Film and TV Technician (1957)

January 1957 FILM & TV TECHNICIAN 11 RIVALS OR ALLIES? T^HROUGH my letter-box at this * time of year comes an abundance of brochures advertising wonderful holidays in foreign countries, and I love to spend hours studying them, because foreign travel has always interested me. Just recently, though, I received some brochures about some foreign film industries and these have held me fascinated in much the same way. They came from Japan and Italy. Two arrived from Japan, and they make interesting contrasts, because the larger, glossier one is from the Motion Picture Association of Japan, which represents five of the six major film companies, and the smaller one — duplicated on cheap paper — was sent out by one of the smaller independent producers, Dokuritsu Eiga Company. Americanization A while ago I reported that the Japanese colour processes were being pushed out of their own home market by the American Eastmancolour process. Startling confirmation of this Americanisation of the Japanese film business is seen in the films made by the five major companies in 1956. From the figures they give, it appears that these producers make over 300 features a year, and they give details of the thirty best ones of 1956 (which probably includes all those made in colour). Eleven of the best features were in Eastmancolour, and one, Madame Butterfly, an Italian-Japanese coproduction, was made in Technicolor. Not one was listed in Fujicolour or Koni-colour, the Japanese colour processes. The same is true of the short films listed in the year's production. Far more adventurous is the independent Dokuritsu Co., which has made its first children's film in Koni-colour, a six-reeler of the fairy-tale by Samuel Marshak, the noted Soviet author, called Twelve Months, which scored a great hit on the stage with Tokyo's children. The big Japanese producers give an interesting short history of their country's film industry — since 1897, when the first film was shown there, to the present day. An interesting aftermath of Fascism is their mistrust of Government in tervention in the film industry; these sober business men say that Government control of production and film censorship prior to 1945 obstructed the growth of the Japanese industry, and they refer By Christopher Brunei to the present state of affairs, under which Government intervention is all but ended, as " the Fifth Freedom — Freedom of the Screen." Turning to a booklet from Italy, " The Situation and the Problems of Public Entertainments in Italy," Twelve Months published by Lo Spettacolo, I find the same mistrust of the Government taking a hand in the affairs of the film industry. The writer, Antonio Ciampi, is very scornful of a proposal to help film production by a Treasury rebate scheme, which appears to have similarities with our own most helpful Eady Scheme. The reason he rejects State aid is an historical one, too; under Italian Fascism there were a number of taxes levied for definite purposes, such as lighting the streets, poor relief and for the unemployed, and these were much resented by the Italian people. Therefore, he argues, if Entertainment Tax were used to assist Italian film production it would be transforming the tax into one of the hated, obsolete taxes. Strange as this may sound to us. it is a point of view that evidently arises from the Italians' experiences, and as such ought to be respected. Unlike Britain, Italian cinemagoing is on the increase, though they have their own crisis in production. Something that we both have in common is the difficulty in conquering foreign markets, particularly the American. The booklet was written before the important agreement between the British Film Producers' Association and the Italian Producers was concluded, and so the system of especially favourable relations between two nations is not mentioned. Briefly, this is a method of trading, whereby two countries agree to grant each other concessions— in the case of Britain and Italy, Italy grants British films concessions over the " Dubbing Tax " and Britain guarantees circuit bookings to a number of Italian pictures. It is a means of gently easing out the Americans from their dominant position in both countries— and, naturally, the Americans have protested vigorously against the deals that the B.F.P.A. has been making with Italy and France along these lines. It seems to me that, while not imitating the methods such filmproducing countries as Japan and Italy adopt to help their native industries, we should learn to understand their methods to see if there are ways in which we can co-operate to our mutual benefit. NOTE THE DATES A.G.M. SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, MARCH 9th & 10th, 1957