Movie Makers (Jan-Dec 1952)

126 APRIL 1952 FILM MAKING AND FILM JUDGING RECENTLY, under the heading Judging Film Contests, we published a discussion in which the author (an active amateur) argued that an exact and fairly itemized film rating form was needed in local contest judging. "Club members," he wrote, "want to have their films broken down (by the judges) into recognizable elements for future reference." Our author then outlined such a film rating form and invited other amateurs to comment on it — an invitation with which we heartily concurred. The response of our club-affiliated readers to this invitation has been, we believe, too slight to indicate any prevailing attitude, pro or con. We have found elsewhere, however, comments on exactly this matter — and comments which were wholly unprompted by our own article. These editorial comments were presented under the perceptive heading which we reproduce above. With a briefing for which we regret the necessity, we quote from Mr. Gordon Malthouse, editor of Amateur Cine World, our English contemporary: "... It does not seem to have occurred to anyone that judging sheets of this kind (exact and detailed) are designed not for film critics but for film producers. No one but the film producer would think it necessary to prime himself with information about the length of a shot, picture steadiness and the rest. No one but a film producer would consciously try to break down a film into its technical components. ". . . Does this mean, then, that the amateur film maker is not always the best judge of amateur films? It could be! For, generally speaking, the man whose main qualification as a critic lies in his own film making ability may tend to be unduly occupied with technique. Indeed, the form taken by the average judging sheet shows only too clearly that this is so . . . By all means have detailed sheets for the guidance of the entrant, but do not use them for the guidance of the judge . . . Such detailed score sheets which have to be rigidly followed are a reflection on the ability of the judge." If Mr. Malthouse will pardon the Americanism, it seems to us that he has "got something" there. A detailed film analysis sheet — expressed in words, not in numbers — can be of very real value to a contest entrant in pointing out the specific technical weaknesses of his production. This, after all, was the help our author said was needed. But as for the judges, we'd be inclined to leave them alone, unhampered by percentages and point systems. "Just pick the best picture," would be our only suggestion to the solons. That is, after all, our only guide in selecting the Ten Best. And sometime we'd like to see this same system (which technically is no system) tried out on the club level. THE AMATEUR CINEMA LEAGUE, Inc. Founded in 1926 by Hiram Percy Maxim DIRECTORS Joseph J. Harley, President Ethelbert Warfield, Treasurer James W. Moore, Managing Director C. R. Dooley Harold E. B. Speight Arthur H. Elliott Stephen F. Voorhees John V. Hansen Roy C. Wilcox The Amateur Cinema League, Inc., sole owner and publisher of MOVIE MAKERS, is an international organization of filmers. The League offers its members help in planning and making movies. It aids movie clubs and maintains for them a film exchange. It has various special services and publications for members. Your membership is invited. Six dollars a year. AMATEUR CINEMA LEAGUE, Inc.. 420 LEXINGTON AVE.. NEW YORK 17. N. Y.. U. S. A. the one following. If so, clip it off, coil it into a ring and place it in the #1 hole on the file board. On the sequence sheet you now mark a 1 in the Hole # column, and in the Description column, opposite the 1, you write in a description of the scene, such as: Medium — Deck tennis game aboard ship. Going on to the next scene on your roll, you find it is a shot showing the wake of the ship. You clip it off, coil it up and place it in hole #2. (In doing so, handle the film by the edges only and do not pull one coil tightly on anther.) In the event the first scene and the second scene are in sequence, naturally it would not be necessary to separate them. In this case you can assume the medium shot is followed by the closeup. You could write then in the Description column: Medium-Closeup — Deck tennis game aboard ship. These operations are continued until the end of the film has been reached, and you have the complete story, in film, before you. The next step is to place the sequence sheet before you and in the Scene # column number the scenes in the order in which they are to appear on the screen. The opening scene should be one that you have planned for that position when you made the picture. For example, let's say, your story is one of an ocean cruise. In planning this story you chose as an introductory shot a fade-in on the forward end of the ship, showing her name and the enormous height of her bow. Therefore on the sequence sheet in the scene column you place a figure 1 opposite the scene marked: Fade-in of front end of ship. This means thai this particular strip, although filed in hole 6, will be the opening scene. The second scene may be a shot of passengers walking up the gangplank, located in hole 8. Place a figure 2 in the scene column opposite the description of this scene. This procedure is continued until (on paper) all your scenes are in the desired sequential order. Then the rest is splicing. At the end of this assembling it is advisable to project the film several times. With a critical eye. look for possibilities of improvement in scene length, continuity and a pleasant grouping of scenes regarding exposure. This kind of editing, I believe, will create a vital difference between movie taking and movie making. I feel that it has been an important factor in my success at winning three consecutive awards for the best amateur movie produced in Dayton, Ohio, during 1949, 1950 and 1951.