Kinematograph year book (1944)

Documentary Films. 75 THE DOCUMENTARY FILM AND ITS PUBLIC IT has taken a war to prove to kinema owners that, factual films are not only acceptable to +he average picturegoer, but that they can be an attraction, rivalling in box-office appeal some of the biggest all-star features. For this documentary producers should at least be thankful and it should be their post-war aim to see that the goodwill so built up will not again be killed by allowing prejudice to play a part in destroying the enthusiasm resultant from documentaries like " Target for Tonight," " Divide and Conquer," and " The Battle of Britain." True, at the time of writing, there is a falling off in public taste for this type of stuff, but it cannot be too emphatically stated that the public reaction is against war films in general and not against documentaries in particular. Any exhibitor will tell you that the biggest all-star fictional offering, if it deals with the war, is more likely to be a nop ; but what ws should be careful to see is that exhibitors are not allowed to get the impression that this attitude is a revulsion of feeling aimed purely against documentaries, which obviously, at this time, must almost inevitably deal with some aspect of the war. After many years we have broken down the prejudice against what was once termed " Interest " or " Educational Subjects," like " The Sex Life of the Earwig." If it is allowed to rise again it will be a much more difficult business breaking it down, so let us hope that our documentary producers have on the agenda for their post-war programme plans to continue in peacetime the excellent work, for the most part, they have done in war. In the post-war world documentaries can prove a profitable and influential source of propaganda for the British Empire and its Industries, but originality and initiative are essential in guaranteeing this type of subject world distribution. At war the documentaries have put up a better show than most of the feature production companies, for they have regularly broken into the American market with pictures that have cost infinitely less than any of the feature subjects that have failed to get a showing on the other side. While the American market is problematical, so far as British feature films are concerned, for the obvious reason that they just cannot afford the screening time, it has been proved that a British short, provided it has originality and showmanship appeal, can get a hundred per cent, screening. If a film dealing with events at Bomber Command in war time can get a widespread showing throughout the States, surely a film dealing, in a novel fashion, with English, Irish, Welsh or Scottish village life could be made to prove sufficiently interesting to get American distribution in peace time ? Stories of our industries, and our people, given an American angle, without prejudice to its origin, could in peace time do a tremendous amount to cement good relations between ourselves and the States. One must bear in mind that as a result of the overwhelming number of American pictures shown in our kinemas we know almost every aspect of American life from the penthouses of the rich New Yorkers to the shacks of the backwoods. We know their taxi-drivers, their bell hops, their cops, forest rangers and newspaper men, and we can almost distinguish the dialects of the various States, but how much do the Americans know about us ? Take a look at the average American picture that is supposed to portray English life, and the caricature that invariably meets you will show that they don't know a thing. This is just one aspect of the peace time possibilities of the documentary. There is one danger. For years British producers have led in the documentary field, but suddenly the Americans seem to be wakening up to its possibilities, and more and more the M. of I., which once depended solely on British producers for this type of subject, are turning to America for subjects like "Battle of Britain" and "Divide and Conquer," There was nothing