Business screen magazine (1944)

;4ie ^ettefi 7<'^<t^ Ot^en^ bv Harold B. Kobcris. LI.. I S.Mt "^OME DAY somebody may be able to an^ sucr the question "Who can make a good training film?" Simultaneously he will be ble to answer its correlate, "What makes a ■aining film good?" The relationship between the two queries calls ) mind the Hollysvood maxim which says "A roducer is no better than his latest picture." 'he truth of the adage, unimportant here, may e left to those who know something of the inematic city. Its implications bear noting. It nplics first that Hollj'wood producers (or aclallv any of those who contribute to producon) are interested in the measurement of leir success and, secondly, that they realize lat they will find their own success inescapably nked to that of their product. Certainly no one can thoughtfully insinuate lat the training film, good or poor, is any more ;lated to the Hollywood entertainment product whether good, poor, or Class C, than Mcluffey's Reader is to one of the Rover Boys ;rics. However, there is every reason to believe lat the maker of training films is equally conerncd with his success or failure and that he ;arches with equal solicitude for e\-idences of 16 success of his product. Ititli i|ii«'ries are fair questions, but the anA'ers remain obscure. They rest within closed oors that can be opened only by further scienific measurement. They can be attained, must e, and the sooner the better. But until more esults of scientific measurement can be applied 3 training film production the training film lakcr who is serious about his assignment must lake the best films he can through the study of ccognized excellences in motion picture craft nd of the discoveries of science in the field of unian behavior and learning. The success of the tr.iining film is dependent ipon the subsequent success of the training film udience. Unlike the entertainment movie, the ucress of the training film is dependent not ipon the size of its audii-nce nor upon gate reeipts nor upon the nods of the critics, but ather solely upon the proficiency of the audincc. Again, unlike the commercial movie, the ucccss of the training film is dependent not on he smiles, the comfort, or even upon the cheers if the audience, but rather upon the ciuality of he subsequent performance of duty of each ndivldual in the audience. The contribution hat the film makes to carrying forward the ^lavy's part of the war through the perforniince of its men is the only real measure of the uccess of a Navy training film. It must follow that the success of the maker >f training films can be measured only in terms of the success of the boys for whom the films are made. Successful performance of duty by naval personnel is the only acceptable final objective of the training film maker. The naval activities assigned to the planning and production of training films dare not lose sight of that objective. Every person assigned to production, whether officer, enlisted man, or civilian must, in effect, ask himself as he works on a film, "What will this one do for the boys?" Having accepted successful performance of duty by naval personnel as his objecti\-e, and having accepted the assignment of producing a film, the training film maker must make certain basic assumptions. He must assume that: (a) The trainee will be different after having seen the film. The trainee will know more, will have a different attitude and, far more important, he will act differently. The picture, in, of, and by itself, will change the trainee. (b) The film may be required to set a stand ard pattern of performance on all ships and stations. The performance of thousands of men may be influenced by the picture. (c) The objectives of the training officer are parallel to his own. The training film maker and the training officer work for the achievement of the same goals. (d) The film will solve or a.ssist in the solution of training problems not yet successfully solved by books, charts, lectures or demonstrations. The problems to be solved by the film may be perplexing and obscure but they are always exacting. Both the objective and the assumptions de luite a problem that is basically psychological. "Common sense" psychology represents a field in which many rate themselves as experts. Naturally, nearly everybody having lived, developed and competed in a social world has perfected a scheme of exercising social controls which work at least part of the time. But the same dependence upon and faith in "common sense" psychology has retarded the progress of educational and training activities for centuries. A consideration of a few of the findings of science, in the study of human behavior, may prove valuable to those who create in the field of the training film. Man is in a most favorable learning condition when confronted by a problem, the solution of which will contribute to his personal ivelfare. The newly commissioned reserve officer, ordered to report aboard a ship for the first time, obviously would welcome a film which would give him detailed instructions on prescribed procedures. In such a case, the trainee himself has isolated and recognized liis problem. The training film maker has but to recognize the same problem and to present the solution. Those responsible for First Leave, a film on good behavior during, and prompt return from leave, v\'ere faced with a far more complex situation. The audience of "boots" could be expected to recognize no problem related to going home on leave for the first time previous to the showing of the picture. Upon the training film makers rested the burden of isolating the problem or problems which would be faced by the "boots," presenting them in such a way that they would be recognized and accepted as personal problems by the "boots" and finally presenting tlie .solutions. .•\ "how to do it" film may successfully present a problem in a very simple way. as exemplified by the Army picture which showed piles of supplies of various sizes and shapes ready to be loaded into boxcars while the narrator said simply, "Loading tliis mixed cargo is a cinch if you use plain common sense." Simple or complex, those fihns which indicate that the producing personnel recognize the necessity for isolating and establishing a problem which would become that of the trainee appear to be superior. Man is interested when he is learning, but interest does not guarantee learning. Simple and obvious enough on the face of it, this concept receives scant support in many training films. The epitome [Turn to page lOo] K REPORT ON NAVY TRAINING FILMS 53