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.
346
CLOSE UP
(3) Waste of time. Still an excellent argument against the commercial cinema. But bread and circuses and the Problem of Leisure.
(4) The Technical objection that the " new " play did not observe the unities. On this point Sir Philip Sidney was particularly scathing, even though it must be remembered that the action was far more free and, in a sense, verisimilitudinous, than when conventionally bounded in the later pictureframe setting. This argument is comparable to the earliest protests that no one could possibly take an interest in the actions of figures who were merely shadows — protests which the Trade ridiculously counters by compound " realism."
The actual similarities of early technical machinery between stage and film are too important to indicate. Only, as a half-facetious comment, it may be remarked that many of the silent Interludes were elaborated into dramas proper, just as silent films are drearily regurgitated into all-too talking pictures. Also note (important) the scenario-like lay-out of pre-Restoration plays, when not " edited " into conventional breaks by the 18th century.
This sort of parallel could be continued for ever. Both ages held, for instance, the pathetic illusion that you cannot have too much of a financially good thing, which means the ridiculous belching at the discreditably grateful public of innumerable rehashings of a successful theme — jungle, prison, or war, which ever form of dangerous emetic is temporarily popular. The Elizabethan successes were largely those of vindicatory jingoism : historical dramas, military knock-about, or Jew-baiting — the Jew of Malta or Shakespeare's copy, Shylock. They are models which current reaction would seem to make safe bets today, when, though social morality has hardened, political morality remains in much the same state of barbarity as it was for the emotional realists of sixteenth century expansionism.
For this is an indication of what can be and eventually will be done, rather than a pedagogic attempt to do it. Least of all is it an attempt, on a sort of Ervine level, to draw shoddy conclusions (from dramatic history), as to future development of the cinema. But perhaps a paper devoted to intelligent discussion of cinema should at some time show its ability to relate the history, though it may sensibly ignore discussion of the practise, of the stage. At all events to show a few of the more obvious directions in which the relation of that history may be directed. More profitably, too, it may be a stimulus of some sort to show that a medium of accepted attainment long underwent the same processes as the newer one of promise. In spite of centuries of commercial theatre, projecting cavalcades of imbecility, there are a few great plays. In spite of everything then — film publics, film finances, film policy, film censorships and Film Weekly — there may still be a few good films.
So now let us get on and make something.