Minutes of evidence taken before the Departmental Committee on Cinematograph Films (1936)

COMMITTEE ON CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS 5 May, 1936.] Mr. R. J>. Fennelly. [< <,i i tinned . 6. While this voluntary experiment was going on the question of British films was considered by the Imperial Conference of 1926. The report of the General Economic Sub-Committee appointed by the Conference drew attention to the small proportion of films of British Empire origin shown in the several parts of the Empire. In Great Britain and Northern Ireland the proportion was about 5 per cent., and in the Irish Free State was probably no higher. In Australia the proportion by number of British Empire films imported in 1925 was slightly in excess of 8 per cent., although on a basis of total feet imported it was considerably less. In New Zealand some 10' per cent, of Empire films appear to have been shown. The proportion in Canada, South Africa, and the remaining parts of the Empire was known to be very small although statistical details were not available. 7. The Sub-Committee attached great importance to the increased production within the Empire of films of high entertainment value and outstanding educational merit, and to their wide exhibition throughout the Empire and the rest of the world. They pointed out that in foreign films the conditions in the several parts of the Empire and the habits of the people, even when represented at all, were not always represented faithfully, and were at times misrepresented. Moreover, the constant exhibition of foreign scenes or settings and the absence of any corresponding showings of Empire scenes or settings powerfully advertised foreign countries and foreign goods. The Sub-Committee suggested certain remedial measures including effective Customs duties, ample preference or free entry for Empire films, legislation for the prevention of " blind " and " block " booking and the imposition of requirements as to renting or exhibiting of a minimum quota of Empire films. They also pointed out that, as Great Britain and Northern Ireland was the largest producer of films and also the largest Empire market for films, any action taken in this country would undoubtedly be < of the greatest assistance to other parts of the Empire in dealing with the film problem. 8. The Report of the Sub-Committee was approved by the Imperial Conference, which unanimously adopted the following resolution: — " The Imperial Conference, recognising that it is of the greatest importance that a large and increasing proportion of the films exhibited throughout the Empire should be of Empire production, commends the matter and the remedial measures proposed to the consideration of the Governments of the various parts of the Empire with a view to such early and effective action to deal with the serious situation now existing as they may severally find possible." 9. When the position was surveyed in the United Kingdom after the Imperial Conference it was found that the voluntary experiment had admittedly failed and the Government accordingly passed the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927, which was not only intended to safeguard the position in this country but also to give a lead to other parts of the Empire. II. — The Purpose of the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927. 10. It should be explained that the cinematograph lilms industry in Croat Britain and Indeed in all countries is organised on the three-tier basis of maker (or producer), renter (or distributor) and exhibitor. It may be added that, although they are three separate entities for the purpose of the Act, there is considerable financial and other interlocking in Great Britain between the various sections of the trade. This is dealt with in the later sections of the memorandum. 11. The purpose of the Act was to build up a. healthy film-making industry so that British films could find their due place on the screens not only of Great Britain and the Empire but of foreign countries. The two main objects of the Act were: — (i) to impose certain restrictions on " blind " and " block " hooking so as to release the exhibitor from the hold acquired over him by the United States renting organisations; (ii) to assist production in the United Kingdom and elsewhere in the Empire by placing an obligation on renters in the United Kingdom to acquire and on exhibitors to show an increasing proportion of British films during the currency of the Act. III. — Blind Booking, Advance Booking and Block Booking of Films. 12. This subject was referred to in a paper on " The Future of the Films Act " which was read by Mr. Simon Rowson, at a conference of the Cinematograph Exhibitors Association held at Cardiff in June, 1935. The following extracts have been taken from that paper. " ' Blind ' booking had for some years been denounced as one of the most serious evils introduced by the renters into the commercial practice of the film trade. It led to the sale of films before they could be seen in this country, and often before they were made. The producer announced a series of subjects — his programme — and the distributor responsible for selling this producer's output opened his sales campaign. The programme would consist of 20 to, perhaps. 50 subjects. Sometimes ' stars ' were specified alongside of certain subjects ; at other times the ' stars ' would be designated before any subjects were allotted. Two or three of the subjects might be made and shown to the trade before the sales campaign began. The salesmen were ordered to sell the programme on the strength of these first productions as representative samples of the entire programme. It was rare indeed that the later subjects realised expectations, much less the representations of the enthusiastic salesmen. Frequent changes were the almost invariable rule in the fulfilment of the unmade portion of the programme. And the exhibitor's disappointment was the more acute because not only did the later pictures prove less good than the earlier ones, or fail to materialise at all, but he was often compelled to accept substitutes from which the promised stars were absent and sometimes even the subjects themselves were different. And there was or could be no effective remedy lor the exhibitors, because at any given date the supply of alternative subjects is a strictly limited one. The exhibitor had in fact to consider, not so much the 700 or 800 films which in those days represented the year's total output of the American studios ; but rather had he to pay attention to an average of 14 or 15 films which made an appearance each week. By the sales system then and still in vogue, practically all these subjects, and certainly the most attractive ones, were already contracted for by various exhibitors. The only resource of the disappointed showman was either to substitute with a film which he was willing to play concurrently with other exhibitors, or to play a film as ' second run which had proved exceptionally successful in some neighbouring theatre one or two weeks earlier, or show a much inferior film. These alternatives were frequently attended with exceedingly unsatisfactory results. " The adoption of a similar system by British producing companies proved even more vicious in its consequences. Here the far-forward system of bookings was attended with the following result. On 1st January, say, bookings were taken in connection with a subjeel to be released maybe 15 months later. The picture