Evening Post. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1920. "MOVIES" AND MORALS

Evening Post, Volume C, Issue 87, 9 October 1920, Page 4

Evening Post. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1920. "MOVIES" AND MORALS

A cinema picture was recently exhibited in New Zealand—not in Willing, ton —which, we understand, was approved by the Censor for exhibition to the sexes separately. The picture referred to, however, -was shown in the ordinary way -with no discrimination as to the sex or age of those to whom it was exhibited—in short, not in accordance with the Censor's conditions. The name of the picture is beside the point, but the film is specifically referred to here because of the growing tendency to screen undesirable and markedly suggestive pictures, which degrade the cinema theatre. Is -the Government, we ask, fully alive to this gradual degradation? We are impelled to ask this question because an increasingly large Section of the public is asking it; because, too, it would seem that picture 'producers, especially those of America, are working up to the ultimate ounce of boiler-pressure that publio tolerance will stand. The Government may say, 'and that in all sincerity, Have we not enough already on. hand? True. It may also ask, Have we not appointed 'a Censor of Films? Admitted. Even so, many of the exceedingly difficult social problems that the Government is endeavouring to soWe derive much of their complexity from influences that the cinema theatre can foster, if it does not generate, by the increasing number of unwholesome pictures that are being shown. Is the Government really alive to this matter? If not, then it is time our common-law makers spent an hour or so in analytical study of the pictures being shown. Most programmes, of course, contain instructive, entertaining, or amusing pictures to which no exception can be taken. Obviously, these are not now under consideration. But some of the latest emanations from the American cinema" studios, especially those with hypocritical pretensions to lofty moral purposes, aTe especially com mended to our legislators. Some of these pictures are unquestionably exceedingly harmful in the impressions they make, anil seem specially designed to make, upon adults as well as on adolescents and children. Unless members of Parliament are wilfully purblind, they cannot come to any other conclusion, after seeing some of these pictures, than that they are conducive to the setting up of moral gangrene in the body politic.

i It was claimed for the picture particularly referred to in the opening of this article that it had a powerful moral lesson to impart, a high service in the interests of the public to perform. But its character moves us to speak as plainly as possible on the question of the purgation of the picture theatre. This particular film was shown in New Zealand quite openly as any other general picture would have been. Anyone who could pay the price of admission could see it. Yet it had already boen refused the sanction of th» British Board of Kirn Censors, but was shown in London in defiance of that authority, which has no legal status. In New Zealand there is a, Film Censor, and he is a statutory officer with largt powers and very many qualifications for his position. But if, as some who saw that picture are said to have held, it had a .great moral sermon to preach, then its purpose, in our opinion, could have been achieved, and with possibly fair greater force, had it been reduced in l«ngth by 70 per oent This could have been done by the elimination of details absolutely inessential to the professed object of the film. True, the film showed in a terribly realistic, not to say ' eickening, fashion, the consequences of Tioo; but it did aot, beoause it could mot (if it was ever intended to do so), make people virtuous or help them to shun vice because it is vice. Producers oi films of this genre make no claims to being artistic, but they do admit, being business men, that they ■ar« primarily actuated by commercial motives. That is all very well; but ought the Government of this Dominion to countenance merchandising of this sort ? No impartial observer of cinoma pictures, and especially pictures of th© olass under discussion, can help realising how very difficult is the position of tie Censor. He may so eviscerate a picture as to render it useless, at least incoherent and ■ unintelligible; he does, it is understood, make extensive "outs" without any reference to the sensibilities of .film importers. Even co, and after he has carefully scrutinised a, picture and removed offensive sections of it, he knows, as; every man and woman of intelligence knows, that there is still more to be done to purify a certain type of pictures. He knows, as we all know, that what is technically called the "black-out" may obliterate something ths.t would not be permitted on the screen, and yet its blotting out in this way leaves very deep and welldefined impressions on tha mind of that deed done. Then, again, there is far too much use mad© in the pictures of the revolver and automatic pistol. The effects of this liberal " gunplay " in the pictures cannot be good for the maintenance of public order, nor for the education of our children. Such displays, at any rate, do not discourage, even if they do not sanction, the drawing of the gun, on the least provocation or juet out of sheer devilry.

Grown people who disapprove of pictures of the kind here under criticism have the remedy in their own hands. They 'caa stay iiway from the theatres. Fareata who 1 realise their, rwpossiallitite few? th«

■religious, moral, and mental welfare of their children can forbid their frequent* ing the picture theatre all the time there is the risk of harmful and unsuitable pictures being shown. But there are other parents. Thjy were thue referred to by Mr. S. E. M'Carthy, the Christohurch 'Magistrate, a few days ago in the following words :

I have been studying child crimes for a, long time, especially American experiences, and I agree with the American who deolared: "Show me the parents of ths children going wrong, and I will show jou the real wrongdoers." If youngsters were properly trained and looked after they would never appear in Court. The "real wrongdoers" may still be inclined to bundle their offspring off to the picture theatre without regard to the character of the films; but for euob children's cakes, if for no weightier reaaons, the Government should institute a general drastic cleaa-up of the picture programme. The matter is urgent, and becoming increasingly fio. If the authority of the Censor needs enlarging, let that be done. In any case, the whole subject is one that the Government must attend to, and that without d*lay.