Documentary News Letter (1947-1949)

!)()( I MINI \R\ M W s [ I ITER •M CORRESPONDENCE— count. sir: It is seldom one reads a thoroughly jaundiced review in DSL, or one which fails utterly to present a constructive assessment of the film in question. In the last issue, however, appealed a review of The Bridge that can be best described as querulous and at worst as irresponsible. Your reviewer, Mr. X, has gone to some trouble to belittle every aspect of this film. We are to believe that it is technically inept, has an impossible commentary poorly spoken, lacks humanity, and (final crushing argument?) dodges the political issues. I do not propose to deal herewith these points, for my technical knowledge would not be equal to the task. In any case, in his destructi\e zeal Mr X has so contradicted himself that in some cases this is not necessary. But I do want to make one point about The Bridge. This film was made to do a job. That job was to show to people here the ordinary folk of Yugosla\ia facing up to the problem of reconstructing their country. That implied, too, the conveying of the new spirit and social set-up of the country and the basic political and subjective attitudes of the people to the job in hand. The film could be judged successful if, in giving an honest account of these things, it at the same time made a contribution to international co-operation and increased the sense of responsibility and solidarity of the British people as far as the people of Yugoslavia are concerned. Judged on this basis the film has already proved itself. I have been present when it has been shown to four very different audiences: to a group of technicians, to the London Scientific Film Society, to Unity Theatre, and to an audience of 300 Birmingham citizens. It is interesting to see how the reactions of these audiences dispose of various aspects of the criticisms of Mr. X. The LSFS membership has pretty high technical standards and is particularly vsatchful for lack of integrity or false values in films, yet The Bridge was extremely well received. Unity Theatre audiences are probably the most politically advanced that can be found, yet the one w Inch viewed The Bridge (and the place was packed) did not feel, with Mr. X, that the political point had been neglected. As a matter of fact it was felt that here at last was a clear picture of the way of living of one of the new European democracies which would be of immense value in combating the stories of the yellow press. However, the reactions of the Birmingham audience are probably the most important, since they were the people for whom the film was really made. Did Mr. X say the film lacked humanity, that there was no warmth in the commentary? I'd like him to have heard the throat clearings at the emotional climax of the film, or the horrified gasp when the commentator drew attention to the fact that Serbia must be \er> prosperous because the dogs were still alive. At the end there was a long silence — and some surreptitious work with handkerchiefs then a woman got up and said that she didn't think people would want to discuss the film because it had been too overpowering. A loud murmur of agreement showed that she was expressing a general feeling, but some people did speak, and all stressed how affected thev had been and how important it was that they should be able to see such films as The Bridge in the cinemas. The Chairman, a member of the Co-op Education Committee, wound up by saying that she thought the film should be shown throughout the Co operative Movement, and in particular to the Youth Clubs. It would do much to bring home the responsibility we all had to the people of Yugoslavia, and of Europe generally, and to strengthen the friendship between peoples that can make future wars impossible. 'If only the film had achieved a sense of humanity', wails Mr. X. If only Mr. X had achieved a sense of proportion! Yours, etc., VAL WALKER sir: Cine-clubs, to use the French term for film societies, obviously play a large part in noncommercial cinematograph activities, in supplying a critical public with historical and aesthetic documents, in awakening a critical sense in a widening public and, through this influence, in eventually raising the standards of production. The post-war cine-club movement in France is strong and has a growing public and, perhaps more important for its future development, has a centralized organization in the Federation Frangaise des Cine-clubs (formed in 1944) and in the resources of the Cinematheque, the official film institute which was already working before the war. The Federation Frangaise des Cine-clubs has moral and slight financial support from the Ministry of Education and from the Centre National du Cinema and this support controls its strictly non-commercial character. An annual general meeting of representatives of the separate cine-clubs elect an administrative council which, in turn, elects the four directors — the 'Bureau'. Cieorges Sadoul is now the secretary and the president is Jean I'ainlcve who is now with UNESCO. The membership is over 100,000 and, oi' the 100 clubs registered, 95 are actually functioning now. The role of the I ederation's office is. to supply films asked for by cine-clubs though in practice the choice is limited by the existing stock of Cinematheque whose offices are in the same building. A journal is planned and desired but barred by financial difficulties; projectionists have been given a special week's training course; a National Congress is planned for June, 1947, and the Comite de Federation International des Cine-Clubs hopes to meet in April and represents, among other countries, Belgium, Poland, the United Kingdom and the United States. The individual clubs are constantly growing and are especially strong in Paris. About ninetenths of then leaders are teachers and Bordeaux has the only woman leader. A few clubs, Tunis, Casablanca and Tours among them, run their own reviews. The variety of clubs is tempting and bewildering — perhaps it is lucky that their programmes have less variety. There are clubs serving different communities and tastes — from that of the railwaymen of Hcllemes and the industrial workers of the Renault Works and of BologncBillancourt to that of Montmartrc (which tries to revive a music hall atmosphere), the University and the Club Voyage et Aventure which specializes in 'open-air films'. L'Ecran Francois publishes weekly cine-club programmes and reports special activities. (continued p. 94, col. 3) REALIST FILM UNIT Producers of films for the classroom Supervision— Dorothy Grayson BSc Alex Strasser FRPS REALIST FILM UNIT LTD 9 GREAT CHAPEL STREET Wl GERRARD 1958