World Film and Television Progress (1937-1938)

■OMETHING HOULD BE DONE About the Creeping Paralysis of FILM CRITICI says film critic, Leslie Withers THE recent banning of Film Weekly from trade and Press shows by Columbia Pictures again brings up forcibly the strange position of the film critic in this country and the lack of dignity with which the job is invested as well as the invisibility of authoritative support. Because a dramatic critic commented adversely on a Cochran production no one has heard of C.B. preventing him from attending, in an official capacity, all of his future shows, yet the film critic is constantly subjected to insults of this kind. And the Film Weekly incident proves that London is no less a danger spot for the critic than the Provinces. I have had some years of experience as a Provincial film critic and know that in many instances it is an uphill fight to be honest yet avoid actual declaration of war by film renters who, ignoring a hundred laudatory reviews of their companies' films, have adopted more than a truculent attitude because of one piece of warranted criticism. On one occasion a few years ago I reviewed a certain film adversely (my opinion being endorsed later by almost every other critic of standing) and a deputation arrived at my office seeking my resignation. Failing to achieve that object, I was immediately banned from their key cinema for several years. It is not difficult to see who lost most heavily by that action. It is inconceivable to me that a supposedly adult-minded business should prefer a con tinuous stream of sickly puff paragraphs to conscientious criticism, yet its high-handed moves demonstrate that it has a great desire to dam the clean stream and turn on only the tap which emits fizz. The film trade has a perfect right to demand that newspapers should entrust film criticism only to those fully qualified for the job (and we know this is not always done) and also they have the right to object strongly to the sacrificing of a costly production demanding serious consideration on the altar of a few pungent wisecracks (and we know, too, that this is often done). But where the Press should adopt a stand is on the question of the sincerely expressed opinions of a critic who has a full knowledge of his subject. I can see no hope for the future if the problem is not attacked at once. I say this because there seems strong evidence that, with a few wise-minded exceptions, film companies' one desire is to make personal and commercial war against all who dare to suggest that every film is not an epic. I have been received coolly for days by renters handling films which they knew were bad but hated seeing so in print. Sometimes coolness develops into open war by the withdrawal of advertisements. It is needless for me to detail here the old arguments concerning the public's resentment against film news obviously inspired by servility and fear and the fact that such re ■< sentment rebounds upon the heads of those who bring it about. The cinema has got beyond the stage where the public is satisfied only with news of a star's diet, dress and loves and the synopses of the films in which they appear. Producers like Thalberg and Korda have made movies worthy of consideration by the cream of the world's intelligentsia. I myself — and with the support of my firm —have endeavoured to subject the films which I have seen to honest scrutiny and I have found that when many of such scrutinies resulted in partial or complete condemnation, film companies are rarely anything but resentful, despite the fact that I may have declared admirable the previous dozen movies they made. It would be a futile critic who consistently asserted his infallibility, but he is no critic at all who does not resent the growing antagonism of the film industry against this branch of newspaper life. The critic who is sincere and honest is read ; therefore he is the film industry's best friend in the long run. In my opinion the matter will grow to alarming proportions unless action is taken by such bodies as the N.U.J, and the Institute of Journalists. That action, I submit, should be a meeting between qualified representatives of the newspaper and film industries. Bitter things might be said but they would be preferable to the creeping paralysis of fearless film criticism which is now taking place. EFFICIENCY i.e. "The ability to produce the effect intended/' . . If you desire to " produce the effect" of a film with first class sound-recording, and, at the same time, keep your production costs to the minimum, you need us. Our watchwords are " EFFICIENCY WITH ECONOMY". The British Acoustic Service, with Noiseless Full-Range Recording and trouble-free ultra-rapid Mobile Unit, low INCLUSIVE charges, and superlative quality, make a proposition you cannot afford to ignore. Whether on film or on disc you will certainly be impressed with the lifelike quality of our recordings. NO ROYALTIES. 4/7 Channel Film-Mixing. The finest and fastest location service in this country. Disc recording in Studio or by Mobile Unit. Tel. SHE. 2050 British ACOUStiC, Woodger Road, Shepherds Bush, W.I 2 36