Focus: A Film Review (1952-1953)

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.

144 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 164 Fifth Avenue, Tang Hall, York. Thursday, May 7th, 1953. Dear Sir, Brian K. Small criticises "The Quiet Man” and claims the Irish do not like it. I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and so have many others. I11 Newcastle it played for about twelve weeEs at a medium sized cinema in the town centre. After seeing the film I felt the Irish would not like it, because in all charity, though many of them may have a good sense of humour I find it difficult to "pull their legs". One may taunt a Scotsman regarding his strong national outlook, and he will good humouredly fight back. Certain northern groups of Englishmen are the butt of comments about their speech but they always have a cheerful rejoinder. I certainly did not take the film seriously nor as a serious picture of Irish country life in humorous vein. In it I certainly found many conflictions with which life in that Emerald Isle seems to abound, and which have puzzled me for a long time. Some things appear to be almost mortal sins, while others which raise my eyebrows to their fullest extent are apparently quite innocent. However, there was nothing in the film which spoilt my enjoyment and I hope others come to its defence. Yours sincerely, W. D. Atpleby. St. Helens, Lancs. May 4th, 1953. Dear Rev. Father, What a pity that the financial position has forced you to omit the photo blocks in the present issue. Couldn’t the sales of the magazine be increased by circularising the day secondary grammar school headmasters or headmistresses? From my own experience as a member of the staff in the above school, I have no difficulty in selling a hundred copies mainly among the fourteen to seventeen year olds — the people who, I suppose, go to the cinema as frequently, if not more so, than many adults. And are not these children the ones whom it is best to teach to be critical of the films they see. My own feeling is that the magazine justifies itself by its monthly criticism of films — apart from the other interesting articles that you sometimes publish. Incidentally I manage to hand over about 10/ a month profit from sales to our own new school building fund — a small matter of over ^200, coo having to be found for it!!! If any suggestion is of use to put into your next issue, I am quite willing that you should use it — though I would prefer not to have the name of the school mentioned, nor indeed actual quotation — which, being very hurriedly written, is not in the best literary style! I feel quite strongly that a potential market is being lost because of a lack of realization, both as to its existence and its capacity for good. I’m sorry this is so hurriedly written, but I hope you understand my daring in writing it. What a pity the Hierarchy don’t realize the power for good in their midst, and follow the wishes of the Holy Father, in helping everyone who tries to instruct the faithful as to the good and bad films so that Faith and Morals need not be endangered. But enough! May God bless and prosper your work. Yours sincerely, Theresa McDermott. [ Several other letters have been held over owing to lack of space.]