Harrison's Reports (1946)

September 28, 1946 HARRISON'S REPORTS 156C Neither do you report that Mr. Ramsaye stated in his editorial that "The story contains what may be called strong material pertaining to hard aspects of life, but the original action of the New York State Board in condemning the picture was not to he justified by any real understanding of the moral issues or the representation of them." It is interesting to note that Mr. Ramsaye, who is, as you say, "An everyday decent person" is, also, a gentleman who knows very much about the provisions of the Production Code, but, who, in his editorial comment on "SCARLET STREET," makes not even the slightest suggestion that he believes, with you, that the picture "flouts openly the prin' ciples of morality and the boundaries of good taste as established by the Production Code." MY REPLY It seems to me as if the Georgia Supreme Court has made a sucker out of Joe Breen on "Scarlet Street," for as I am writing this reply I am reading a news item in the September 10 issue of Motion Picture Daily, reading as follows: "Atlanta, Sept. 9 — The Supreme Court of Georgia has ruled that Judge Bond Almand of Fulton County Superior Court erred in allowing 'Scarlet Street' to be shown in Atlanta over the protest of the city board of censorship. . . ." Not that "Scarlet Street" would have been purified by Breen's protesting arguments without this decision of the Georgia Supreme Court, but it just makes it possible for me to eliminate the use of a great deal of valuable space. So far as his attempt to use other parts of Terry Ramsaye's article to prove his code conduct correct, let me say that, at a luncheon table the other day, Mr. Ramsaye told me that, if I should want him to repeat that "Scarlet Street" is "a morbid, seamy story dealing with the dregs of humanity," he will be very glad to accommodate me. So, before Joe Breen again invokes Mr. Ramsaye's writings to prove his case, he had better communicate with him. THE LETTER You ask the question, "Where was Joe Breen when 'THE CORN WAS GREEN' was submitted to his office? Again, I answer that Joe Breen was here in Hollywood, working away at his task as Administrator of the Production Code. You ask the further question : "Does he know that in this picture there is implied a seduction?" The answer is, yes, I do know that there is in the picture an implied seduction, but I hardly know just what you mean by "an unadulterated sordid seduction." I take it that your purpose is seeking to establish that I have been derelict in my duty. It must be that you are of the opinion that because of this "unadulterated sordid seduction," we should not have approved "THE CORN IS GREEN." Maybe so. But, let us see what some others — aside and apart from you or me — think about this picture. I have before me as I write, a copy of a publication, titled, "UNBIASED OPINIONS OF CURRENT MOTION PICTURES." It is a four-page document, issued by the Fox West Coast Theatres, under date of April 14, 1945. In this bulletin, there is set forth in some detail the estimates of a group of trained film reviewers representing eleven national organizations, concerning this picture, "THE CORN IS GREEN." These groups are the following: American Legion Auxiliary. General Federation of Women's Clubs (Western Committee.) National Film Music Council. National Legion of Decency. Daughters of the American Revolution (Western Co mittee.) Zeta Phi Eta. American Ass'n of University Women (Los Angeles County Branches). California Congress of Parents and Teachers. Business and Professional Women's Clubs. California Council of Church Women. L. A. Sec. National Council of Jewish Women. Attached hereto is a copy of this issue of "UNBIASED OPINIONS." I direct your attention to the fact that in not a single one of these comments concerning "THE CORN IS GREEN" is there any reference whatever to any "sordid seduction" — "unadulterated" or otherwise. With the exception of the Legion of Decency, all these groups, com' mended the picture most highly. Six of these groups recommended the picture as acceptable for mature family audiences; three, recommended it as acceptable for adults; and one classifies the picture as acceptable for mature audiences. The Legion of Decency, which classified the picture as "Objectionable in Part" states that this partial objection is due to the "false moral philosophy" which "motivates major sympathetic characters," — with no reference whatever to any "sordid seduction." It may be that those who represented these various groups in the examination and classification of "THE CORN IS GREEN" did not know that in this picture there is "an implied seduction," and to quote your viewpoint, "a seduction, not out of love — you may forgive two young people, madly in love with each other, for forgetting themselves." It may be that none of these representatives who examined this picture critically, noted this "shocking" suggestion of a "sordid seduction," or, maybe they noted it but agreed that such an implication was, not only not offensive, but acceptable as valid dramatic material. But, in any event, none of them seems to agree with your estimate of the picture. Except for the Legion of Decency — which found no objection to the picture on the basis on which you condemn it — all these responsible groups recommended the picture to their members, and several of them praise it fulsomely. MY REPLY It is no surprise to me that Joe Breen does not understand the moral degradation from permitting the implication of loveless seduction. I have had experience with him once before; on a worse situation — rape. If you are an old subscriber, look into the editorial, "An Approved Artistic Rape," published in the March 28, 1936, issue of Harrison's Reports, referring to the picture, "Robinhood of Eldorado." But I am going to save you the trouble. I said in the beginning of the editorial: "The hero's beautiful wife is raped by four ruffians. . . . The next scene shows the victim on her bed, face up, [and legs stretched wide] and with a pathetic expression on her face; she dies." Shortly afterwards I had a discussion with Breen on this matter and he told me that he could see nothing wrong with that scene. In connection with "The Corn Is Green," Mr. Breen forgot one thing: not only is there an implied seduction, but also an illegitimate child, resulting from it. Let Mr. Breen show me an independent picture where he permitted such a license. In order to prove his case, Joe Breen brings forward the testimony of a group of outsiders, most of them amateurs. What is the matter with his own judgment? Why doesn't he use that? I selected "The Corn Is Green" at random. There is a large number of other pictures, just as bad and even worse. But I don't want to tire you out, so I shall pick for discussion just a few of them — from the late crop: "GILD A" : The heroine, a married woman of loose morals, picks up a strange man at a night club. When he asks her what they should do that evening, she replies: "Well, if I were a ranch, you could call me 'bar nothing'." Discussing this picture in his column, Robert Ruark, whose writings appear in the J^ew Yor\ World-Telegram and other newspapers in the nation, said the following: "Burlesque in New York may be too rich for the average working stiff's blood, but a movie called 'Gilda' slipped in some business that would have pinkened the cheeks of the Freres Minsky." "TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT": Humphrey Bogart, while holding Lauren Bacall tight, says to her: "I've got to have you, Baby." Perhaps this remark is too subtle for Mr. Breen, but not for the audience — they howled. "KITTY": Reginald Owen, an elderly English nobleman, keeps walking around Paulette Goddard admiring her shape, and says: "A mighty pretty piece, I should say!" Is this too obscure for Mr. Breen? It was not for the audience — they howled at this one, too. But here is one that tops them all — "THE BIG SLEEP": The scene is in a restaurant, and the characters Bogart and Bacall. The two, discussing the type of persons each prefers to have a date with, talk in race track lingo, which lends itself highly to double meaning: Bacall: "I like to see if they are front runners, or work from behind."