The Cine Technician (1935-1937)

74 The Journal of the Association of Cine-Technicians Dec, 1936-Jan., 1937 TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION ESSENTIAL When we speak of a film as technijcally interesting, we are often unconsciously making an adverse criticism. We often mean a film in which the technical excellencies and devices draw attention to themselves and that is a form of bad technique. For technique after all is only the answer to the question "How ? " And the best answer is the least obtrusive. Film-making has so many separate departments each with its own technique that a technically perfect film is necessarily rare. And each department is, or should be, subordinate to the telling of the story. From this there sometimes arises technical clashes between departments and the technician has to learn the difficult but necessary lesson that sometimes he must sacrifice apparent technical excellence in his particular department to the good of the whole. For instance, the camera-man must forego those Madonna lilies tipping into the left corner of the picture. True they make an attractive composition, but in this scene that is just what is not wanted. An attractive composition inevitably draws attention to itself and in this scene the whole of the attention needs to be focussed on the actors. Incidentally, does any one remember an interesting shot, qua shot, in any Chaplin film ? I believe that is because the element of supreme importance in every scene is the figure of Chaplin himself and nothing — not even a lovely shot — must distract us from it. The supreme technique of film-making lies in the co-ordination of the separate techniques of individual departments. And this can only be brought about by sympathetic co-operation. A film can be beautifully photographed, admirably recorded, powerfully acted, and yet be a technical failure because these elements do not fuse into a whole or forward the story. For in the end it is the imaginative technique of telling the story that must be supreme and technical blemishes which do not seriously interfere with this are of minor importance and that is why speaking as a director, "Mr. Deeds" seemed to me the best technical achievement of 1936, though in no individual department did it break new ground or was even outstandingly good. Anthony Asquith. A DISAPPOINTING YEAR This has been a disappointing year for British films. Though the equipment of some of our studios is now equal to the world's best, our most ambitious efforts are still below those of America, Germany and France. Among the outstanding productions of 1936, I can see only one in the first ten. That is "The Ghost Goes West," which I would place fourth after "Romeo and Juliet," "Modern Times" and "La Kermesse Heroique." In the first twenty pictures, there is nothing else British. In secondary pictures, we have held our own, many of the thrillers and comedies being quite excellent. But all the big pictures, with the exception of "The Ghost," have been amateurish by comparison with their foreign equivalents. Largely the faults (to an untechnical critic) are in the scenarios and the casting, principally the latter. The plots have been woolly, and the editing gawky, and some quite incredible people have been given the leads. I could name three young women, but will refrain, who ha\-c been "starred" in costly pictures, and whose talent and personality do not justify more than walking-on parts. Why should this be, when we have more fine actors than any country except France, and an abundance of native dramatists ? The secret of the general inefficiency is in the capture of so many key positions by an army of foreigners who have blown into the industry on a whirlwind of ballyhoo and who are great artists in only one thing, self-advertisement. John Ramage. MORE TECHNICAL CREDITS WANTED Most satisfactory A.C.T. feature of '36 the consoHdation of membership — the rough cut is finished and we're beginning the final trims. Must continue to stress the importance of the men who make the film ; would like to see trade press list technical credits in their reviews (as the Americans do) so that bouquets and kicks can reach the technicians they're intended for. The boys don't mind the kicks and they'd like to take a bow occasionally. Also hope the Journal may be able to issue complete list of A.C.T. credits on all films made during previous year. Technically, year has shown slight tendency to have more lengthy set-ups and less cross-cutting. This may develop, but is dangerous except where players can really carry long scenes. Growth also of having editor standing by on floor with director throughout production — habit to be encouraged. Colour will perhaps be more important problem in 1937 ; has as yet scarcely touched the British technician. Hope increased use will not be excuse for importation of too many foreign technicians — British technicians must be fitted for working on colour at every opportunity. New problems colour is bringing should receive earnest attention of A.C.T. educational committees. Sidney Cole. SCENARIO'S BIG CONTRIBUTION TO RECENT SUCCESSES The past year has seen some notable films, and it is particularly interesting from the scenarist's point of view to see how greatly the scenario has contributed to the success of these pictures. More interesting still is the fact that success has been attained by scenarios that differ wholly in type. "Mr. Deeds Comes to Town," one of the very best of its kind, has been excellently served all round. It is a highly polished performance, and the dialogue is admirable. But the picture's triumph does not depend on its dialogue. Now take the other side. "The Petrified Forest" is a picture of the static type, entirely successful and full of dialogue. This picture gives the lie to those who maintain that a script full of dialogue is not only reactionary but doomed to failure. It would seem that the screen is catering to both eve and ear, and is beginning to gauge the compass of public taste in both directions. It is the picture that above others should stimulate our dialogue writers for^ — when all is said and done, and heaven knows a lot is said in picturemaking but comparatively little is done — the actual continuity over which scenarists frown and pore is, and quite rightly, at the mercy of the Director. The tendency is toward writing the script in master scenes and leaving the ultimate breaking down to the director and his assistants — again a decided move in the right direction. Simplicity is coming into its rightful own, and for tliis all our thanks are due. Walter Meade.