Kinematograph year book : 1931 (1931)

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.

14 The Kinematograph Year Book. were found to measure up to her standards, and we on this side were inclined to sit down under the disappointment and nurse our inferiority complex. In 1930, however, we really broke down the barrier, and, thanks to the courage and persistence of one or two undaunted individuals, we look o\'er the Atlantic at the end of the year to see quite a fair sprinkling of our best pictures being shown, and appreciated, in the States. Now it's a poor vicious circle that won't work both ways. In the old days we were told that in view of our failure to sell in America we had so much the less income to meet our negative costs. Therefore every picture we made was, in comparison with the best product from the other side, made with so anxious an eye to economy that the most imaginative and intelligent work of our directors was hampered. Today we may reasonably hope that the converse will apply. We know that obvious cheapness is the worst characteristic of a picture, and must therefore give all honour to the men who have not stinted their directors. Now, if we can make the average British picture well enough to earn a proportion of its costs in the United States, we can really consider we are on the footing to which we are entitled. At present only the cream of our product is acceptable in America, but with the sinews of war fortified by the tonic of transatlantic trade we may reasonably look forward to a far bigger proportion of our films bringing back some tangible form of appreciation. Our Stars There is one avenue which I do not think has yet been fully explored, and that is the definite development and popularisation of our own acting talent. Far too many of our artists are taken up for a time, taught the groundwork of the highly specialised branch of their profession in our studios, and then allowed to drift over to Hollywood, where the studio executives are always ready to give a chance to capable men and girls who know how to speak English. Our own openings should be so attractive that when we have the right people we should be able to use them and to give them such encouragement that Hollywood's beckoning finger would fail to tempt. The advantages, from a national point of view, that are presented by the increase in quality and quantity of our own productions are immeasurable. The unconscious propaganda effected by pictures breathing British scenes, British sentiment and British ideals can hardly be estimated, but some conception of its value is afforded by the achievements of the American films. When one recalls the enthusiastic reception that was given at the gala performance of British pictures by the Dominion delegates to the Imperial Conference, the way to a progressive popularity, wherever the English language is spoken, is indicated, and with our producers facing the fact that their watchword must be " entertainment values first " that day is drawing rapidly nearer.