoats for dwindling profits".<ref name="friedman139">Friedman (1982), p. 139.</ref> Structural changes that occurred in the industry during this period ensured that studios would become "more important as backers of independent producers than as creators of their own films", a situation that left little room for the traditional movie mogul.<ref name="friedman139" /> By the mid-1960s, most of the film moguls from the [[Golden Age of Hollywood]] had died, and Warner was regarded as one of the last of a dying breed. Evidence of his eroding control at Warner Bros. included his failure to block production of the controversial but highly influential film ''[[Bonnie and Clyde (film)|Bonnie and Clyde]]'', a project he initially "hated".<ref name="thomas280-281">Thomas (1990), pp. 280–281.</ref> Similarly, as producer of the film adaptation of ''Camelot'', he was unable to persuade director [[Joshua Logan]] to cast [[Richard Burton]] and [[Julie Andrews]] in the leading roles. Instead, Logan selected [[Richard Harris]] and [[Vanessa Redgrave]], a move that contributed to the project's critical –  and commercial – failure.<ref name="thomas285-286">Thomas (1990), pp. 285–286.</ref> Another factor was that Logan was able to manipulate Warner's ego to persuade him from cutting the screenplay's length, despite the fact that the studio executives had already agreed with the film's unofficial producer, Joel Freeman, that it was overlong.<ref>{{cite book|last=Harris|first=Mark|title=Pictures at a Revolution|year=2008|pages=191–2}}</ref> Warner officially retired from the studio in 1969.<ref>Sperling, Millner, and Warner (1998), p. 332.</ref>