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

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 159 14 July, 1936.] [Continued. interval between consecutive exhibitions of parts of a serial film or series of films would tend to an increase of business in short films by permitting greater elasticity in the arrangement of dates of exhibition. We recommend the amendment of Section 27 (2) of the Act for this purpose ; (6) we are also of opinion that, notwithstanding the restrictions imposed by the Act upon the blind booking and advance booking of films, the introduction of a system whereby short films might be sold to exhibitors on an indefinite service or running contract similarly to " news " films, subject to provision being made for the termination of contracts by reasonable notice on either side, is desirable. We therefore recommend the amendment of the Act to permit the introduction of such a system. 7. We understand that you are considering proposals made to you in April last by a deputation representing the Film Group of the Federation of British Industries and the General Council of the Trade Union Congress for the amendment of the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927, in certain respects, and we therefore venture to urge that amendments on the lines of those we have recommended should be considered at the same time. On behalf of the Cinematograph Films Advisory Committee. (Sgd.) L. N. GUILLEMARD. Chairman. THE PROBLEM OF BRITISH " SHORTS." " The difficulties attending the making of short films " (i.e. registrable and therefore counting for quota) — referred to in the question put at the last meeting of the Committee, are merely commercial. Under present conditions they do not pay, and I believe they cannot he made to pay so long as those conditions prevail. Exceptional cases may arise from time to time, when a satisfactory commercial return for special shorts may occur, but these are so rare that the general conclusion in the previous sentence may be regarded as fully conforming with experience. A statistical measure of the problem is provided by the information contained in the tables prepared by the Board of Trade for the Advisory Committee. These show that in the year ending March last the length of registered British shorts amounted to 7-3 per cent, of all British films whereas foreign shorts amounted to 26-6 per cent, of all foreign films. There is thus an enormous disparity in the proportions of British and foreign " longs " and " shorts " respectively on the (market. In the first case there is available nearly 13 feet and in the second case only three feet of long film to each foot of short. The following figures give, I believe, a more instructive view of the statistical sitnation. In the last quota year (i.e. April, 1931-March, 1932), when the quota liability was 12^ per cent., British " shorts " registered by renters amounted to 6-4 per cent of all " shorts," whereas British " longs " amounted to 23-9 per cent, of all " longs." If the production of British " shorts " had grown pari passu with the production of " longs," nearly four times as much " shorts " would have been produced. If British " shorts " had been produced to satisfy the quota requirements in respect of short films without trenching on the long films for this purpose, nearly twice as much British " shorts " would have been prodiu -I'd. The figures, by themselves, are not conclusive in proving a shortage from the point of view of the exhibitors. There might be an average of twice as many showings for British " shorts " than for foreign ; in that case there would not be any shortage of British films. But taken in conjunction with the hundreds of returns from defaulting exhibitors which have come under the review of the Advisory Committee, nearly all of which show that short films are in greater deficiency than long films, we may regard it as definitely established that there is an unquestionable deficiency in British " short " films. There are many causes contributing to this result. Some of these may he of small importance, but together they suffice to overwhelm all the efforts and enterprise of the most commercially-daring manufacturers and the most skilled distributors. The first of these causes arises from the concentration of the exhibitor on the feature item of his programme for his attraction. On this he concentrates all his publicity presentation values, and attention, to the comparative neglect of the " shorts " items in his programme. These items are put on, frequently without rehearsal, sometimes without examination of condition, and much too often without any regard for the character of the neighbouring items. Everything is done to concentrate the entire attention of the public on the feature, and success in the cinema is made to depend only on the agreement of the public with the exhibitor on his feature selection. The effect of this kind of showmanship, .whose wisdom need not be questioned, is that the exhibitor has little interest in his " shorts," and he is convinced that the public are equally disinterested. In filling up his programme with " shorts " he is accustomed therefore to choose what is cheap rather than what is good, and the pressure tends always to bring prices downwards. For this reason the market price for " shorts " tends to become too low to become commercial. Again, the supply of " shorts " is much greater than the demand. Out of a programme containing 140 minutes of registered subjects it is doubtful if ever more than 20 minutes or 14 per cent, will be given to " shorts." Yet the figures quoted show that the length of " shorts " offered by the renters amounts to more than 22 per cent. The jostling competition of this over-supply for the limited market brings about a still further tendency to depress prices. Perhaps the most serious contributory cause to low prices is the trade practice which has grown up in recent years among renters. In their insistence on " sharing terms " for their feature films to take the place of the old " flat rate " which was common in the old " silent " days, renters have found themselves compelled to supply a supporting programme — consisting of, in some cases, a second feature, but more frequently one or two comedies. The exhibitor generally leaves the selection of these supporting items to the renter who, in his turn, has been tempted to supply such " shorts " as could not bo sold independently to the exhibitor. Not only is the reputation for " shorts " destroyed or depreciated by these means, but the available free market into which worth-while " shorts " might be sold is very considerably restricted. There is no doubt whatever that this practice in recent years, encouraged by the depression, has reduced very considerably and very seriously the opportunities for selling good " shorts " at commercial prices. One more contributory cause may be mentioned. To meet the prevailing depression in the industry, exhibitors have very extensively adopted the practice of adding a second feature and sometimes one or more " turns " to their programmes, in order, by such a combination of added attractions, that some improvement in the box-office returns might be achieved. Whether these practices have averted the box-office depression need not be discussed here : we are concerned only that these changes have made further encroachments on the time in the programme not occupied by the " star " feature attraction. The conditions described so far apply to foreign and British " shorts " alike. There are however certain other conditions which affect adversely British " shorts " even more than foreign " shorts " The first of these is the absence of, practically . <ni >/ sale whatever of British " shorts " in any market outside the British Isles. Even more therefore than in the case of long subjects — for which some market