The Cine Technician (1943 - 1945)

52 THE C T N E T E C H X I C I A X July— August, 1941 importance far greater than that of the vested rests involved. This national importance would justify the Government in taking a very firm line with Hollywood. The industry should develop n.it I'tvlK as an expression of British life, without attempting to imitate American product. There should be some definite method of raising and maintaining the standard of film production. ' Quickies ' and the reason for them must disappear. " H. "On the other hand, again, producers should give full consideration to their choice of subjects, so that our films are suitable for distribution abroad." I. "But Britain is surely what foreign countries expect and would wish to see on the screen in British films? " J. ' Yes, and steps should be taken to prevent the Gasliglit scandal!" K. " Might not the point made by H disbar the possibility of producers making films of cultural and philosophical value to this country, in seeking to gain wide international distribution. Who is to decide ' suitability ' any way? " L. "And whatever else you do, don't take a person who has attained sudden popularity and 1 naive three or four films quickly without giving due consideration to the story and situations. Also, don't write such a player into every shot. Give the supporting roles more scope and don't use them just because the star must have somebody to talk to." LONDON TRADES COUNCIL DISCUSSES MONOPOLY The following resolution in the name of the Association of Cine-Technicians was discussed at the July meeting of the London Trades Council : — ' The London Trades Council regards the creation of a flourishing and independent British Film Industry as an indispensable national asset for the expression of British ideas and ideals on the screens of the world. It views monopoly control of the industry, whether by British or American capital, as contrary to public interest and regards as inadequate the measures taken by the Board of Trade to limit the development of sudi a monopoly. It draws the attention of the Labour and Trade Union Movement bo the proposals put forward by the Trade Unions in the film industry for countering the grip of monopoly capitalism on the industry, i.e., (a) Maintenance and extension of Government film production and sponsorship and the preservation of the Central Film Library as a public service. (b) Government acquisition of Film Studios, Laboratories and equipment to enable independent production to continue. (c) The creation of a State Film Bank to advance credits for films of national importance This Council regards these as praci measures pending full public ownership ot tl. industry." The resolution was moved by George H. Elvin (A.C.T. General Secretary). The main points m by Mr. Elvin were : It was a. vital matter of public policy that an industry which is an important public service should not come under the eontn of private monopoly. The strength of any medium of expression was dependent upon complete freedom of expression and unfettered access to it~ means. It would be suicidal not only to films a< such but to the national well-bein» if the p< over the film industry was wielded 1>\ one man or one set of interests. There were at the mom two sets of interests with powerful influence in the industry : — (1) The Americans, who by reason of being th manufacturers of the major proportion of English speaking films — and therefore the chief source of supply to British cinemas — had a power and influence which if used to that end could considerably jeopardise ordinary British film interests. (2) The Bank interests, which were building up an all-powerful position in the British Film Industry. They were in somewhat of an anomalous position as the recent deal with 20th Century 1" showed. On the one hand they claimed to 1 building up a vast organisation to safeguard interests of genuine British production. On th other hand they were completely dependent on American product to supply the bulk of the films for their cinemas and had to come to business arrangements with them. Mr. Elvin gave details of the Bank holdings and control in the indus and claimed it was increasingly difficult for am interest to make, distribute or exhibit films witl out using Rank facilities, and therefore to a 1 extent doing so under Bank terms and under Ban control. Any understanding between Bank an! A.B.P.C. organisation would make Bank virl controller of the film industry. For this reas the film Trade Unions, the Films Council an 1 other bodies made urgent representations to the President of the Board of Trade last year. Tli • action taken by him was only satisfactory as temporary measure. It did nothing to restrict Rank's existing powers — which were already great — and did nothing constructive to aid th development or ensure the maintenance ot independent film industry. Mr. Elvin stated that the proposals in the lnt inn were a necessary prerequisite to the maintenance of an independent industry free from any control by large private interests. \ State Film (Continued on page 59)