Documentary News Letter (1942-1943)

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.

DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER MAY 1942 NEW DOCUMENTARY FILMS Middle East. Production: Shell Film Unit. Producer: Edgar Anstey. Direction: Grahame Tharp. Diagrams: Francis Rodker. M.O.F 5 minutes. Subject: The importance of the Middle East in allied world strategy. Treatment: Plain diagrams with the minimum of animation, straight commentary and a few drum rolls. The subject is clearly treated and well expressed but by its nature it is really no more than a lecture illustrated by a map of the world. Only in one place, the illustration of what the greater length of sea communications means to us, is there any real use of diagrams. The film does, however, succeed in giving quite a clear picture. Propaganda Value: It is, of course, a very good idea for the M.O.I, to try and keep the public informed on issues of world strategy such as this, and for a middle-class audience no doubt this film will prove successful ; but for the average cinema-going public it is all too remote and didactic. The schoolmasterly approach combined with the refined and nasal (not so say rheumy) tones of the commentator will only serve to make the general public feel that it is something which does not really concern them. 1 don't know what the solution is (certainly it will have to include actuality material) but something will certainly have to be done to humanise these informative films if they are to fulfil their purpose. London Scrapbook. Production: Spectator Short Films. Producer: Basil Wright. Direction: Derek de Marney and Eugene Cekalski. Camera: A. H. Luff. Collected by Bessie Love and Basil Radford with Leslie Mitchell. Subject: The films deals with the small changes and slight, semi-picturesque situations incidental to the more violent distress of war and through them it seeks to characterise the manner by which the familiar disasters of London have altered its outward scenes and the lives of the people living in it. The film is for American consumption. Treatment: The lightness of the subject is reflected in the treatment, and Bessie Love is excellent as the unselfconscious cine-kodak amateur trying to sell her •"Scrapbook" to a film-weary Films Division. No criticism of the superficial jauntiness of the film should overlook the fact that its purpose is to show those very subjects which, though less profound and therefore usually ignored, may, if properly handled, throw into relief some of the deeper sufferings which the people of London and other cities have undergone. For example, the extremely effeeli\c and nostalgic shot of the empty, windy playground in Kensington Gardens, with only one child ("the only child in London") left to feed the ducks at the feet of Petei Pan, must be as sharp in its effect on a New York mother as a complete film on the evacuation of school children. The extent to which the film succeeds in this kind of respect is the proper measure of its propaganda value, lot mere light-heartedness by itself would not suffice as a pretext for showing such a film abroad. In this sense it is to be hoped, without wishing to be priggish about an extremely funny and well-made film, that Americans will not make the mistake of believing that the tragedies of several million Londoners reduce themselves to a series of nostalgic spectacles and semi-humorous inconveniences, as they tend to do when viewed by an American woman living in circumstances likely to remove from war much of its more permanent severity. For example, Bessie Love's difficu'ties over rations are never so great as when she drops them in the park on her way to a party. The film which is very well shot, contains a good parody on the M.O.I, and one of its officials (Leslie Mitchell) and is certainly excellent entertainment for anyone making documentary films and almost as certainly for everyone familiar with Anglo-Saxon cities. Propaganda Value: An unusually incomprehensible paragraph on the M.O.I. programme sheet runs thus: "Owing to the fact that this film was in production when America entered the war, it has had to be re-designed and the propaganda content is therefore not as strong as it would have been but for the change of angle necessitated." Apart from what this may mean, it is safe to say that the film will at any rate suggest to Americans the depth of the sacrifice being forced by a changing environment upon a people more than usually reliant (if we are to believe the Americans) upon the fanvliar and traditional. Incidentally, it is a questionable whether parish jokes, however good, about fumblings at the M.O.I, are the most reassuring way of proving to Americans that our traditional sense of humour about ourselves has succeeded in keeping pace with the urgencies of total war. Go to Blazes. Direction: Walter Ford. Screen Play: Diana Morgan, Angus MacPhail. Camera: Ernest Palmer. M.O.I. 5 minutes. Subject: Will Hay demonstrates the funny (wrong) and the funny (right) way to tackle incendiaries. Treatment: We are back to the good old days of blitz propaganda when the siren has always gone ten minutes ago. The mother and the daughter are the unsympathetic heroines who know that the right people no longer use a spray but a jet, and Will Hay, after fooling bravely with several fires is packed off to the Warden's Post next to the "Pig and Whistle" to brush up his A.R.P. Propaganda Value: If people really lose their heads over incendiaries as quickly as Will Hay, or, like him, as soon forget the lessons the> have been taught under fire, then the film ought to have been made. Otherwise not. Men of India. Presented by M.O.I. Made by the Indian Film Unit, Bombay. Direction: Ezra Mir. ( aniciii J iua raja Bodhyc. Editor: Phatap Parmar. Production: Alexander Shaw. English Commenlai t.I dmund Willard for Strand Films. Subject, factory production in India and the part Indians are playing in the war effort. treatment. Indian fire-fighters at a realistic practice remind us that air-raids threaten also the war production of that continent. The forceful commentator he who spoke on "Naval Operations" — describes how the men of India, of many races and many religions, work side by side in the factory where they turn out armoured cars. They have the common brotherhood of skilled craftsmen. The feeling of high speed production is put across well by good cutting. The commentator reminds his audience that this tyre-fitter's father sold lamps in the bazaar, this rivetter's father knew nothing more mechanical than an oxwagon. ... It is a pity that we are not shown this side of Indian life. One cannot help feeling that the urgency of the factory, so effectively put across, cannot be as yet an outstandingly important aspect of life to the average Indian. Surely the old industries of India — the production of rice, hemp, cotton — are still vital. It is most encouraging to see a film of high technical quality produced by an Indian Film Unit. Propaganda value. The audience, particularly those members of it who work in factories, will be given more understanding of the Indian people and their way of living. Had it been possible to show the more general picture of Indian life it might have done an even better job. In the Rear of the Enemy. Production: Soviet Children's Film Studio. Direction: Eugen Schneider. Subject: This is the first full length Soviet film since the war to have been dubbed in English. It presents an extremely realistic picture of winter warfare which will give British people — civilian and military— a pretty graphic idea of what fighting is like in Arctic conditions. The story is simple enough, but full of interesting detail, and packed with suspense. A Soviet patrol of three men is sent out to reconnoitre the headquarters of the opposing troops (Finnish, but officered by Germans). They reach the objective but are trapped. Two of them attempt to break back through the lines, but the third stays to give Soviet H.Q. the range for an artillery bombardment which destroys the Finnish guns. Soviet infantry follow up and annihilate the enemy. The three heroes are saved. The story is one of simple courage and endurance based on that dynamic belief in a cause that is at the base of Russia's successes against the Fascist powers. It is a picture that could usefully be shown to British troops and to the Home Guard, for in addition to the natural excitement of the story there are many lessons in guerilla tactics and the art of camouflage. The way the three Russians reconnoitre the enemy house before entering it is an object lesson in precaution, although one of them slips up badly later when he fails to observe a peculiar mound in the snow which conceals a Finnish soldier. Propaganda value: The Red Army men and officers in the film are all extremely pleasant people, tough, efficient and human; you get a feeling that they know their job and nothing will stop them doing it. All in all, the film is very good propaganda not only for the Soviet Union, but for the cause of all anti-Fascist peoples.