The cinema : 1952 (1952)

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.

KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS 53 more interesting way than I had previously had the chance of doing in a film. Thirdly, that of making a picture which paid no regard whatever to established, although not practised, moral convention. This last was not from any desire to shock, but from an impulse to escape the somewhat inflexible and unshaded characterization which convention tends to enforce in scripts. Michael Balcon, Angus McPhail, John Dighton, and I went through many bouts of trepidation in the process. We had denied ourselves the usual yardsticks of ' They did it like this in so-andso' and 'But such-and-such was more successful'. I am ashamed to admit that we not infrequently classed ourselves as superior persons and asked, 'Well, we like this, but will they?' Anyhow, we pressed on, deciding to gamble that 'they' would. 'What did we achieve?' First, for ourselves a valuable and humbling lesson on the subject of 'we' and 'they'. I have seen the picture with all kinds of audiences and been grateful for how kindly they have received it. One more little blow had been struck at the belief that the fact that people have not had the opportunity of seeing a certain kind of picture or brand of humour means that they will not welcome them if given the opportunity. I suppose there is no greater pleasure for a film-maker than to sit in a cinema listening to people enjoying what he has made. Particularly is this so in the case of their laughter, and I don't think this is entirely a selfish pleasure. If we had managed to make something which extended the horizons of laughter for quite a number of people, that was something in return for their friendliness. I'd better end as I began. There are many things that satisfy me about the picture, there are many things that don't. People on the whole have been kind enough to forgive the latter because of the former, but I don't want them to think I regard it as other than something I'd like to try to improve on.