PICTURE CENSORSHIP.

Grey River Argus, 3 April 1922, Page 6

PICTURE CENSORSHIP.

NO TWO OPINIONS ALIKE. “Censorship is all wrong,” said M: Jno. W. Hicks, junr., at a moving pic ture gathering at Wellington recently ‘‘Perhaps I shouldn’t speak of it. be cause 1 get hot in the collar at the mention of it. There are certain peo pie in America who are against any thing wh’ch gives a little pleasure There is no horse racing, the country is dry. and now the wowsers are at tacking the picture industry. 'Phen are gO< d and bad in all communities and most of the producers are deceni fellows with wiv-es ami families, like the rest of ns, and they are producing good, clean pictures—better picture.' than we ever had before. It is th< clean pictures, too, that make bi( money—pictures such as “The Miracle Man” and “11 umoreske. ’ ’ Exhibitor.' should have nothing to do with picture* which may contain -elements of suggest iveness. Talking about censorship: wi had a case of a censor cutting out the subtitle from a Kipling poem, “Am h»‘ learned about women from ’er. ’ You couldn’t produce the Bible in pic tores, not a part of it. They had censorship here and there in America, and what did they find? A picture that passed the censor in New Tork would b? banned in Pennsylvania, and whilst a par*, of a picture would be cut in Ohio, it was left in in Kansas, ami another part altogether cut. We don’t all think alike. It wouldn’t do.’’