The Cine Technician (1953-1956)

July-August, 1952 THE CINE-TECHNICIAN 83 The Editor, The Cine Technician. Dear Sir, As a member of the A.C.T. and a pioneer of the religious film movement I was very pleased to read Chris Brunei's article on film censorship threatening 16mm. As far as the religious field is concerned two points stand out — one — that impoverished Churches, Youth Clubs, etc., who are doing an excellent job of work for spiritual morale of the country can ill-afford to meet a hundred-and-one petty-fogging fire safety regulations. The paper used for the parson's sermon is far more inflammable than the celluloid used for the film sermon. Some clergy need every encouragement to use modern means to reach the ordinary person and to make it too complicated would be to retard the forward movement. And two — a most important point — that with all censorship no consistent voice, other than the Pope of Rome, can be found in Christendom to decide what should, or should not, form part of a religious film. There's no money to be made, so that eliminates all heretics, but the cornerstone will fall on the question of the figure of Christ on the screen. The British Board of Film Censors until a few months ago would never give a certificate to a film which showed the actual face of Christ — they split hairs by passing films in which the voice occurs, or a decapitated figure with voice appears. This did not worry the ever-growing religious film movement, for their field of operation was not in the public cinema but in 16mm. where the Board had no jurisdiction. Well over 5,000 clergy are using such films on their projectors in Churches, Sunday Schools, Youth Clubs, etc. The Home Office could very easily find by hand-picking an old-fashioned collection of clergy who would ban not only the figure of Christ on the screen but almost the whole of the religious film movement. For some years I have been pointing out to the British Board the fallacy of their position — few realise that only a few months ago they made history and departed from their policy of not granting a censorship certificate to a film in which the face of Christ appeared. They granted a certificate to the Roman Catholic film entitled " Behold the Man," which is based on the Crucifixion of our Lord. There were all sorts of reasons for this sudden departure. I promptly submitted to them some of our films, which had previously been banned, in order to test their new policy, not because I wanted them shown in a cinema. They received a censorship certificate, e.g., " Jairus' Daughter," etc. I began my negotiations with the British Board in 1937/8, so it took nearly 15 years . . . now there could not be a more admirable and sensible Board than the B.B.F.C. and it is a Trade Organisation, thank goodness, but what of a Home Office Censorship ? I have heard it said that the Government is afraid of communistic propaganda in 16mm. The healthiest bulwark against revolutionary communism is progressive vital Christianity. 16mm. is the poor relation of the 35mm. and the religious film movement is even more povertystricken, but its reputation stands high, for it endeavours to tackle the extremely difficult job with no capital resources or subsidy and not an atom of commercial outlet. It only triumphs as a result of the heart-slogging of those who believe in it and the helping hand from those in the Industry who realise the power of the screen to teach the good things of God to the rising generation. Yours faithfully, The Revd. Brian Hession. Show British films — / showed Henry VIHth, didn't I ?