The cinema : 1952 (1952)

l8o THE CINEMA cinema's darkened warmth, are exposed by television for what they are. The individual viewer remains critical, isolated, unelevated by membership of the group ; his experience is intimate and personal, and he is likely to be, in the best sense, sceptical. All this must have its effect on the manner in which programmes are presented ; for the fanfares and vainglory of the opening titles of a musical would fall strangely flat in the parlour. Something more common-sensical is needed, something more homely; and in fact the most successful programmes are those that go about their job in an intimate and unpretentious way, sticking to the close-shot and the tight action which television registers so well, and to the slower tempo which its optical peculiarities and production limitations demand. For the accepted varieties of film editing styles are not the only things that can be done with sound motion-pictures; they are the styles which go over best to a group audience which has, however humbly, a sense of occasion. Thus the thoughtful and leisurely construction of some documentary films is often well suited to television and this, in view of the current attitude of the big renters, is just as well for the B.B.C. At the same time, the informal 'fireside5 quality which registers well on television can easily be allowed to excuse faults of technique, faults of grammar, which should never occur. The fact that the Hungarian inventor or the contortionist just over from Benares can be interviewed on television and seen by a million people is no excuse for slipshod presentation, bad composition, pointless camera movement, and the rest. Television will not always be a novelty; soon we shall take it for granted, and grow more critical. The further and important difference between television and film is that the former can transmit the image of events as they actually occur. Much is made of this 'actuality5 by television producers, who claim, justly but for the wrong