VI
PRODUCTION
One writer gloomily said, recently, that every cinema was in a bad way, and inferred that the films were a failure; the distressing shrinkage of the audiences signified the general non-approval of the tone of the films submitted. It is not that the people have not the money; in spite of the stress of the times, cinema theatres are the best patronized places of amusement, and the fact that these companies are paying a dividend (anything from seventy-five to ninety per cent.), spells, in one word, “success,” which means a good turnover and good profits.
The Failure and Success of the Film.
I do agree in this respect, that the British public is becoming much more critical, and in time will insist that it get its value, or else will steer clear of the cinemas. It is for the managership to provide the films with the necessary tone. There are several factors governing this criticism and decline, and one is that the English film production started with an unsound foundation, or a bad tradition. Give a dog a bad name and it will stick to it, and to retrieve a lost reputation is a difficult feat, yet not an impossible one.
If the British producers were composed of Englishmen alone, and not a conglomeration of nationalities, the plots in the various novels and plays would be produced exactly as intended and not murdered and warped as at the present time. To read the book, then see the play, and finally the film, one is astonished at the vast difference in the rendering; the whole plot being considerably changed.
The rendering of the film should be exactly the same as the play, and as one reads, yet it is widely different. It is either “cut” or lengthened; the important is ignored and the unimportant is enlarged upon, showing in striking features the blunders perpetrated. What is the result of this doctoring? Instead of the producers raking in the thousands and pleasing millions of patrons, the whole production is a miserable failure, and the reputation of the author as a writer is belittled in the eyes of the public.
To prevent this, the producers could approach the author to supervise the production and pay him a nominal retaining fee, and the public would be assured of an exact reproduction of the play or plot they have seen acted, and wish to see filmed.
In film production the British would create an improvement in their films if some of the American methods were copied. It is the latter’s custom to secure the presence of the author throughout the whole period of production, and his critical judgment and suggestions ensure the exact reproduction of the film as written.
All films are not a failure, far from it. Several British films have been excellently produced, and the plot has remained as originally written. This is what the reading public requires and looks for, especially when they are familiar with the story. The exact reproduction of the plot without alteration does much to secure the confidence of the patrons.
At the present time the British film-producers are handicapped by the American film-tax, which reduces considerably the scope of sale, but if only out of fairness to this country the tax should be dropped—or our Government must perforce raise a similar barrier to protect British producers in this country.