FILM MORALS

Otago Witness, Issue 4069, 8 March 1932, Page 71

FILM MORALS

AUSTRALIAN CENSOR’S ATTACK SEX DRAMAS CONDEMNED. (From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, February 18. Although the Commonwealth film censor (Mr Cresswell O’Reilly) in his annual report says that the censors would be the first to deplore the fact that their activities resulted in the exhibition of films suited only to the sub-normal and to children, it is clear that he has a sturdy dislike for most of the talkies that are released. He says he is convinced that there is no place for the sophisticated play, and that one statement alone has aroused a chorus of protest. The managers say in reply that there is a great demand for that type of film, and that they should be permitted to give the people what the people want. It is admitted that such films are not suited to the tastes of children, but as children do not understand the themes' little harm can be done. If children were to be considered always there would be a succession of Western dramas and gangster pictures always providing that the gangster meets his just punishment, or repents at the eleventh hour. It is asked: “Has the censor no place for Frederick Lonsdale, John Galsworthy, Noel Coward, Elmer Rice, Ben Travers, lan Hay, Jean Webster or J. M. Barrie? ”

It is common knowledge that some of the most popular films shown during 1931 had a rough passage at the hands of the censor. Some of the pictures which were successful in other countries were cut beyond recognition, and even the titles .were altered. For instance, “ Anybody’s Woman ” became “ The Better Wife,” and it is difficult to know how this was achieved. “ Oh, for a Man ” was shown to the public as “ Oh, What a Man,” and even the “ Yellow Ticket,” known on the stage throughout the world was shown in Australia as “ The Yellow Passport.” In defence of his decisions Mr O’Reilly states that he has set a very high standard, and that that standard is made to apply to all countries in which the films have originated. “ The old silent films have almost completely disappeared,” says the censor. “But the switchover to the talking film has demonstrated the truth of the old saying that a leopard cannot change his spots. There are fashions ’in pictures as in clothes, and the successive backstage, gangster, modern youth, and prison films seem to have now’ given way to the mistress theme and the sex immorality drama.” There was a marked improvement during 1931 in both the quality and quantity of British films, but there was still a very high proportion of poor quality films. Smartness and sophistication, stepping over the border line into suggestiveness and indecency was still in evidence. There was too great a tendency to eater for the sophisticated adult rather than make pictures with a universal appeal. Clean and wholesome story suitable for the whole family could be counted on the fingers of both hands. During the year 1499 films were imported from the United States, 321 from the United Kingdom, and 101 from other countries. The percentage of final rejections was higher in the case of British films than American, the respective figures being 8.7 and 4.8. In both cases the percentage of final rejections was higher than in 1929 and 1930. Of the 368 feature films imported from the United States, 131 were passed with eliminations, and 18 were finally rejected. In the case of British films 28 of the 91 imported were cut, and eight were final!}’ rejected.