Motion Picture Commission : hearings before the Committee on Education, House of Representatives, Sixty-third Congress, second session, on bills to establish a Federal Motion Picture Commission (1978)

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.

MOTION PICTURE COMMISSION. 171 takes each staging. The story, when finished, is gone over and re- duced to the desired length; if a full reel is wanted all but 1,000 feet are eliminated. After that the negative is submitted to the com- mittees, who view it and then they criticize it. At that meeting sug- gestions are made as to possible effect of this or that scene and judg- ment is passed. It then receives its O. K., and the picture is adver- tised in the papers and circulars, copies of which I have here. [Copies submitted to committee.] The films are then sent to the various exchanges and from them to the exhibitor. The exhibitor who shows it first has to pay the highest price; that exhibitor is, naturally, one of the most progressive; generally the largest and most prominent. The first time the picture is seen the owner or manager looks at it to see if it comes up to the standard and will not offend his patrons, and as from one-third to one-half of his day patrons are ladies, and he knows they come almost daily, he is careful to see that there are no objectionable features. If he thinks a scene or part of a scene can be misconstrued he cuts it out. After it is cut out, it stays out. When he is through with them they are returned to the exchange and go from place to place. I have stood at the exits of the theaters hours and hours to hear the comments, and asked the opinions of patrons, and in three years have never heard a criticism adverse to the tone of the play. Some did not like certain shows, and others raved over the same ones, but that was a matter of taste. If a man wanted to be amused and there happened to be no comedy that day, he would not be so well satisfied. In Washington an officer is detailed to inspect every new picture, and he makes his report. If, there is, to his mind, anything the least objectionable, he reports it to the captain and the captain comes and looks at it. The Chairman. Can that one officer have the time to inspect all of those pictures? Mr. Brylawski. No. I recall two pictures to which objection was raised. An oriental picture showing a scene in which the costumes appeared scant—well, we all know that in India they do not wear overcoats and portions of the lower limbs are often seen—and an- other was a comedy " bull " fight in which the ferocious bull was represented by two men with a hide cover. The officer was honest in his conception of the regulation. When this officer was first de- tailed, we had practical experience of what a censor with power could do. We have in the police regulations in regard to obscene posters the following: No posters or placards shall be publicly rlisplayed or exhibited which are lewd, indecent, or vulgar, or. which pictorially represent the commission of or attempt to commit any crime. He even went so far as to object to a poster in which a detective exhibited a gun when attempting to capture a criminal. He said that the pointing of the gun was an attempt to commit a crime, as if any burglar or any other man would hold up his hands without some official authority in the way of a gun in the hands of the detective. We are treading on dangerous ground when we open up the gate of public authoritative censorship. Where will it stop? Next may