Kinematograph year book (1944)

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.

168 The Kinematograph Year Book. of exhibitors in the country ; of this number 1,646 failed to meet their obligations as regards feature films only. In the previous 12 months period defaulters amounted to 1,402. The reduction of the exhibitors' quota, which operates as from the current year, has apparently materially eased the situation, for in July an official of the C.E.A. estimated that defaults that year were roughly a thousand. Of this number only 17 prosecutions were recommended and this does not necessarily mean they were undertaken. The situation in which exhibitors find themselves is, of course, directly related to the productions made available by renters. During 1941-42 there were no fewer than 12 cases of renters not complying with their quota commitments. The main pleas submitted were shortage of studio space and production delays arising mainly from inadequate man-power. Owing to the established fact that, even were all available studio space utilised, there would still be insufficient product to supply the renters' quota, it was decided by the Films Council that no prosecution should be recommended in any of the cases of default. As a consequence exhibitor emphasis has been laid upon the impossibility of satisfying their 15 per cent, quota footage from the 3 per cent, handled by renters. Councillor A. W. Green has pointed out that the trouble is made worse by the treble quota clause under which renters received < credit quite unrelated to footage which was the basis of exhibitor quota requirements. Criticism has been vigorous of the Board of Trade's attempt to alleviate the position by permitting reissues to count. This step was taken against the advice of the Cinematograph Films Council on the grounds that it " would have (a) a depressing effect on British production, and (b) would provide such films with an entirely artificial value." Both of these objections have since been substantiated, as well as a third entered by exhibitors who declared that many of these four-year old reissues could not stand comparison on entertainment and technical grounds with modern product and would prove disastrous at the box-office. Another matter, of which adjustment is sought, is the need of exhibitors to provide quota against American pictures more than three years old. It is claimed that old British films should be offset against old American subjects. A welcome concession was the decision by an Order in Council (No. 1377, Sept. 24, 1943) to permit certain exceptional features to count for long quota, " notwithstanding that they consist wholly or mainly of news photographs, and /or contain a proportion of foreign footage." This concession, previously granted only to short films, was made to secure the widest possible distribution of feature length propaganda subjects of the type of " Desert Victory," "Battle of Britain," etc. A considerable number of such films have been released during the current period and consequently exhibitor quota figures should display a corresponding improvement. Although the inclusion as quota of these compiled films, and four-year old British product, enables the Trade more closely to balance its footage requirements, it has not only contributed nothing toward the encouragement of British production, but has actually proved a stumbling block to the smaller independent producer. Nor has the position of the exhibitor been materially improved, because for such British films as are available, utterly disproportionate rentals are being demanded — 40 per cent, second run is not infrequently required for a film which has already been played second feature at a circuit opposition. These are some of the difficulties and anomalies still confronting exhibitors which have led to protests, and the demand that representations should continue to be made to the Board of Trade, which has also been urged to suspend the Act for the duration and 12 months after. Capital has been made of the forbearance shown to exhibitors by the Board of Trade in the administration of the Act, and the contention submitted that even were the quota reduced to 1\ per cent, there will still be defaulters, and as there would have been no excuse there would have been a greater number of prosecutions. This argument is derided by other exhibitors, who point out that the inconsistency of the Board of Trade attitude is revealed