Film and TV Technician (1957)

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.

January 1957 FILM & TV TECHNICIAN 41BIARY. In view of the film legislation now before Parliament we print in plB*©^ of our usual editorial an article which has special bearing on the steps needed to protect British Films WHY WE NEED A QUOTA ACT THIS month and next will see both Houses of Parliament once again discussing the film industry, and in particular the renewal for another ten years of what is called the Quota Act. Why do we need a Quota Act to protect British Films? Surely, you may say, we have been making films long enough in Britain not to need Parliamentary permission to do so. Let us look back a few years — to 1927 in fact, when the first Quota Act was introduced. At that time hardly any British films were being made at all. Hollywood had so captured the British cinema market during and following World War One that British films had practically disappeared from the scene. A few brave souls kicked up such a fuss by public meetings and petitions to M.P.s that eventually Parliament was forced to take steps to ensure that some British films were made and marketed. This was done by imposing an obligation on all importers of foreign films to make a certain number of British films (Renters' Quota), and a similar obligation on all cinemas to show a definite percentage of British films on their screens (Exhibitors' Quota). " Quota Quickies " The Act succeeded in its main purpose. Films were made. Slowly the industry revived under the protection that had been given. It was also, of course, the era of the ill-famed "Quota Quickie" — a term of opprobrium used to describe a type of cheap film made solely to satisfy legal requirements. Such films were often put on the Renter's shelf immediately they were completed; others were inflicted on the public who rightly resented such inferior entertainment and gained the impression that if it was British it was no good. That suited the Hollywood book very well. However, the Quota Quickie was largely eliminated ten years later when Parliament passed an amended Act which imposed a minimum By Ralph Bond labour cost on all films ranking for British Quota. Although cost can never be the arbiter of taste and quality. Renters who had to expend a reasonable amount of money soon found that it was better business in the long run to make good films. During World War Two, British films, after a shaky start, really came into their own, and roused the admiration of the whole world. Any lingering resentment on the part of cinema goers towards the home product rapidly disappeared, and for the first time our films took more money in our own cinemas than many Hollywood epics. Wave of Optimism When the War ended, there was a wave of optimism for the future of British films, and in 1947 when the Quota Act once again came before Parliament for renewal, Renters' Quota was dropped, and the Act was confined to the obligation of the exhibitors to screen a percentage of British films. Many who then supported the dropping of Renters' Quota have since questioned the wisdom of doing so, and in a further article we shall examine the arguments for and against this. The fact has to be faced, however, that after all these years since 1927, Hollywood films still dominate our cinemas to the extent of seventy per cent. Without the protection of the Quota Act, it is most likely that the number of British films produced each year would rapidly decline. That is why the film legislation now before Parliament is so vital to every one of us who wants to see an expanding film industry. It looks as if the Government is trying to rush its legislation through Parliament without adequate opportunity for amendment, and many amendments are urgently needed to ensure that the Act works better for British films during the next ten years. Why on British Films? For instance, the conditions governing the definition of what is a British film need tightening up, to avoid a number of abuses which we all know have occurred recently, when films made abroad with scarcely any United Kingdom technicians have nevertheless obtained their " British " Quota certificate. There is also the more fundamental point which A.C.T.T. has raised. Why should the Quota be on British films. Surely it would be more logical to have a quota on foreign films, thus giving our own industry a chance to climb out of its semi-colonial status. So please, in your own interest, watch things very carefully and be prepared to see or write to your own M.P. and get him to support the changes that the film Trade Unions want. Your own job may be at stake. FILM & TV TECHNICIAN Editor: MARTIN CHISHOLM Editorial Office: 2 Soho Square, W.l Telephone: GERrard 8506 Advertisement Office: 5 and 6 Red Lion Sq., W.C.I Telephone: HOLborn 4972