FILM CENSORSHIP

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 76, 31 March 1922, Page 7

FILM CENSORSHIP

CONDEMNED BY EXPERT

PROTECTIVE ORGANISATION URGED.

Strong reference to film censorship and the need for the industry to protect itself against adverse legislation was made by .Mr. John W. Hicks, junr., managing director for Australasia for Paramount Pictures, in the course of his speech, at the^ "get-together luncheon," held at the Grand Hotel yesterday afternoon. "There was a movement, he said, in favour of a more drastic censorship) and it was the duty of those connected with the business to get together and organise to combat adverse legislation and things that would absolutely ruin the, industry if they went on. The picture business did not show the public the power they wielded,' and they were even more powerful than .the press, if they chose. What could they hot do by using the screen for propaganda purposes —for political purposes, even, for instance? In Australia it was estimated that two million people attended picture theatres weekly. What an immense, scope for propaganda! At the same time, he condemned suggestive films and suggestive advertisements as utterly wrong. The business was a clean one, and should be kept clean. Sentiment played a big part in their business. Sentiment accounted for the success, of Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, and other great film stars. Sentiment had made the Arbuckle pictures popular, for they had made the kiddies laugh. If Arbuckle were pi'oved guilty, they would never bo able to screen another Arbuckle picture. The censorship was absolutely wrong. If the pictures were so bad, why were not the censors corrupted, and he had never heard that suggested. . Censorship should not be tolerated in a free country, and he did not believe the people wanted it. They did not censor ordinary, theatre plays, women's dresses, or anything of that sort.

A voice: "We have a'pretty fair censorship in New Zealand." '

Mr. Hicks admitted this, but declared censorship was wrong in principle. It limited the production and scope of genius. The public was the judge, and if the picture was. not clean the public would have something to say about it, and the police had the power to suppress it. He urged them to work to improve the industry in every way, and to fight all adverse legislation. The producers were trying to live up to the public demand for better, and better pictures. The motion picture business was here to stay. v