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

42 COMMITTEE ON CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS 12 May, 1936.] Mr. F. W. Baker, Mr. M. X. Keaknky. [Continued. Mr. A. Korda, Mr. N. Loudon and Captain the Hon. R. Norton. As I say we were not successful and one after another the producing companies either failed or turned out very very few films, and that led up, of course, to the consideration of the Government and to the 1927 Act, and that was, of course, a necessity in those days, and in my view, and I am sure in the view of my confreres, it is no less necessary to-day. 148. Yes, but you are talking of the time before sound films, and is it not the case there is such a prejudice on the part of the public against the American accent and in favour of the King's English that quite apart from the Act you have had a great assistance to British production ? — I would agree generally, but I think there is a tendency grossly to exaggerate that advantage, because we know very well that the Americans quickly corrected their films in the matter of speech. I have no doubt that we have all noticed the improvement, or the alteration in the speech of American artistes, and so on, and I think that ought not to be exaggerated — the advantage that the British industry had in relation to sound. I would be willing to admit a slight temporary advantage in the matter of sound, but I would not agree that it was a permanent advantage. 149. In your " General Observations," at the end of paragraph 2, you put the estimated export of payment from this country for foreign films at £100 millions during the last 15 years. Is there any published basis for those figures? — Well, my Lord, there are ways and means of estimating the amount because we do know the gross values. Shall I say, we do know the gross hooking value, or the box office value, of theatres in this country, and the percentage of American films that are screened in those theatres, and we can by that and other methods arrive at a fairly accurate, but of course estimated, amount of money earned by American films, all of which is sent out of this country except the necessary percentage for the distribution and costs that occur here. 150. You say in the next paragraph that the position of British producers is very different, they make British films, and they try to secure the exhibition of these not only at home but overseas as well. Either now or in a separate memorandum I wonder could you give us details as to the export of our films? We have seen figures about the British Empire, but it would be interesting to see what the foreign market is. There the sound film is telling against us just as much as it is telling in our favour in this country? — You mean excluding the Colonies and our own possessions? 151. Yes. It would be interesting to have details also for the Dominions because .we have only got the footage and not the distinction between positives and negatives? — I have no doubt we could prepare a memorandum giving those figures, (Mr. Kearney) : It would be «[iiite impossible to prepare a memorandum showing the returns of revenue earned by British companies with their films overseas unless the overseas sections of the various companies will give us particulars of what they earn. 152. Can you not tell the amount of film yon export? — You can tell the amount of footage of negative and positive film exported, but that has no relation to the value of those films from the rental point, of view. A thousand feet of film with a subject of no value upon it counts the same as a film of extreme value in statistical returns. Tt is what films earn that matters, and not the footage, that is why the Board of Trade and Customs return of footage has no relation to values at all. 153. In the absence of statistics can you give us your impressions as to whether it is easier now to find a market for British films in foreign countries? — It certainly is not easier to find markets to-day that before, because every foreign country is imposing restrictions of one kind or another; but to-day there are far more British films shown overseas than four years ago, at least they earn more in some cases in very much better conditions. They are gradually becoming more successful. 154. In the United .States of America too? — Yes, in the United States of America too; as worth-while pictures go out so they are beginning to earn more. (Capt. the Hon. B. Norton): I think it would be quite possible to ask these companies if they would give us the figures of rental. (Mr. Baker) : I think, my Lord, if that information would be of use to the Committee we could get the companies voluntarily to give us that information or some figures that would give you the information you require. 155. I think it would be of value to us, we should like to see how far the existing system has been affected and how far foreign systems have put countervailing difficulties in your way? — You remember nearly all countries have been following the lead this country took in the matter of quota and the difficulties in that direction do not decrease because they all aspire to show their own national films. 156. That gets me to the point which you make in paragraph 6. You anticipate serious setback unless the Act is re-enacted in some similar form with modifications. Of course, it is an unusual form of protection. You quote the protection which other industries enjoy, and I should be glad to know whether you have considered alternatives and whether you think protection by tariff would be ineffective in the case of films, and whether you have examined the methods adopted by foreign countries and find they are less effective than the rather complicated machinery which we have here? — We have from time to time given consideration to other forms of protection, but the trade generally is very firmly of the opinion that only by the compulsory screening of a given quota of British films can the British industry be maintained and increased. Apart altogether from other objections there would be a very serious difficulty in endeavouring to tax films coming into this country because their value is unknown for one thing until they have done their work. 157. But is there an advantage in the quota as compared with the system which they have in Germany?— Yes. 158. So many films are allowed every year — I do not know whether they are divided among countries, but there is a maximum? — Yes. I think it is only the inverse way of the quota. They allow so many films to come in and we, on the other hand, say. " For all the films that come in you must have a certain quota of British pictures ". (Mr. Korda) : That position is entirely different. We have competition with the same language. In Germany English counts for very little, and in France an English or American film counts for very little. Here, on the other hand the Americans can import 200, 300. 400 or 500 pictures, all in English, while the German or French producer has no real competition at all. {Mr. Baker): You appreciate the point, my Lord, that in this country the American language is supposed to be identical with the language that we know here, and therefore all those films are welcomed here, or get shown here in contradistinction to the Continent where American or English is a disadvantage to those films. 159. I gathered from Mr. Korda's remarks that French and German films are more welcome here than British films in France and Germany:— (Mr. Korda) : No, French and German films here are absolutely negligible. They are played in two or three theatres in the West End only and in a few others in the larger cities. 160. Successes have been in London?— I do not think they are 1 per cent. (Mr. Baku): They cannot be calculated. 161. The real problem is the American film. Then, in paragraph 7 you sa\ it has not been possible for British films to earn any substantial revenue in America. Do you see any prospect of effective entry into the American market? — Well, that is a very difficult question. 1 was going to say we have been