SIN AND THE FILMS

Evening Star, Issue 21036, 25 February 1932, Page 1

SIN AND THE FILMS

DEFENCE OF THE CINEMA

“ The movies entertain thousands of’ people every week, provide employment for a few thousand more, help pay the country’s bills by collecting entertainment tax and paying duty on imported films, contribute a few thousands a year to charity, and provide harassed l newspapermen with something to write about. Take it all in all, the movies look pretty harmless to you and me, but then, you see, we are looking in the wrong direction,” sarcastically writes Leslie Wood in a recent issue of the British ‘Film Weekly.’ You thought the davs when little Bertie Bonebutton could get away with scrumping apples by pleading that he had “ seen it on the pictures ” were past. Not so. Many a magistrate’s heart still misses a beat when ne hears Bertie declare that. He still clears his magisterial throat, pulls down his waist-coat, and brings out the one beginning, I don’t think this lad is entirely to blame. The cinema has evidently—” You know the rest. Not long ago a lot of foolish women stampeded at a wedding and stood on the pews in order to get a better view. The officiating clergyman reproved them by reminding them that they were “ not in a cinema.” „ Now 1 am waiting for a ciroraa manager to, reprovfrh hustling'cl'owd that they are “not iin a church.” But that’s by the way. What puzzles mo is why the clergyman, having murder .. trials and bargain basements to Choose f from, chose the cinema—most decorous of all amusements —as the peg on which to hang the hat which he was talking through. The Rev. Gordon Lang, ex-Labour M.P. for Oldham, asked the House of Commons recently if members would take their families on Sunday to see a film like ‘ The Blue Angel ’ ? I would. For one thing, the copy of ‘The Blue Angel ’ shown on Sunday is the samo one that is shown on Tuesday after-, noon.

But that is not all. “ In many cinemas,” so Mr Lang informs his listeners, “the whole surroundings, even the costumes of the attendants who show people to their places, are not conducive to the best interests of young people.” We had not thought of that before. How many young people of Peckham have been lured on the downward path by seeing that massive carved fireplace in thelounge, and do managers, I wonder, sit up on Saturday nights thinking of twiddly-bits for their usherettes’ uniforms that will undermine the whole social fabric of their neighbourhoods?, But the Rev. Gordon Lang has nothing on Mr J. A. R. Cairns, the magistrate, when it comes to denouncing the moving tintypes. “ The films give an exhibition of sex that figures humpn love as something disgusting, nauseating and revolting. The people who are sending this stuff across the world are fouling civilisation. Our criminal courts and hospitals are left to clear up the litter,” says Mr Cairns. _ Mr Cairns asserts that he is “no kill-joy.” On the contrary, he seems to bo just the merriest fellow to have around at a picture show. Twenty years ago it was fashionable to throw mud at the movies. The mayor of New York even went to the extent of withdrawing _ the whole of the cinemas’ licenses in New Yonk. But they opened again, and New York seems to have gone along fairly well ever since. To-day it appears that there are still those who think “ sin and V cinema ”> are synonymous. Fifteen years ago the cinemas’ enemies used to goad cinemalovers into a frenzy. Film goers can now afford to sit back and smile at the kittens trying to run off with the dog’s kennel.