The Cine Technician (1953-1956)

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.

March-April, 1953 THE CINE-TECHNICIAN 51 and (Hi) to secure a fuller and more efficient exhibition of British films available. Identical with the resolution passed at the previous month's meeting of the London Trades Council, Chris Brunei moved it on behalf of the Westminster Branch; it was seconded by Bro. A. Phipps (Studio No. 2, Westminster Branch of the E.T.U. ), and passed unanimously. FILMS OF VIOLENCE: Stan Warbey attended, as an observer on behalf of A.C.T., together with other representatives, the meeting called by the Authors' World Peace Appeal to consider violence and war-scenes in films. He writes as follows: I had the pleasure to attend as an observer on behalf of A.C.T. a meeting of " The Authors' World Peace Appeal " on Sunday, 11th January. It was an extremely interesting meeting with a high level of discussion all round, and it was particularly noticeable that the Conference had every confidence in British films and their ability to produce good entertainment. The Chairman informed us that over a hundred people of those invited sheered away when they saw the word " Peace " in the title of the Conference as they feared it might imply something subversive! What a pity that even in this country there are those who run around looking in every corner expecting to find some terrible ogre, whilst others run away, afraid to look. What are they afraid of? It reminds me of a famous bird which flies round in everdecreasing circles. . . . Anyway, to return to the Conference. There seemed to be two distinct channels of thought with regard to violence in films: 1. That all violence in films should be banned, and 2. That violence does happen, therefore the important thing was for the film to show the real details, instead of glossing over the facts or misrepresenting them. An example was given where one sometimes sees a man kicked in the teeth and stomach in a brawl, and next minute get up as if nothing had happened and with no apparent discomfort. Then there are the films which imply that war is inevitable, or that force is right or justified in certain circumstances. It was these latter points which mainly concerned those present in their endeavour to check the increase in the production of this kind of film. Certainly there was plenty of food for thought, whether one eventually agrees with the opinions expressed or not. It is difficult to deny the overall influence of the film medium on one's outlook on life, which makes it so important that we do not ignore dangerous trends which may occur in their presentation. ONE-SIDED " PEACE " CALL: Another of A.C.T.'s observers attending the conference on films of violence, Reg Groves, spoke against the blind antiAmericanism that, he said, characterised the main platform speeches. Films of violence, he suggested, were not all made in America, nor was Hollywood the only place where critical and independent thinking was suppressed. Later, he made a further protest when a " specimen " programme for the pro jected World Film Peace Festival to be held in London showed an overwhelming majority of films from Russia and pro-Russian countries. OBITUARIES There can be few film technicians, writes Dan Birt, who have not, at some time or other, come into contact with Harold Richmond, even if they have not actually worked with him, and the news of his sudden death must be a shock to most of them, for Harold was a warm-hearted, lovable human being, and a true friend. Those of us who knew him will miss him a great deal more than we yet realise. Harold Richmond spent the early part of his working life in Australia, for he was apprenticed to the Merchant Navy during the first World War, served as an officer in Australian ships for many years, married, and made his home in Australia, and did not return to this country until shortly before the coming of sound to the movies. But with the outbreak of talkies he found a job at Twickenham under Julius Hagen, and from that day on he never left our trade. He was production manager on one of the first films ever made at Pinewood and on all George King's pictures. He worked for many years at Warner Brothers' Teddington studios. He piloted innumerable independent pictures through their production period. And he was never behind schedule or over budget. His last job as an employee was in charge of production on 7he Planter's Wife, but he had recently formed Corsair Productions Ltd. in conjunction with Clive Nicholas and Brock Williams, and was producing their films for them. It was in this connection that I renewed my association with Harold, for he invited me to direct their first two films. I found him very little changed from the Harold I had worked with more than twenty years before, when I was a cutter. His hair was white, but his energy had not abated in the slightest, and he had that rarest of all qualities, the ability to take and to carry out — every necessary decision without putting any unnecessary restriction on the work of his technicians. I am sure Harold Richmond will be chiefly remembered for other qualities; his patience, his understanding, his unfailing loyalty to his unit; his integrity, his kindness, and his warmth. But I believe that his greatest contribution to our industry was his loyalty — not to the unit — but to the production; the loyalty which drove him to overwork himself consistently for so many years, and which finally killed him. It is only through the selfsacrifice of such people as Harold Richmond that our industry has been able to come through its slumps, and that the rest of us are still able to find pictures to work on. We must never forget him. Stan Warbey writes: I must regretfully record the passing of Archie Stenning, who died last November after three months of illness. A negative dryer, he lived at Sydenham and used to make the long journey to and from Elstree quite cheerfully and rarely missed a shop meeting in the evening. He always told us he did not mind the journey as he was happy at Elstree. He left a wife but no children, and both Wardour Street and Elstree Labs contributed to a wreath and to a gift for his widow. In addition, A.C.T. made a gesture and Pathe sent a gift from the A. B.C. Benevolent Fund in addition to a wreath.