Documentary News Letter (1947-1949)

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 •OL. 7 NO. 65 MAY 1948 film news EDITORIAL BOARD ROBERTO ROSSELLINI STEPHEN ACKROYD DONALD ALEXAM'I'K MAX ANDERSON EDGAR ANSTEY GEOFFREY BELL KEN CAMERON PAUL FLETCHER SIN< I MR ROAD GRAHAME THARP BASIL WRIGHT EDITOR DAVIDE BOULTING ASSISTANT EDITOR J\Nt DAVIES The co\er still for this month is from a new film Steps oj the Ballet, which will shortly he released h> Crown Film Unit CONTENTS Editorial 49 Notes of the Month 50 German Feature Films Basil Wright 51 Animated Films Norman McLaren . . . . . . 52 Germany Year Nought . . . . . . . . . . 53 New Documentary Films . . . . . . 54 COl Report 55 Indian Cinema K. Alumni Abbas . . . . . . . . . . 56 Normandy Diary . . 57 Chapter I Competition Result . . 58 Film Classification James Harris . . . . . . 59 Correspondence .. .. 60 Published every month h\ Film Centre :ti s«»ii«> s«|. i.omlon \vi VNNUAL SUBSCRIPTION 12 S. SINGLE COPIES 1 S. ni \ki -i twenty years ago the concept ol putting real people and events on the screens ol this count began to show its first practical results. The first documentai j films opened the eyes ol British cinema audiences to, among other things, the artistic possibilities ol a medium which until then had been concerned principally with various versions of what the hut lei saw. Many of those who witnessed these early interpretations ol reality felt that at last the British cinema was beginning to find its proper material in the life and work, the hopes, fears and struggles of the common man. In the rugged, friendly, unfamiliar laces which the camera then scanned for the first time, there laj the strength and humanity from which the British cinema, it seemed reasonable to hope, might develop a power to move men's hearts as they have rarely been moved by any of the older arts. Here was a new medium of expression, popular in the most literal sense, which could worthily interpret the life which throbbed under the roof-crusts of our cities and in the quietness of our countryside. Since those early years the British documenary film has gained an importance in our national life which has fully justified the soaring dreams of its founding fathers. On a scale which few could have imagined twenty years ago the moving picture has been turned to the service of the people, not only of this country, but of the whole Commonwealth, and it is certain that this progress has not reached its peak. The advance has not, however, been equally sv. ift in all directions. Partly owing to the influence of the war. of all the potentialities which were latent in the initial documentary idea, the one which has developed most fully is that of public information. But the capacity to depict the life of the individual, ordinary man is the one which has progressed least from its rudimentary, state, for although many films have been made in which all the participants have been men and women in the street, they have generally been treated as symbols of the mass, as puppets whose attitudes and gestures emphasize or prove a social point. Seldom has there been an attempt to portray the single, idiosy ncratic indiv idual w ho, w uh millions of other unique individuals, is the raw material ol the mass. It ;s a matter of approach; the course followed with every justification by documentary film-makers until now has been to take a social problem and illustrate its elfects and solution with the help of representative individuals. The alternative, equally justifiable, is to start with the human being in the round, his face, his gestures, his thoughts and the inflections of his voice, and set him in his surroundings, which include not only the pattern oi his carpel and the view from his bedroom window hut also the social situation in w hich he lives. This trend of British documentary tow aids the treatment ol institutions rather than people has spread wherever the documentary influence has spread, and the portrayal ol the individual has been left to the feature and entertainment film-makers who. by and large, still seem only able to contemplate the perverted aspects ol the present and the romantic aspects ol the past. I o find any p screen study ol mankind it is necessary to turn to the countries ol Europe where people have been compelled to reconsidei then approach tO main subjects besides that of the ci iem I' visit to I ondon ol Si Roberto Rossellini was more than a date in the cine m t's s, vial calendai It was I lie \isit ol a man who. h\ his will .ind inspiration, has probably come closer than any other aetne directoi to portraying our time in terms ol its in me participants His most recent film, Germania l/i ■ • /. ■ which has un{Continued at foot of p /.l)