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

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.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 93 26 May, 1936.] Mr. T. H. Fligelstone and Mr. W. It. Fuller. [Continued. 894. On the question of the quality of British films, to take the opposite suggestion to the one put by Sir Arnold Wilson to you, it has been stated and is stated quite often that the objection to British films on the part of the regular cinema goer is that, with certain notable and recent exceptions they have made with less expenditure of money, since the best artists and the best technicians go to America, and consequently that they are dull both technically and as an entertainment in relation to the American made films? — Yes. 895. Is that a fair statement? — That is a fair statement. (Mr. Fuller) : In the past some have not been quite so slick. 896. Would not that explain to a large extent this variation in area reaction? — (Mr. Fligelstone) : 1 think it would, particularly in London they like something fast, snappy and slick, like the American gives, and they cannot stand the British production that is slow and halting and not as perfect as the American production. 897. And do you get the preponderance of demand for the British picture more in the middle class and residential districts? — Particularly in what I term the country districts, the better class districts which cannot stand the American films. 898. Do you find that under the circuit system there is a tendency for local choice to be eliminated? The taste of a South Coast watering place and the taste of a northern manufacturing town are probably different? — Very different. 899. Do you find that under the circuit system if there is a circuit house in the North and another in the South the same film is shown? — Not always, but in a great number of cases. (Mr. Fuller) : As a matter of fact there are circuits for booking purposes within the circuit, and you get certain houses on circuit A, certain houses on circuit B, and certain houses on circuit C, so that you get the differentiation within, and that enables them to book in special areas films which have a special appeal which would not be universal. 900. And that is becoming a regular practice? — Yes. 901. There was a time when the circuits first started when that did not happen, was there not? — It may have been, but not now. 902. Are there signs, do you think, of a tendency for differentiation in programme in particular houses? You mentioned one, and the Academy is obviously another? — (Mr. Fligelstone): Yes, Studio One in Oxford Street. 903. Do you find that there is a tendency in the provinces for a similar, but less marked differentiation, one house concentrating say, on A films, another on family party films ? — No, I do not think generally, they simply go for entertainment and what the public will come in to see. 904. And have you any evidence that the proprietors of the special theatres, whether in the Provinces or in London — because there are some in the Provinces — have a difficulty in getting films, foreign films of a limited appeal, but obviously of entertainment value to their particular clientele. Do you find under your existing quota arrangements that your members who are wanting to show that particular kind of film find it difficult, to get it? — I think they find a difficulty, I do not know why. They find a difficulty in getting suitable foreign films. 905. The difficulty I had in mind was getting them on the renters' quota? — That I do not know. (Mr. Fuller) : I have only had one case, which was where a film is brought into this country by someone who has the quota against it, and he just runs through his five or six bookings and then sells the film outright to another man, and on the transfer the second man woidd have to get some additional quota. That is the only case that I have come across. I have noticed a very big development of these films into a regular business in the last year and there are people who have now got sufficient quota who will take them and rent them. 906. Is it not also the case that the Film Society brings in a film without its being on any renters' quota and an ordinary exhibitor cannot get hold of it? — I think they havo means now of sending it round without any difficulty. 1 think they link up with people who have got some spare quota so that it is only a question of getting a renter to oblige them by registering it. 907. But you are satisfied that where exhibitors want to do that they have got reasonable facilities now for doing it? — I think so. I think the Board of Trade and the Advisory Committee are helpful on that point too. 908. I want further, to be clear what the position would be of an independent exhibitor in a town with, say, four other theatres in it all belonging to a circuit. I am thinking of an actual case where that particular exhibitor had started, and most successfully, to show films of rather a special character. Now, supposing he wants to compete with the general trade of the town, he wants to book a film that would normally be shown in the circuit theatres or in one at any rate of the circuit theatres, he probably finds he is up against a barring clause, does he not? — Yes, he cannot get it. 909. So does that mean, in a sense, where you have got one independent exhibitor holding out in an area against a number of circuit houses he is debarred from a very large area of the better American and indeed equally the better British films? — Yes. '(Mr. Fuller) : He is up against it. (Mr. Fligelstone) : He is up against it, and that is why we, as independents, want this protection to have the K.R.S. policy put right. 910. Under that he could link up with a number of other people similarly placed? — He would be linked up with a number of other people. 911. People in the same position who would thus be able to compete? — To secure a fair quantity of the products. 912. (Mr. Cameron): Thank you my Lord, those are all the questions I have to ask. 913. (The Hon. Eleanor Plumer) : I have only a few questions left. I gather from the discussion that you do not look upon the Act as a necessary evil, but on the whole the exhibitors' side of the trade welcomes it providing the quota is reasonable. Is that a fair statement? — That is a fair statement. 914. You desire for patriotic reasons to show British films, and you do not look upon the Act as a necessary evil providing the conditions are reasonable?— Providing the conditions are reasonable we like to show British films. 915. In paragraph 28 you say that you are not in favour of the suggested solution of cost as a basis of qualification because you are not convinced that it will be the means of increasing production. I did not think the idea was to increase the production, I think the idea was to eliminate "quickies"? — I think it would eliminate " quickies," but it would reduce the number of films very considerably. What we want to get is the same number of films but of better standard. 916. Yes, I see that perfectly? — And if you set up a cost clause it is going to eliminate a great number of films plus the fact that a number of the American films which we now get into this country would no longer come in because of the cost of the making of the British quota against those American films. 917. But supposing the cost qualification was. as has been suggested, as small a figure as £2 a foot? — We contend you can make just as bad a film at £2 a foot as at £1 a foot. The intention must be there, not the cost. 918. Is it possible to make a good film at less than that ? — Miracles happen. 919. But with such a low figure as that it would not have the discouraging effect that you suggest? I thought that possibly putting a very low figure