Celluloid : the film to-day (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.

THE BRITISH FILM 43 THE BRITISH FILM What I have written of America largely holds good with England, save that it applies on a much smaller scale to our limited output and our small-minded executives. There is no question, of course, that the coming of the talking film greatly helped the British film industry as a whole to gain some position of moderate stability, and that British films to-day are, generally speaking, slightly better in quality and more plentiful than they were in the pre-dialogue period. On the other hand, I and many with me wholly disagree with the way in which films are produced in England, not only as regards subject-matter but with the whole attitude of the average British film man towards the cinema. I object to imitative methods; I differ from the British executives' idea of what constitutes box-office appeal; and I abhor bad and incompetent workmanship in such a great medium as the cinema. The general mismanagement of British studios and their complete failure to understand what the cinema means to the everyday person is capable of quite simple explanation. Immediately after the War, the film industry in this country was comprised almost solely of renting and distributing firms for handling foreign, chiefly American, pictures. There was little attempt at actual production, partly because of lack of money and partly because of inexperience. The men who entered the film trade then came either as newcomers or were returning to their old calling. At any rate, it is more or less true to say that few of