Documentary News Letter (1947-1949)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

74 DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER NEW DOCUMENTARY FILMS Pool of Contentment. Public Relations Films for C.O.I. Director: Richard Massingham. Photography: Shaw Wildman. Distribution: C.F.L. to Government Departments only. 20 mins. The Treasury, that ominous body which so often arouses fury in the breasts of documentary film makers working on Government contracts, is to be congratulated on presenting a witty film on an apparently dull subject. To let Massingham loose in a typing pool was a temptation that might have been resisted. Fortunately, it was not, and the result is a film that provides much good fun in its description of how and how not to utilize the services of a centralized pool of shorthand writers and typists. The 'How Not' sequences inevitably make better material than the 'How', but the awful examples of people mumbling, stumbling, muttering, smoking, chewing, peering in desks and paying attention to everything and everybody but the wretched typists who are trying to get it all down, will at least provoke a cheer from the girls and possibly shake the dignities of a few executives who regard themselves as perfect dictators — of letters. Or will it? Nobody ever sees himself in a film unless the image is favourable, so perhaps not. But the film was worth making if only to heighten the morale of the unsung workers of the pencil and typewriter who would be excused battery and assault, and much worse, if they ever took it into their heads to revolt. Photography, casting and general production values, all contribute to a useful and entertaining film for internal use in Government offices. The Single Point Fuel Injection Pump. Shell Film Unit in collaboration with B.O.A.C. and RollsRoyce. (Aircraft Engineering Series.) Director: John Shearman. Photography: Stanley Rodwell. Animation: Francis Rodker, A. J. Shaw. Technical Adviser: Ivor Lusty. Production Consultants: Film Centre. Distribution: Non-T. Shell Publicity Dept. 22 mins. There have not been many films like this one. Expositional techniques apparently attract very few technicians. When films of this kind are required, all too often producers give them to the junior directors to cut their teeth on, or more experienced personnel bash them out without proper thought. Deplorably few directors are really at home with animation, and patience — even in cameramen — is a rare virtue. One would like to believe that this particular example of the type might come as a shock to many people — a salutary shock of realization that a subject as involved as this can be put across so succinctly. But one feels, depressing though it may be, that in too many quarters — apart from those for which it is intended — it will be greeted with indifference. The film is designed to explain the working of the modern fuel injector required for highperformance power units in aircraft. John Shearman has done this by relating the formulae of pure physics to the practical interpretation of them achieved by the engineer. In other words, his film translates a set of letters and symbols visually into swash plates and aneroid capsules, pistons and levers. Every second increases one's anxiety that the thread of the exposition is about to break, or that one will have to cry 'Pax'! — but, miraculously, it never happens. Shearman, Rodker and Shaw have used theanimation bench to give the film originality of expression and Stanley Rodwell continues in the tradition he initiated for the Admiralty Asdic Care and Maintenance series and contributes the beauty of mechanism in close-up to a film which concentrates your attention for nearly twenty minutes on a piece of equipment not much bigger than a carburretor. There is, by the way, also in the film a working model of the injector which is a masterpiece of crudity. Undeniably it does its job effectively, but it is horribly out of key with the high technical quality of the rest of the production. The expositional film relies on a precisely controlled visual logic. It is difficult to write (so tempting at the scenario stage to rush delightedly into a welter of technical jargon) and exacting to make, for technical carelessness shows up more clearly than in any other kind. By these standards John Shearman is a welcome addition to the 'back-room boys' of documentary. The Bridge. Data Films for C.O.I. Producer: Donald Alexander. Director: Jack Dean Chambers. Photography: Wolfgang Suschitsky. Story: Arthur Calder Marshall. Distribution: C.F.L. Non-T. 39 mins. Far too few films have been produced about the problems of reconstruction in Europe. Those that have reached the screen have done so after many difficulties; usually they have been made from dupes from scenes shot by outside crews in a hurry and for no obvious reason. These have had to be adapted to a policy laid down by the 'Ministry' and shaped in the cutting rooms. The Bridge, a four-reeler recently finished by Data, is one of the rare exceptions to this unstimulating process. A unit was sent specially to Yugoslavia to shoot an inspiring little story, of how in a remote village, devastated by war, men and women have worked together to build themselves a necessary bridge, not for motives of individual profit, but for the common good. On this location each sequence was well directed and photographed. The completed film is not likely to be shown publicly in the cinemas. This is a sorry reflection on our industry when we remember the short films now receiving wide distribution which are bringing disrepute to the word 'documentary'. Yet the very proper complaints on this score have attracted a weight of attention to The Bridge which it would not otherwise have achieved, for it is in the reviewer's opinion an extremely disappointing film. However good an original idea is, and however well each scene is played, a story must be well told. This film is too long, taking thirty-nine minutes when a quarter of an hour would not only have been ample, but far more effecti\e. Instead of being clear and occasionally exhilarating, it is diffuse and occasionally boring. These faults are due mainly to bad construction. There are no climaxes, only a series of anti-climaxes. Time after time we reach the end of a sequence, the film makes its point, fades out to start again, making the same point at the same tempo. Unfortunately, though it is well recorded. The Bridge is not helped by its sound tracks — effects, music or commentary Odd noises appearing at infrequent intervals add nothing to realism but a great deal to irritation, and on one occasion at least to unconscious humour. The music, if listened to with eyes closed, is probably fine, yet, alas, is divorced completely from anything seen on the screen. The commentary sounds as if it reads well, but as spoken is merely repetitive and tiresome. This is not because Valentine Dyall speaks it badly — just that there is no warmth in the written words. As we listen to him repeat again and again: 'The bridge must be built. The bridge will be built', we can only wish it would be so — and quickly, too. Obviously the job must have taken a long time — so long that the unit seem to have been called back before it was finished. If only the film had achieved a sense of humanity, all its other faults could have been overlooked so easily. There is no black sheep in the village — everyone behaves too perfectly. Admittedly the film throughout follows a group of people and never a single person for long, but the same could be said about The True Glory, or Desert Victory. Surely war documentaries need not have a monopoly of feeling. With this lack of humanity there seems also a certain lack of faith. Probably in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain a commercial release, the political part of the film is played down. It certainly does not try to be impartial — only one case is put forward, but so half-heartedly that the story's strongest point — its simplicity — is almost lost. It is sad to give such a poor report on this film. The unit rightly must have gone with such hopes to Yugoslavia and had even higher hopes when they saw their rushes. Purely factual and training films undoubtedly perform a service for the community, but it is the occasional film with an idea, such as The Bridge, that film makers want to welcome — all the more so. if the idea is disturbing. New films on the world's urgent social, economic and political troubles can be of immeasurable value, but only if they are made imaginatively and made well. Good Neighbours. Production: Greenpark for C.O.I. Producer: Ralph Keene. Director: Humphrey Swingler. Photography: Ray Elton. Music: Patrick Harvey. Distribution: C.F.L. and theatrical. 15 mins. The war-time community feeling that grew up around the air-raid shelter and the civil defence post, the gun-site and the aerodrome, is not easy to translate into a peacetime setting. Our planners have talked rather cold-bloodedly about redesigning the pattern of urban life on the basis of the neighbourhood unit. But it has needed someone to show us where the human beings come in and to put some real life into the plans for new communities. This film, describing how the initiative of one or two people in a small Scottish town resulted in the establishment of a community centre, goes some way to till this deficiency. Its description of the mechanics of how one organizes a campaign to get the interest of one's neighbours is admirable. We see schoolchildren pushing leaflets under doors, fetes to bring in the cash, assistance from the Director of Education, and so on. At this practical level it will undoubtedly bo of considerable value and it is encouraging to know that there is to be a shorter version as one of the monthly releases to the theatres. One can only regret that the film is not as moving as it might