CENSORSHIP OF FILMS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19842, 10 January 1920, Page 8

CENSORSHIP OF FILMS.

AN AUTHOR’S LAMENT. I am an American novelist., and like n\y betters—Mr Wells and Mr Maxwell among them.—l know what it is to bo censored; but liberal are the book censors of Britain beside the film censors of my native land, writes W. B. Trites. I sold a film scenario last spring to 'a Los Angeles firm; the film was duly made, and the other day I got the Pennsylvania censors’ report on it. “Reel 1, Part D,” I read- “Eliminate scone of young husband and wife buying cradle, as this suggests prenatal condition.” With an astonished oath I turned to tlio next page. "Reel 2, Part C. Eliminate pocketpicking scene, as tho modus operand! of criminals which might invite to evil action is not approved.” i didn’t sec how my film could be produced without that pocket-picking scene. However—and I read on: “ Reel 8, Part F. Out out scene of calf feeding from, mother.” I lit'a ciragette. This scene, too, was rather crucial. And then another prommciamenio caught mv eye: B. eo l 8- art B. Tho murder must be eliminated, as unduly harrowing scenes, such as shootings, stabbings lynchings, and tho like are forbidden.’* I thought to myself that it was a good thing I had been paid for my film scenario in advance. “ Reel 4. Part 0. Eliminate scene of young bride making baby linen.” And then, foaming at tho mouth, I fell heavily and read no more. All this, of course, seems like burlesque. It must especially seem like burlesque'to'those who have beheld the rather outrageous films which now and then come over from America.. Yet it is the truth, the Gospel truth, about the film censors of Pennsylvania. The censors of the other States are less severe. Many States, indeed, get along without any censors at all. But Pennsylvania! It was Pennsylvania, bv the way, that limited the length of the film kiss to 7ft. “Reel 2, Part I\. Eliminate eight and a half yards of the kiss, as this suggests.”