Cinema Papers March 1975

*

_______ I

K -11

DISASTER FILMS AFI AWARDS <®> SURF MOVIES W OM EN IN THE M PREVIEWS

REVIEWS

MARCH'APRII, 1975

Real herbs for

SK.THOMAS

lino;

Bolex announces the H16EL, with a new kind of meter that is ultra sensitive to light changes and built for hard use.

A built-in light meter once turned even a ruggedly built pro camera into a delicate instrument.

Enter the H16EL, with a silicon cell instead of the conventional CdS cell. Results: 1. Instant response to light variations. Shift from blinding light to deep shadow with perfect results. 2. No sensitivity to temperature variations. 3. No corrections needed, because of its straight response curve. 4. Equally responsive to all colours from blue to red.

Manual light measurements are made through the lens in the body of the camera so the camera can be fitted with any optics, including long telephotos, macrolenses, even extension tubes. For extreme changes of light, use a lens with built-in automatic exposure adjustment.

Bayonet lens mount for quick and precise changes. So strong that you can carry the whole camera by the lens.

Film speeds 10-50 fps, single frame, reverse and crystal control are electronically regulated and are coupled automatically to the meter, with a selector knob rated from 10 right up to 630ASA.

The motor is electronically controlled. When you stop, it stops. And the shutter closes. You can use your original film without having to cut frames from both ends of each take.

The viewfinder has high brightness and 13x magnification, plus built-in comfort with either eye. Two red light diodes in the viewfinder indicate correct aperture. No waiting for a needle to settle down. The diaphragm of the new Vario-Switar 12.5-100mm f2 lens is fully open for accurate focusing and closes down automatically when you squeeze the button.

Power is supplied by a Ni-Cd battery. Take your choice of two power packs, two chargers.

With the usual Bolex attention to detail, a full range of accessories is available, including a removable 400 foot magazine that is used with a take-up motor providing constant film tension.

The whole unit is built like a tank. It is a rugged and reliable piece of gear that is as fail­ safe as Bolex know-how can make it, despite its light weight (about 71bs for body and power pack).

The Bolex Shoulder brace provides excellent stability with good weight distribution, and frees the camera­ man’s hands to operate camera and lens.

Contact Photimport in your state for further information or a demonstration.

Photimport (Aust) Pty Ltd Melbourne 38 6922 ££ Sydney 26 2926 ^ Brisbane 52 8188 O Adelaide L H Marcus 23 2946 ® Perth L Gunzburg 28 3377

The Film, Radio and Television Board of the AUSTRALIA COUNCIL (form erly Australian Council for the A rts) will hold

PUBLIC MEETINGS in all states

so that proposed new policies for its Creative Film and Television Production Funds can be discussed with interested parties

SYDNEY April 7th 8.00 p.m.

Australian Government Centre Theatrette Chifley Square

BRISBANE April 10th 8.00 p.m.

Australian Government Centre Theatrette 295 Ann Street, Brisbane

MELBOURNE April 22nd 8.00 p.m.

Playbox Cinema Exhibition Street, Melbourne

Watch daily media for dates and venues in other capital cities

The Board intends to abolish the current Experimental, and General Production Funds; to be restructured as:

THE BASIC PRODUCTION FUND and THE ADVANCED PRODUCTION FUND incl. Alternative Production

The SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT FUND will continue under different criteria.

Quarterly Assessments for applications to Creative Production Funds in 1975 CLOSE o n â&#x20AC;&#x201D; 24th March 23rd June 22nd September

Television series.

Tourist and Industrial development documentaries.

T h e South A ustralian Film C o rp o ratio n is a to ta l film enterprise involved in film research, p ro d u ctio n , m arketing, distribution and library services established by th e S tate G o v e rn m e n t and o p e ra tin g b o th n a tionally and in ternationally.

In the first tw o years of operations, film of eve ry ty p e , to ta l film, has been p ro d u c e d (w on Awards), and is being sold by th e South A ustralian Film C o rp o ratio n .

Feature films.

Educational and Instructional film.

If y ou w a n t to ta lk film, to tal o r in part, ta lk to u s â&#x20AC;&#x201D; soon.

Television drama.

Contact : The Director,

South Australian Rim Corporation 64 Fullarton Road, Norwood, S.A. Telephone 42 4973 (S.T.D. Code 08) G.P.O. Box 2019, Adelaide, S.A. 5001. Australia.

I enclose $6.00/$12.00 for 13/26 issues of the four weekly Digger.

Please make cheques or postal orders payable to Hightimes P/L and cross them not negotiable.

Subscriptions, Name ...

The Digger, P.O.Box 77, Carlton 3053, Address Victoria.

Postcode Y o u can help D IG G E R 'S chances o f surviving m ore th an th e n e xt tw elv e m onths by paying n o w fo r th e n e x t tw o , th re e , fo u r or how ever m an y years y o u 're w illin g to risk. W e w o u ld stress th a t these m u ltip le year subs are speculative because w e c an n o t guarantee to fu lfil th em !

FILM MAKERS CO OPERATIVE MOVEMENT OF AUSTRALIA U C S Ö » **

tlms

Itis, p i T C i ^ S

§mii-iJ

film s *

H um a»

tHlms*

D ram a*

fil®8

nW 5 Æ r a

t ^

5

f ilm

s

e

fu tu c y

L lm s .

gych®

” S -« * ï â film s films

B e& r

» - ■■""•

p g e \jd o

films films

films

full S o c ia l

Í | p 1 # « l É' ^ a «

« - V ”3,

fx p a i

films

films

te r

films ÎD C ?

lllÂS:f|iil^^ÉÂ:- fil 3 ú < & ' m l * 0 1 '1

* /;

*

>? * y

t

films*

Ç lljflS .

ï ^i l m

g .

f il m

■

Catalogues and information available at the Co-op >n your state.

B e a t

Ï films films* %

W

- tjgpcm ^

^ ’ -sZ.

^ c i\r e f r i® 8

l^ f iû

Brisbane Filmmakers Co-op “Coronation House” 109 Edward St, Brisbane 4000 Q. Tel: 36 3859 Sydney Filmmakers Co-op ' (St Peters Lane, Darlinghurst) PO Box 217 Kings Cross 2011 NSW Tel: 31 3237

CO-OPERATIVES

SCREENING A N D DISTRIBUTING THEM n o w !

*

» !

m akers

C heap

P f ~

B ack*

Melbourne Filmmakers Co-op 382 Lygon St Carlton 3053 VIC Tel: 347 2984 or 347 3450 S.A. Media Resource Centre (Union £t, Adelaide) PO Box 33 ; Rundle St Adelaide 5000 SA Tel: 223 1600

Hobart Filmmakers Co-op PO Box 1 Kempton 7409 TAS Perth (Embryo Co-op only) c/- Ian McLay c/- Perth Institute of Film and ’ Television 92 Adelaide St Fremantle 6160 WA Tel: 351055 or 35 1056

MEET TH E S P E C IA L IS TS John Rowley, Manager, Enterprise Color Video. Complete production facilities; mobile cameras, video tape.

Plus post production facilities in­ cluding film to tape (35m m and 16mm), time code, editing and audio facilities.

(Chris Newark,

G eneral M anager, Royce S m e al Film P ro du ctio ns.

C om plete 35m m and 16mm film production and creative services.

Paul Harris, G e n e ra l M a n a g e r, Samuelson Film Services Australia Pty Ltd. Complete range of 35mm and 16mm film cameras and accessories.

Panavision. In fact everything — from a battery pack to a camera crane.

Allan Martin, Manager, Samuelson Film Lighting. Everything from a tiny little inky dinky to a great big brute arc. Plus mobile blimped generators up to 1,000 amps.

ROYCE SMEAL FILM PRODUCTIONS PTY.

LIMITED

166 Willoughby Road, Crows Nest.

2065. N.S.W., Ph: 43 3243.

NATIONAL FILM THEATRE OF AUSTRALIA Box 1780 GPO, Sydney, NSW 2001.

SEASONS FOR APRIL-MAY

,

Sixteen Japanese Directors (fully imported) British Horror Films Guerrilla Cinema The Heritage of Expressionism Classics

COMING IMPORTED SEASONS Tv Russian Classics of Dziga-Vertov, Pudovkin, Dovzhenko American Classics \ Films from Austrian Archives % Carl Dreyer

USE FORM BELOW TO SUBSCRIBE NOW S U R N A M E (S )............................. Init.................. ............................. * ....................... I n i t ................

PLEASE PRINT CAREFULLY to ensure correct delivery of notices.

Groups of two people at the one address may join on the same form.

Y ADDRESS FOR NOTICES ......................................................................

.................................................................................................................

I declare that I (we) have attained the age of 18 years.

I enclose $5 each in payment of the joining fee.

S IG N A T U R E ......................... .. .( d a t e ) ...........................

New M em ber Renewing

LNTH)AÍ7TBTSPHXRTS

Articles and Interviews Disaster Films Philippe M o r a .................................................................................... 10 Disasters’ Mr. Success: An interview with Jennings Lang David Stratton.........................................

14 Byron Haskin: Exclusive interview Graham S h irley............................................18 Surf Films: The Quiet Industry Albie Thoms ..................................................... .26 We know where we’ve been, but . . . Tony B uckley............................................31 Restrictive Trade Practices Legislation and The Film Industry Antony Ginnane ....................................................................

34 Raped, Slapped, Ignored: Women in the Movies Tricia Edgar.......................... 39 A Matter of Fact Ken H a ll...............................A ................................................... 46 Brian Probyn: Director of Photography Eric Reade ..........................................73 Ross Wood: Producer and Director of Photography: An interview Graham Shirley.........................................................................,.................... 76

Features The Quarter......................................................................................................................... 8 The 1974 AustralianFilm A w ards........................................................

24 Top 10 of 1974 ................................................................................................................ 42 Filmography: Charles Chauvel Andrew Pike ......................................................... 44 Index 1974: Supplement...........................................................................Centre Pages Picture Previews — Inn of the Damned and Sunday Too Far Away ............. 60 Production Survey.......................................................................................... . ...............67 C olum ns................................. ................... .........................................................1..............88

Film Reviews

\%\ \ '% '

Chinatown Mark Randall .............................................................

51 The True Story of Eskimo Nell John Tittensor.....................................................52 Flesh for Frankenstein and Young Frankenstein Sue A dler...............................53 The Mean Machine AntonyGinnane ......................................................................54 Contes Immoraux Meaghan Morris ........................................................................... 55 11 Harrowhouse Mike H arris....................................................... ........................... .58 Emmanuelle David Stratton ........................................................................................ 59 The Front Page Virginia D u igan............................................................................... 62 Andrei Rublev John O’H a r a .........................................

63 Scenes from a Marriage Ross Lansell...................................................................... 63

Book Reviews Hollywood and After Bruce H odsdon...................................................... ...............80 The Filmgoers’ Companion Graham Shirley ....................................... ..

80-81 Film as a Subversive Art Barrett H odsdon..............................................................81

% \

.85 ___________

_a

Sue Adler is a regular contributor ’ to Cinema Papers. Tony Buckley is a film producer and editor; vice-president of the Sydney Film Festival; ex-president of the Australian Film Council and leading In­ dustry spokesman. Virginia Duigan is a script-writer and ex-film critic for The National Times. Patricia Edgar is a lec­ turer in media sociology at La Trobe University’s Media Center. Ms Edgar is co-author of the recently published book, Media She. Tony Ginnane is a Melbournebased film critic and independent producer-distributor. Ken G. Hall is a prominent Australian director of the Cinesound era. Mike Harris is resident film critic for The Australian. Barrett Hodsdon is an economist and has studied film theory in Britain and America. He is presently engaged in a series of research projects for the Film, Radio and Television Board. Bruce Hodsdon is a tutor in film with the Council of Adult Education, a program co-ordinator for the NFTA, and a regular contributor to various film socie­ ty bulletins. Ross Lansell was a critic for Nation and is now a script-writer. John O’Hara is the Melbourne film critic for the ABC and lectures in film at the RMIT. Andrew Pike is an authority on Australian film history and is currently conducting research for the Films Division of the National Library. Mark Randall is a television writer and actor and has been accepted as a student of the Film and Television School. Graham Shirley is an independent filmmaker and a graduate of the Film and Television School. He is currently conducting research on the American director Norman Dawn. David Stratton is the director of the Sydney Film Festival and runs a radio film review program. Albie Thoms is a director of the Sydney Filmmakers Co-op, a filmmaker, TV producer and regular contributor tc a number of periodicals. Meaghan Morris is a regular contributor to Cinema Papers and The Digger. Eric Reade is a film historian and author. He has recently com­ pleted a third volume in a series dealing with Australian cinema. John Tittensor is a teacher and a regular book reviewer for a number of newspapers and magazines.

%

Editorial Board Peter Beilby Philtipe Mora Scott Murray

Managing Editor

Design and Layout

Printing

•Recommended price only.

Keith Robertson

Waverley Offset Publishing Group

©

Advertising

Distribution

Melbourne: Barbara Guest, Tel. 329 5983 Sydney: Sue Adler, Tel. 26 1625

Gordon & Gotch Ltd

Peter Beilby

Assistance

Editorial Assistance

Andrew Pecze Maurice Perera

Sue Adler

Correspondents

Contributing Editors Antony Ginnane Graham Shirley Rod Bishop

Contributors

London: Jeremy Thomas

\ Los Angeles: Dave Hay

Secretary Glenda Dodd

Business Manager

Photography

William Mora

Virginia Coventry

FRONT COVER: Publicity still from Byron Haskin’s War of the Worlds (1953). Enlarged from original 20cm x 25cm color transparency. An exclusive interview with Byron Haskin appears on p. 18.

Cinema Papers is produced with financial assistance from the Film, Radio and Television Board of the Australia Council.

Cinema Papers, March-April, 1975.

Signed articles represent the views of their authors and not necessarily those of the Editors. Whilst every care is taken of manuscripts and materials supplied for this magazine, neither the Editors nor the Publishers accept any liability for loss or damage which may arise.

This magazine may not, by way of trade, be reproduced in whole or in part, without the prior permission of the Copyright owner.

Cinema Papers is published every three months by Cinema Papers, 143 Therry Street, Melbourne 3000 (Telephone 329 5983); 365A Pitt Street, Sydney 2000 (Telephone 26 1625).

Cinema Papers, March-April — 7

FILMS COMMISSION The Australian Films Commission Bill was adopted on March 6, after a long and stormy passage through both Houses. But it has yet to receive Royal Assent.

The Bill now provides for the establish­ ment of a Commission aimed at en­ couraging the promotion, production, distribution and exhibition of Australian movies. This Commission will: « Take over the Gorton governmentinstituted Australian Film Develop­ ment Corporation; • Incorporate a number of recommen­ dations made by the Tariff Board report Into the industry; and e Incorporate Film Australia, the Government’s movie production arm.

But as Liberal Senator Guilfoyle pointed out however, the Bill does nothing to remove the dominance of the prime exhibition outlets and restructure the industry to provide a greater number of alternatives and inject the necessary measure of genuine competition.

Much debate on amendments to the Bill concerned the need or otherwise for the Commission to be autonomous in its decision-making processes. Senator Steele Hall from South Australia for ex­ ample, arguing for close supervision of the Commission by Parliament, noted that in his view the South Australian Films Commission, set up by the South A ustralian governm ent, would be operating far more efficiently if it were under direct supervision by Parliament than it is at the moment.

The redrafted version of the Bill provides for parliamentary supervision of direction to the Commission by the Minister for Media and enables either House of Parliam ent to disallow regulations establishing levels of Australian content in local cinemas.

(Another Opposition pooh bear—the fear of socialist propaganda shorts being forced on cinema audiences was fre­ quently expressed).

The eligibility for membership of the Commission was also contentious. The Interim Board of the Commission includ­ ed such people as Hector Crawford (Crawford Productions) and Graham Burke (Village Theatres). Clause 20 of the Bill restricted membership of the Commission to people who are members of an incorporated company with more than 25 members, thus restricting membership to those movie producers involved in larger companies. This clause was negatived by a vote on October 23.

With the Act about to go into operation, large scale funding will be available for local production. Further the Act gives the Commission power to seek and obtain industry statistical infor­ mation otherwise unobtainable and should give rise to a more informed and educated industry.

AG

LES AUTEURS AUSSIE Australian movie and TV producers will benefit from last year’s exploratory trip to Cannes by Tom Stacey, executive officer of the Australian Film Develop­ m ent C o rp o ratio n. Thé AFDC has successfully lobbied the Department of Overseas Trade and this year both the TV Festival MIP-TV (April 21-26) and Film Festival (May 9-23) have official status as trade promotion events. This means the Australian government’s new Export Development Grants Act (1974) applies and that producers attending will receive 85 per cent tax rebate on eligible expenditure.

Further, the AFDC and the Department of Media have combined to provide a number of free or assisted facilities for accredited producers. A stand in the

8 — Cinema Papers, March-April

Carlton Hotel and a hospitality suite in the Martinez Hotel, with cassette playback equipment and translators, Is being provided. A group of Australian producers is being flown to Cannes at the AFDC’s expense. These include Richard Franklin (True Story of Eskimo Nell); Tim Burstall (Petersen, Alvin Purple and Alvin Rides Again); John Lamond (Australia after Dark); David Baker (A Salute to the Great McCarthy); Paul Wltzig (Rolling Home) and Michael Thornhill (Between Wars).

The AFDC are following the Canadian format and have hired the Regent Cinema for daily grind screenings of assisted Australian movies. A Sydney ad agency has been briefed for publicity and promotional material production.

The Australians will be on view this year more prominently than ever before and some international sales are likely.

But there are some doubts and mis­ givings. A number of other Australian participants at Cannes have, over the past few years, argued against the ‘lump them all to g e th e r’ e ffe ct of the bureaucratic umbrella provided by the AFDC-Media-Overseas Trade joint ven­ ture. Tales of audiences of 10 and 11 watching reruns of some of the Canadian films, abound. Perhaps, the Swedish ex­ perience should have been followed where government assistance is strictly ‘back-up’ and individual producers arrange their own screenings and slot their promotions to fit In with the movie’s feel.

The absence of provision for 16mm projection at the hired Regent Theatre is also causing problem s. Certainly producers will be augmenting and sidestepping some of the ‘free’ facilities.

O ther v is ito rs to the Festival accredited to the delegation but not funded by AFDC will include David Roe (director AFI); Terry Bourke (Inn of the Damned); Ninki Maslanski (Piugg); Tony Ginnane (Cinema Papers)-, Silvie le Clezio (Perth Film Festival); and distribu­ tion people like John Fraser (BEF), Andrew Gatty (Seven Keys), Robert Ward, Mark Josem and Leon Boyle (Filmways), Richard Walberg and Dr. D. Killen. A full report on Cannes in the next issue.

PB

WOMENS FESTIVAL A festival of women’s movies made by or about women will be held in six Australian capital cities later this year.

Movies to be screened will Include the latest work of Susan Sontag, Agnes Varda and Marguerite Duras as well as movies by Ida Luplno, Nelly Kaplan, Dorothy Arzner, Leni Reifenstahl, Mai Zetterling and Shirley Clarke. Almost all the material to be shown will not have been screened In Australia before.

Also to be included in the festival are video-taped discussions with Kaplan, Sontag, Varda, Duras and Clarke as well as many lesser-known British, American and European women filmmakers.

The idea for such an ambitious and wide-ranging festival was first mooted at the “Womenvision” conference early in 1974, and Its purpose has been describ­ ed as a “. . . springboard (for) an ex­ ploration of fem ale consciousness through movies, while at the same time celebrating the creativity of women”.

Raising finance for the festival has proved difficult. The Film, Radio and Television Board has offered a loan of $20,000 to cover some costs, and the International Women’s Year Committee has promised the festival a $35,000 guarantee against loss — however organizers are expected to raise the finance for movie purchase and hire, transport, publicity and administration from advance subscriptions. A raw deal from both bodies to say the least.

Dates of the festival in each capital city and addresses for subscriptions are listed below.

SYDNEY — August 9-17 P.O. Box 245 Broadway, NSW, 2007 Phone: 660 7108 MELBOURNE — August 21-30 175 Kooyong Road Caulfield, Victoria 3162 Phone: 347 5902, Thurs. 7.30-10 p.m.

HOBART — September 5-7 239 Harrington Street Hobart, Tas. 7000 Phone: 30 2435 (Robin Harrison) Office Hours ADELAIDE — September 12-14 Media Resources Centre Union St Adelaide, SA 5000 Phone: 223 1600 PERTH — September 20-23 c/- Guild of Undergraduates University of WA Crawley, WA 6009 CANBERRA — September 26-28 14 Angus St Ainslie, ACT 2602, Phone: 48 5150 BRISBANE — October 3-5 c/- Video Centre Ground Floor Coronation House 109 Edward St Brisbane, Qld. 4000 Phone: 21 0987 RATES: Melbourne and Sydney: $16.00 All other cities: $8.00 PB

NEW BOARD POLICIES The Film, Radio and Television Board of the Australia Council (formerly the Australian Council for the Arts) is currently circulating a policy document which precis all discussions to date con­ cerning the administration of the board’s Creative Film and Television Production funds.

The recommendations maintain that they are based on the experience of the last five years of operation of the funds.

Basically the policies will establish two prerequisites for new candidates to receive monies from either fund. The new and inexperienced applicant will have to participate in an orientation seminar to be conducted quarterly in capitals and country centres. In addition to providing applicants with basic ex­ perience in handling of equipment, the board expresses the hope th at applicants who might come into the film arena without any real interest or con­ cern will be weeded out at this stage.

Successful ‘graduates’ of the seminar would be eligible to attend quarterly workshops for further experience — par­ ticularly in the use of 8mm equipment and other facilities which the board plans to make available.

Completion of both seminar and workshop will also make them eligible for either Basic Production Fund grants or Advanced Production Fund loans.

M e e tin g s a re c u rr e n tly b ein g programmed in all capitals for board representatives to discuss these policies with interested parties. Filmmakers who feel that: e The policies exercise unwarranted restrictions on would-be applicants; e The distinction the board draws between ‘art’ movies and ‘commercial’ movies needs to be challenged; e The board’s monies would be better channelled into the co -o perative movement; or who have any gripe with the scheme at all are urged to attend the meeting called in their State.

All enquiries should be directed to The Secretary, Film, Radio and Television Board, Australia Council, PO Box 302, North Sydney, 2060.

HG

NOBODY’S PERFECT Over the last 12 to 18 months film ex­ hibitors in Melbourne have been riding a cloud of gold-lined successes with movies like The Sting, Live and Let Die and That’s Entertainment chalking up extremely successful seasons. In fact, visiting American executive Jennings Lang noted at a press conference here that on a per capita basis Melbournites go to more movies than people in any other city in the world.

Moreover movies like Mame, Lost Horizon, The Great Gatsby and Sunshine which have had mediocre runs in many instances overseas have ex­ perienced better seasons here than most countries in the world.

But as the famous last line from Billy W ild e r’s Some Like it Hot runs: “ Nobody’s perfect” . Everyone has their flops and a few weeks back now Melbourne saw a monster. The Great Gatsby on a Village Drive-in splash — with a revamped advertising campaign — was yanked out of the multi-theatre release after only one disastrous night and replaced throughout the circuit with a hurried return of The Dirty Dozen.

Nobody seems to have the answer for what went wrong but apparently opening night took less than $2000 which on a seven night splash has grossed upwards of $200,000 on the circuit.

At any rate don’t try to blame the publicity man. As American Nat Segoloff points out in Film Comment's latest issue, the publicist has got enough on his plate. To give his comments weight, Segaloff listed 50 reasons why a movie might fail — Here’s a random 20: 1. It’s a shitty movie.

2. It’s a good movie — not a great one, but a good one — only the shitty reviews killed it.

3. It’s a great movie with great reviews and audiences like it when they see it — only we can’t get them to come to the cinema.

4. The reviews were so great that the public got the impression that the queues were too long, and so they waited. Meanwhile it died. 5. It’s a fag movie.

6. It’s a kid’s movie.

7. It’s a women’s movie.

8. It’s a men’s movie and the women won’t come.

9. Black audiences don’t want to see a white movie.

10. White audiences don’t want to see a black movie.

11. The movie opened at the wrong time of the year.

12. The movie opened at the right

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

time of the year, but so did a lot of other good ones and it got lost in the crowd.

The weather’s so good, who wants to see a movie?

The weather’s so bad, who wants to see a movie?

The weather’s going to be so good, who wants to cancel a weekend trip just to stay home and see a movie.

People are waiting until the movie hits the suburbs.

They showed too much of it In the coming attractions.

Leads were better than the movie turned out to be, and word of mouth killed it.

That bitchy critic kept pounding away. __ There’s nothing to hum. (For musicals only).

THE QUARTER It seems the industry still hasn’t found a Delphic Oracle. But there’ll be a swell job waiting for him when he comes knocking on someone’s door.

AG

GOLDEN REELS Presenting the 1974-5 Australian Film Institute Awards at the Sydney Opera House with Glenda Jackson presiding was a calculated attempt by the Institute to focus both local and international a tte n tio n on th e now b u rg e o n in g Australian film industry. “ Im m ediate local m edia response suggests the gamble largely paid off.

What the international trade press will think of the event remains to be seen. . Certainly the showmanship of the even­ ing was marred by early projection and compere gaffes.

The awards themselves {published elsewhere in this issue) were the subject of much discussion, as might be ex­ pected, but the only general thumbs down seemed to land on the choice of best screenplay which went to David Williamson’s Petersen. However there was general approval for the awards given to the South Australian Film Cor­ poration productions, particularly Sun­

sid erab le interest in ‘in tern ation al’ productions.

He pointed out, however, that in the re­ cent co-production Sidecar Racers, Universal expected to drop a million.

David Stratton's in-depth interview with Jennings Lang appears in this issue of Cinema Papers.

HG

GROSS TROUBLE Talk to a cinema manager or a dis­ tributor until recently about the film in­ dustry here and he would automatically assume you were referring to the exhibi­ tion or distribution machine. Look through the pages of The Australasian Cinema until recently and you would be forgiven for thinking the same. It’s only now that production has become a con­ sideration in ‘the trade’s eye’. But the doors are opening . . . slowly.

For a producer to assess the marxet he intends to compete in he needs to know its size and comparative figures, in the US, UK, France, Italy, Spain, Ger­ many and Japan and d ou b tle ss elsewhere, gross box-office figures are regularly published in the trade press.

This is not done in Australia, but it is common knowledge that such figures day Too Far Away. are regularly swapped throughout the There was also some discussion sur­ distribution-exhibition network. rounding inclusion in the awards of Here again the producer is the odd movies made specifically for television, f man out. Until he has access to such and it was pointed out by some that the material he is unable to assess the TV industry already has its own award potential of this, his market place, and is system (Logies, Penguins and TV Society at a disadvantage in dealing with dis­ Awards). However with productions like tributors and exhibitors.

Scenes from a Marriage, Duel etc. the With a view to providing this informa­ boundaries between TV and movies have tion Cinema Papers, over the last couple definitely become blurred. of months, has been approaching HG producers, distributors and exhibitors to draw up a continuing list of the gross HOLLYWOOD PERUSES box-office and gross film hire of Australian movies since 1950. By and Visiting executive vice-president of large co-operation has been forthcoming Universal Pictures, Jennings Lang, made and we hope to have the first listing set some interesting points on the size and up in the next issue. One of the two importance of Australia in the world largest exhibition outlets, however, has market. so far refused to release any information.

Australia ranks third in Universal’s top The new Australian Films Commission grossing foreign nations — with UK and Act has provision for compulsory ac­ France heading the list; Italy and Japan quisition by the Commission of such taking fourth and fifth' places. items as box-office figures. No doubt if Variety gives us second place (moving this organization continues to refuse up from fifth position in 1973), with a film access to vital figures, local production hire of $21 million for the first six months groups, starved of marketing information of 1974. they have every right to share, will be lob­ Asked if he felt that Universal had a bying for this to be done.

responsibility to help support the local industry in view of the large amount of cash it took out of the country, Lang was evasive, preferring to comment on his company’s investments in local cinemas.

Under the Income Tax Assessment Act «(Sections 137 and 138), preferential treatment is allowed to foreign-owned movie companies, who have to pay only 10 per cent of their gross income in tax.

Lang said he was against any move for compulsory reinvestment of a part of the film rentals, but expressed con­

AG

QUALITY ROADSHOW Roadshow Distributors’ and Village Theatres’ decision to market the first season of Ely Landau’s American Film Theatre series ail over Australia must be one of the most daring enterprises ever attempted in the history of serious cinema promotion here.

At a cost of over $500,000 in up front payments and advertising, Roadshow

have invested in the seven filmed plays of the initial series: Edward Albee’s A Delicate Balance with Katherine Hep­ burn and Paul Schofield, directed by Tony Richardson; John O sborne’s Luther with Stacey Keach, directed

by Guy Green; Simon Gray’s Butley with A lan B a te s , d ir e c te d by H a ro ld Pinter; Eugene O’Neill’s The Icemen Cometh with Lee Marvin, directed by John Frankenheim er; P inter’s The * Homecoming with C yril C u ssack, directed by Peter Hall; Ionesco’s Rhinoceros with Zero Mostel, directed by Tom O’Horgan and Kurt Weill; and Max Anderson’s Lost in the Stars with Brock Peters, directed by Daniel Mann.

The original American experiment had teething troubles, due largely to com­ puter booking foul-ups and alleged problems with American Express, who with Landau and the French Canadian television were initially partners in the joint venture. The series, in its second season in the US with a children’s season on the way, is now run exclusively by Landau.

Roadshow, whose iinks with the AFT organization are no doubt partially ex­ plained by their vice-president Norman •B. Katz’s previous position as head of Warners — whom Roadshow handle here — have options on the subsequent seasons.

Initial reaction to the movies overseas has been varied but largely upbeat. The main criticism has been their often stagey reverence for theater with a capital T, but the massed talent on view makes them eminently interesting to say the least.

There will be only two matinees, two evening and two school performances of the movies before they are returned to the US. Programs will be played fortnightly from 23 and 24 June. No individual tickets will be sold, but season tickets will retail at $21.

The organizers say they will need well over 100,000 subscribers for the scheme ' to make a profit.

AG

THE BANKFATHER Up until the mid-60’s a list of top grossing movies of all time would in­ evitably have been headed by the blockbuster Gone With the Wind, with a few newcomers like The Ten Com­ mandments and Ben Hur trailing behind in second and third places. That was until movies like The Graduate, Love Story The Sound of Music and more recently The Godfather came along.

In fact the latest Variety listing of “all time box office champs” shows that the new super grossers have taken as much in one or two years as it took Gone With the Wind 20 years to run up.

After only three years The Godfather is now at the top having grossed upwards

of $85 million in the US and Canada, followed by The Sound of Music (1965) with $83 million and Gone With the Wind (1939) with a mere $70 million. Close behind comes The Sting (1973) with $68 million, and The Exorcist (1973) with $S6 million.

Other “champs" at the top of this year’s listing are Love Story (1970), The Graduate (1968), Airport (1970), Dr. Zhivago (1965), The Poseidon Adven­ ture (1972), Butch Cassidy and the Sun­ dance Kid (1969) and The Ten Com­ mandments (1956). .

PB

GAMMA RAYS AND SEX AIDS Melbourne has acquired two new in­ dependent cinemas in the last month bringing the number in the greater urban area to 41. This is at least nine more than its northern neighbor Sydney, where restrictive licensing regulations have, un­ til recently, kept a closed door on The market. Melbourne’s high cinema stan­ dards have contributed to the increasing popularity of local movie going. For com­ fort and modernity, Melbourne cinemas are world standard, unlike Sydney where old barns still stand tall.

The larger of the two new cinemas, The Total, conceived as a live theatre by its owner, millionaire property tycoon Gordon Barfield, was converted to a cinema after a disastrous premiere run of Guys and Dolls. Initially programmed

by Dendy Theatres as a matinee house for the day release of Benji and Thè Winners, the cinema is now being programmed and controlled directly by Barfield on a ‘quality movie’ plan. The first movie in under the new policy is the 1973 Cannes award winner, Effect of Gamma Rays on Man in the Moon Marigolds.

Screenings at The Total are in 16mm (with the sound quality In need of im­ provement) but this new cinema could well fulfil a need if it puts into release some of the major movies never screen­ ed in the town.

The other new entry — also 16mm — is at the opposite end of the scale. An 83seat shopfront operation run by Sydney entrepreneur Dave Gondali, the Barrell Theatre will screen essentially sexploita­ tion products. Their opening attraction is the controversial Australian sex educa­ tion movie Sex aids and How to Use them, directed by George Schwarz — which by dint of its education tag in­ cludes some of the most objectively hardcore material ever seen on a cinema screen in this country.

Although the Barrell had early teething troubles with the Health Department it now seems to have settled comfortably into the daily grind. Management’s inten­ tion is not to attempt any form of ‘club’ structure but operate within Com­ monwealth censor controlled limits. This may of course mean that subsequent attractions will be less ‘hot’ than Sex

HANDSOMELY BOUND IN BLACK WITH GOLD EMBOSSED LETTERING. 400 lavishly illustrated pages of

SPECIAL OFFER

BOUND VOLUMES

VOLUME 1 1974 NUMBERS 1-4

• • • •

exclusive interviews with producers, directors, actors and technicians valuable historical material on Australian film production film and book reviews surveys and reports from the sets of local and international productions

BOUND VOLUMES

STRICTLY LIMITED EDITION. ORDER NOW. $ 1 5 plus $1 po stag e.

Please send m e ............. bound volume(s) of Cinema Papers, Volume 1, 1974.

Enclosed cheque/postal order for $ . . . . . .

N A M E ........ ...................... ...........................r........................................................................

ADDRESS........................................................................................POSTCODE............

Cinema Papers, 143 Therry Street, Melbourne, 3000.

Cinema Papers, March-April —- 9

Ei yy üBm

ïr p ir ? | t ili« . &

J I J lü* 9 8 * * Msi*8|

§g.

S ili Mmim MH p isiyr »s i^»Ii Eflnrs

mm% P«sfeisis*ß'tii 11 11 luii ^ |f! # i i l i fe «Sii i f |j i ï £ § I l SJ ...il S i i l S i 8 fe T * •>

0 %M i» fe 1 ** Iss & fe f i l g ÿ|

«& S i mk %

te ff«

Mito:

By Philippe Mora

'.-* ss

S i 88 SS

es is es sess se »8 ie ü

i i iS ü

M i 88 68

10 — Cinema Papers, March-April

feTs f e lfi8SLfJ_c î Sg b ïl îI sïi.iWg® TOT# S fit 8 St » f « fcfcito i » i » # i! p » m p |a i e ë i i i |

Vi' - $»Iw; i' w ü & ü ü Ili l i »1

Ìs sl-is *t aBi'B

Illustration by Andrew Clark

At the end of the film, after the last fam e has been doused, Paul Newman surveys the ruined hulk of his skyscraper. He suggests allowing it to stand as “a monument to all the bullshit” of our age. Probably ‘‘The Towering Inferno” should be placed on permanent exhibition at the Smithso­ nian for the same reason.

— Richard Schickel, Time, 6 Jan 1975 Poseidon Adventure, The Hindenburg, The Towering Inferno, Juggernaut, Airport 1975, Earthquake ... apart from total nonsense what do these recent film subjects have in common?

Disaster. Catastrophe. Death. BOX-OFFICE These films represent “commercial” filmmak­ ing at its peak of cunning. They have been con­ structed with the cinematic equivalent of Machiavellian precision. They exude a remarkable confidence in their almost total mastery of mass audience manipulation. The audience is placed in the stance of a car accident voyeur eating popcorn.

But maybe this is taking things too seriously.

Perhaps it is the glossy kitsch which is appealing. For example, the climax of Earthquake is Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner being drowned in a sewer. That’s entertainment!

Cecil B. de Mille, when asked why he continual­ ly filmed biblical subjects said: “What else has 2000 years advance publicity?” A reasonable answer would have been: “human disaster.”

Hollywood has discovered this answer and is feverishly milking it. In the process, a new genre (hot on the blistered heels of Kung Fu) is born: Disaster films.

In an orgy of flood, fire, earthquake and collision, God has suddenly become a Hollywood star. God created the tidal wave that sank the Poseidon. God created the Los Angeles earth­ quake in Earthquake. God starts fires, crashes planes and generally creates havoc. But then, perhaps I’ve got that wrong. Maybe its the Devil creating all this catastrophe. After all, why stop with Linda Blair when you can try and kill Gene Hackman, George C. Scott, Paul Newman, Steve McQueen, Charlton Heston, Charlton Heston and Charlton Heston . . .

Hollywood has been obsessed with evil ever since virgins were tied to railway tracks by wicked frotteurs in silent serials. But now, after 60 years of murderers, perverts, sadists and rapists, Hollywood has discovered the non-human villain.

Whether this villain is God on an off day or the Devil on a good one, the basic element is the sheer terror of catastrophe.

However, Hollywood remains confused about all this. One producer angrily denied that his film was a disaster. “It’s making millions” he said.

Some connoisseurs of the new genre claim that Deep Throat was the first disaster filjn. After all, what greater disaster could befall one than being born with a clitoris in one’s throat. But whatever

the origin, the genre is here to stay.

There have always been film subjects based on catastrophe. For example, San Francisco (1936), War of the Worlds (1953), Titanic (1953), A Night to Remember (1958) etcetera and ad infinitum.

The difference between the latest crop of “Ark pictures” (as Variety calls them) and past disaster films is the clear formula running through the re­ cent products. No training in mathematics is re­ quired to understand it.

Big star names + Absurd accident or Outrageously improbable catastrophe + Big budget + Soap opera = Disaster film.

Sophisticated film critics have always found it difficult to rationalize the relationship between art and money in the film industry. However, recent disaster films leave no room for ambiguity. They are quite clearly made to make money. Thus an unexpected result of the new genre is a worldwide flowering of abusive languge in film criticism.

Here is a typical example: “Movies like Airport 1975, with their furious mediocrity and their manifest cynicism about their own mediocrity, represent American film-

The physiognomy of disaster: These people are under stress for our entertainment. Disaster films, altnough not exactly an acting challenge, do require their stars to perform amazing contortions of facial muscle tissue.

Movies like Airport H5 (above) have provoked a worldwide flowering of abusive language in film criticism.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 11

DISASTER FILMS

making at its shabbiest, most unimaginative, most exploitative.”* But once a particular film subject becomes ex­ tremely popular and prevalent and is in effect, a new genre, then the critic’s role is radically diminished. What is the point of criticizing a James Bond film, a Carry On film or a Kung Fu film? Likewise, disaster films are carrying on regardless.

Violence has always been a popular ingredient of films. In Bonnie and Clyde (1967), Arthur Penn introduced a new technique in screen vocabulary to handle violence. This was violence-in-slowmotion. Faye Dunaway’s slow motion writhings as she was hit by scores of machine gun bullets in the film’s finale signalled the beginning of the ‘ ultra-violence ’ of the last seven years. Sam Peckinpah stepped in with the Wild Bunch in 1969 and blood and guts in slow motion reached a new high. In 1972, Stanley Kubrick, obviously tired with chastity after years of working on 2001, leaped to the front of the ‘ ultra-violence ’ race with A Clockwork Orange. By 1972, just about *Jay Cocks, Time, 4 November, 1974.

Left: A scene from Clarence Brown’s The Rains Came (1939).

Another precursor to contemporary disaster films, it starred Tyrone Power and Myrna Loy in a dull romance set against spectacular Indian monsoon and earthquake sequences.

every human muscle and organ had been stomped on, cut, bashed, mauled and bloodied.

Disaster films are the natural extension and development of the screen violence of the last years. There is nothing more violent than the con­ vulsions of a hostile fate in the form of fire, earth and water. The violence of the clenched fist has been dwarfed by the bursting dam. Slow motion shots of flying intestines pale into insignificance when compared with the spectacle of thousands of people being burnt, crushed or drowned. Herein lies the ‘appeal’ of the macroviolence of the new disaster films.

Of course, filmmakers have not entirely neglected the human dimension. Most of the dis­ aster films are careful to include “human in­ terest” in the form of puerile characters worthy of True Confessions. A foreground of banal relationships heightens the impact of any extraor­ dinary disaster. In this regard, one recalls Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds, where the banality of The human relationships, by virtue of their realism, in­ creased the horror of the ‘supernatural’ attacks by the birds.

Perhaps the most obvious precursor to the macroviolent films of today is San Francisco (1936) starring Clark Gable and Jeanette MacDonald. A reconstruction of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, it emphasized the relative triviality of human affairs when humanity or Jeanette MacDonald is confronted with the

Modern lifts can be dangerous. However, do not be alarmed. These scenes are make-believe from Fox-Warner's $14 million Towering Inferno, Hollywood’s most lavish contribution to cornball catastrophe.

destructive power of chance, God or the Devil.

However, let Hollywood have the last say in the form of these words by Jennings Lang, executive producer of Earthquake: “Take a picture like Sunshine, which is going to outgross Earthquake in revenue. It’s about two kids with cancer — you could call it an internal disaster, I guess, but it doesn’t fit any trends.” •

Cinema Papers, March-April — 13

â&#x20AC;¢Mmmmswm

Wmmm

Jennings Lang: DISASTERS* MR. SUCCESS Jennings Lang: I got a report from a friend named Paul Monash who I worked with on Slaughterhouse 5.

Paul had seen the National Theatre version of The Front Page in London and raved about it. He asked if I’d like to turn it into a movie using Joe Mankiewicz. I knew Joe Mankiewicz so I called him up to find out if he was ready to write a script. He was interested in- the material, but because of his faithfulness to Charley MacArthur and Ben Hecht he said he wouldn’t dare write it. At which point I asked Joe whether he’d be offended if we went elsewhere for somebody who’d write and direct it and he said, “Not at all”. I then told Paul Monash I would try to get Billy Wilder to do it.

Why did you pick Billy Wilder? I think he is a great director, but his last two films — “Avanti!” and “Sherlock Holmes” — haven’t been commercially successful.

Well, there are certain things one is proud of. And one of the things I’m proud of is that I really don’t think a guy is as good as his last pic­ ture was successful. Take Coppola for example . . . The Conversation was a disaster at the box-office and although we don’t know about God­ father II, I can assure you it will be very, very successful. I know of no filmmaker who has made more than two movies that hasn’t had an un­ successful one. If you go through the course of any successful director — whether it’s George Stevens or Willy Wyler or Billy Wilder — you’ll find a certain amount of unsuccessful movies.

I picked Billy Wilder because I thought he was the best fellow to do it — and the best fellow is not often the one who was involved in the most successful movie.

“The Front Page” was produced

by Universal. Was there any indepen­ dent company or separate company involved?

• No. So in a situation like that you are executive producer of the movie.

The answer is ‘yes’, but in this par­ ticular instance, Paul Monash is listed as a producer, although he is an absentee producer ... it was through Paul that I got the idea of

Universal Studios’executive vice-president Jennings Lang was recently in Australia to promote The Front Page, and take a first-hand look at one of America’s most profitable movie markets.

For many years Universal has maintained its reputation as one of the world’s most shrewd and aggressive movie producing giants.

• 1 ” The following interview, conducted by David Stratton provides a revealing glimpse of the methods and attitudes of a powerful Hollywood executive. Lang begins by describing how The Front Page was set up. doing The Front Page — it’s a kind of finder’s fee.

In other movies where he is labell­ ed ‘producer’ he does far more work

than he did on this one. In the movies that I ’m labelled ‘executive producer’, the amount of effort I put in generally depends on whom I’m

Co-star Jack Lemmon (Hildy Johnson) talks with Jennings Lang on the set of Billy Wilder’s The Front Page. "

Opposite page: Producer-director Mark Robson and executive producer Jennings Lang hold a meeting against the background of a devastated street during the shooting of Earthquake.

working with. There are certain producer-directors who enjoy func­ tioning in all areas including costs, checking out advertising and hiring draftsmen. There are some who con­ centrate on the actual directing and are more interested in the script preparation and the casting . . . and there are others who are less in­ terested in the script preparation and more interested in the post produc­ tion. So the labels overlap and-the duties change and vary.

On The Front Page I advised Billy Wilder and did anything he wanted me to do that he didn’t want to dp alone. Billy and Izzy Diamond did the writing of the movie. Needless to say he allowed me to read the script . . . listened to certain suggestions . . . then took some and discarded others.

He was in final creative control. But he was a listening creative director.

And when he disagreed he gave me his reasons for it.

How is “The Front Page” running in the US? I was trying to look in Variety. I would guess the movie has grossed about $6 million domestically between Christmas and now — which is very good although not in the class of Earthquake, Towering Inferno or Godfather II. What did the movie cost?

I would say around $4 million — which includes an overhead of ours.

And I would say that if the movie did $10 million it’s a success — from that point on everybody makes money.

You’re talking about the United States and Canada?

No, I’m talking about the world.

If I was to guess I’d say that it would do $15 million in the world, before television — which is a very successful movie.

We have become very, very spoilt in the days of block-busting hits.

There are very few minimal hits . . . there are failures and there are some that just go through the roof like The Sting, Airport 75 or American Graf­ fiti. But we have hopes for Waldo Pepper, Hindenburg and Jaws.

I am interested in the relationship between independent companies like Clint Eastwood’s Malpaso ComCinema Papers, March-April — 15

JENNING S LANG

Universal in a sense then suggested — i.e. Clint Eastwood — to take “Earthquake” and “Hindenburg” to over the project. the Filmmakers Group. It doesn’t I’d like to move onto another area work that way with Malpaso. which will interest people here. Have Malpaso must be a different set up. you seen any recent Australian Not true, Let’s take the movie that movies?

No, the only movie I saw was one Malpaso has just finished — The Eiger Sanction. The history of we made here — or at least our com­ this movie, in the shortest ver­ pany made here — Sidecar Races. sion I can give you, is that David It’s felt in some quarters that Brown, a partner in the Zanuck American take a lot of Brown Company — another in­ money outcompanies of the box-office in dependent company working under Australia and don’t put- any money Universal — came across the book back in through production. I noticed The Eiger Sanction and suggested it your list of credits that you were to Universal, who in turn financed in involved in “Act of the Heart” which the purchase of the book without was a Canadian with a Cana­ ever contacting me directly but con­ dian director andmovie actors, which tacted Clint Eastwood’s agent. Clint was a big flop. Did youandmake Eastwood read the book and was in­ because of similar pressure init terested in it but would not commit Canada? until he’d seen a screenplay. At which point Zanuck and Brown No. We made Act of the Heart made a judgment not to make a com­ because a girl called Stevie Phillips, a Malpaso director Clint Eastwood with Donna Mills on the set of his first movie Play Misty for mitment with Clint Eastwood on the very good agent with CMA, came to Me. basis of his approval of the me and said: “You’ve always liked jpany*, The Filmmakers Group and the movie. I was there in the actual screenplay, but made the decision to Genevieve Bujold and it would be a Universal. How do things work on a making of the movie as a creator, not project like “Earthquake” — which only as an executor. was produced by The Filmmakers In connection with Hindenburg, Group — or some of the movies that I brought the property to Bob Wise.

Clint Eastwood has made for Univer­ I disagreed with the writer he sal.Well, you’re not going to be very selected, but he was in the creative role and he took the writer. I happy with the answer because the suggested George Scott and Anne movie industry cannot be over­ Bancroft who agreed with, and I simplified. If somebody says, “What helped him get he them.

I had much less the hell do you do Jennings Lang?”, to do with the day-to-day I’d say, “ I don’t know. I do of Hindenburg although I production have everything.” You know, if necessary been used if Wise wanted could to use me.

I’ll direct a test on the lot — if the Now with George Roy Hill it’s an unions will allow me to do it — or I’ll entirely different kind of function. write a story.

With The Great Waldo Pepper I very, very closely but didn’t Your actual position though, is served make as many of the creative vice-president in charge of production suggestions as I did with Earthquake. at Universal.

No, that’s not quite true. We don’t Would that have anything to do have a vice-president in charge of with the fact that George Roy Hill’s production. We are very careful not track record of late has been good, the first couple of movies made to have it. If there is a so-called head while by the Filmmakers Group — Mark of production, he constantly in­ Robson’s Birthday Wanda fluences the creator and restricts his June”, and“Happy Robert Wise’s “Two freedom.

— were such flops? The George Roy Hill with Robert Redford on the set of The Great Waldo Pepper. Lang served . We have tried, for the past several People” Filmmakers Group must have needed closely years, to create an image based on some with his “dear, darling, lovely talented friend George Roy Hill” on this movie. hits like “Earthquake” and transferring controls — particularly “Hindenburg”. go on their own. So they contacted great favor to me, to Genevieve and the creative controls — to the film­ Newman. Newman was interested in to the Canadian movie industry . . .” maker. Some guys work more with That’s not quite true. My dear, the book but convinced Zanuck and And I said: “Let me see the script. the creators and others just work as darling, lovely, talented friend Brown that if the book and the script We’re not in the favor business, liaisons. I am the executive producer George Roy Hill has had some flops. were rewritten and it satisfied him, we’re in the movie business.” I read on The Front Page because I’m the As a matter of fact, Slaughterhouse he’d make the movie. the script. It had some very, very in­ only one who functions that deeply 5, the first movie I made with him Now after Newman, Zanuck and teresting dramatic values and it had with people. On the other hand I was not a commercial success. The Brown had scripts and scripts and something to say thematically that don’t function as an executive second movie I suggested was The producer or the head of production, Sting, which he thought was a pot­ scripts written, it became an impossi­ interested me. It was a kind of con­ for example, with Hitchcock or Hal boiler and didn’t want to direct. ble venture. Newman withdrew and troversial subject.

Wallis. They may ask me to help Conversely I had less to say about there was $700,000 spent in develop­ But when I finally saw the movie it them on a certain thing or I may the making of Hindenburg after ing scripts that nobody wanted to was dreadfully long and boring — it approve. The studio was ready to covered up so many good things. I offer a suggestion, but I am not in­ I gave him the property. volved deeply in the production of This is the same point as you made shelve the property and go onto thought it could be measurably else. I had heard this and helped by taking 25 minutes out that the movie. before, that it doesn’t influence you something I said: “Now wait a minute, there’s just didn’t belong.

The Earthquake situation was uni­ what their last movie was like. something wrong because at one At this point the director, Paul que because it was my idea. I func­ tioned much more deeply in every Not at all. Mark Robson had four point a man called Clint Eastwood Almond, accused Universal of ruin­ detail, including selection of the cast. or five dry years before Earthquake was interested in The Eiger Sanction ing movies, from a contractual point I got Heston, went to England and but I selected him for a specific — whatever the provisos. So, if of view and even a moral point of talking to Ava Gardner, suggested reason: There are very few film­ Zanuck and Brown would withdraw view, because we had final control.

George Kennedy, transferred the makers in the industry who could be as far as participants in making the So after, thinking about it very parts and argued about the ending of secure in making a movie with that movie, I will see that they are carefully and talking about it with many special effects. Mark is one of protected because they purchased the my esteemed chief executive officer *The Malpaso Company is Clint Eastwood’s them and so is Bob — because they property . We will call them executive Mr Wassermann, he said: “Look, production entity through which — on from the editorial department producers of the movie and they will pay the $2. I’d rather have them very movies in which he is either actor or actor- come and they know about the handling of get a certain proportion of the happy and lose some money than director — he joins with other backers to profits, and I will try to get Malpaso have them scream and yell unfilm. constitute a film production company.

16 — Cinema Papers, March-April

JEN N ING S LANG

necessarily.” So, unfortunately we came over to Paul’s version of Act of the Heart and it was very un­ successful — but we didn’t have that much money in it so it wasn’t a terri­ ble loss.

Has that experience colored your attitude or the company’s attitude, towards backing completely in­ digenous movies in other countries for local distribution and the option on international release?

We have had bad luck with movies that have been made away from the supervision, or at least the contact of home office executives. The most serious one was done in England, where we lost over $30 million. A marvellous guy from MCA got so in­ volved with the excitement and tradi­ tion of English moviemaking that he had forgotten about the international market, — and consequently he made movies that had a very restric­ tive kind of audience potential. They never made any money . .. none of them.

You’re talking about movies like “Charlie Bubbles?”

Charlie Bubbles, Countess from Hong Kong, Boom, Love is a Four Letter Word and on and on and on. I thought Privilege would have been a very successful movie had it been released two years later. I think it was ahead of its time.

I think “Charlie Bubbles” is a magnificent movie.

It’s a marvellous movie and it got great reviews, but nobody went to see it. These days we’re taking a more primitive stand. We’re looking at scripts, working out the best place to do them and then making them there. '

Are you likely to be looking at scripts or being given scripts, while you are out here?

We’re given scripts all the time. I haven’t received any here and if I had I wouldn’t have the time to read them anyway. But there’s a marvellous story from an Australian book about an older woman who is in love with — or at least cares for — a young retarded man ... that could make a fantastic success. But it would need a grown man to play the retarded person, to sell the movie to the international market. It would make an exciting project using Katherine Hepburn and Robert Red­ ford.

But then the point that would be made here is that it would no longer be an Australian movie. It would just be one made in Australia.

Well then it’s the wrong subject.

You’d have to find if the making of an Australian movie requires all the cast to be Australian — then get a subject. ~ What would your company’s at­ titude be to a project which had a good screenplay, an Australian writer, director and cast; one which had been properly budgeted for Australian conditions and which had the support of the AFDC? If such a project was put to you with a view to CIC* distribution in Australia — and first options on international distribu­ tion — would you be interested?

Oh yes. But I’m not an authority on what would happen. I presume the judgment would be made on whether or not the movie would *Universal distributes through CIC in Australia.

A thoughtful Walter Matthau, playing the managing-editor of a Chicago newspaper in The Front Page, listens to director Billy Wilder explain a story point.

appeal to Australians; how much it would cost to make; how much of that could be recouped in Australia; and how much potential it has for the rest of the world.

Well, as you probably know feature films are being made here at the moment from anywhere between $250,000 and about $400,000.

Currently there are a lot of scripts that have been partly financed and producers are looking for the rest of the money. In this sort of situation how much control do you think Universal would want? Presumably they would want to put in an ex­ ecutive producer.

I really don’t know. I think Sidecar Racers could probably provide the answer. The only difference was that there were two Americans involved as performers — the rest were Australians.

But it had an American director.

An American director and an American executive producer.

And it was finished in the US. It was edited and scored there.

Yes, it was edited and scored in the US although there was some editing done here. The first cut was done and then it was sent back — which is not unusual even if it’s made in England.

Would you consider it an Australian movie?

Yes, I think it’s 90 per cent Australian. We make movies in the US and Hollywood with Vanessa Redgrave, or with an English direc­ tor — for example Karel Reisz made The Gambler recently with Jimmy Caan.

There’s an interesting situation here. A lot of talented filmmakers are lobbying very strongly for the Govern­ ment to take action to help the in­ dustry get going. The feeling on a project like “Sidecar Racers” is that the Australian filmmakers themselves — directors, writers, crews — don’t really benefit although the movie is made here.

A very big problem exists in not understanding that movies are made for the world. I think that as chauvinistic as we all are if our major objective isn’t to make movies for people all over the world then we’re in the wrong business.

Now if in order to secure your jobs you have to threaten us — the out­ side world — by not allowing the Australian people to see movies that are made elsewhere, you’re retrogressing . . . going backwards.

That’s building a wall around yourselves. If I was a filmmaker in Australia I would say: “How the hell can I make Murder on the Orient Ex­ press in Australia?” — then it becomes an Australian movie. Just the same as even though Sidney Lumet, an American director, directed Murder on the Orient Ex­ press, it’s predominantly an Englishmade movie. It was made in England and had an international cast — Vanessa Redgrave, Albert Finney and many other people including Sir John Gielgud. It was predominantly

an English movie, but in order to have an international audience in­ volved they used the best.

Now if I was to make the movie we’re talking about, based on an Australian novel, and I went with an Australian director, there’d be nobody in Australia that I could sell internationally the way I could sell Robert Redford in that role.

I’m for protecting the Australian filmmaker. I think the best way to protect a filmmaker is by letting him make a very successful international movie. Of course, he must not be told that he can only use Australians to make it work. That’s restricting him much more than we do in the US. If we think the best guy to play a cer­ tain role is Jean-Pierre Belmondo then we try to get him to make that movie. Or if we think Mastroianni is a better person to play a role then we try to get him. As a matter of fact I thought Ava Gardner was the best person to play an old movie star in Earthquake . . . and she hadn’t work­ ed in years.

I think the goals you have are great. I’m for that. If there is some Australian talent let’s get it going.

Let’s invest money in this guy to get him going. Let’s get the right proper­ ty so it’ll be not only a hit here but a hit internationally. Rather than saying, “Well, we’ll show them — the only way they can get The Sting to play in the Australian theatres is if they guarantee to put up $8 million to make eight movies with only Australians, from top to bottom.” I think that’s going backwards — in­ tellectually, culturally as well as economically.

In your position at Universal you are able to predict where American movies are going. Universal is, at the moment I think, the most successful producing company. Where do you go from here?

Well, I think the motion picture industry is in the position where it has to compete with other events.

For many, many years the motion picture was a habit. Now that habit has been removed and substituted by the television habit, and along with telev isio n th ere are very sophisticated forms of audio enter­ tainment — which are also habits.

The movie now has to be a special event. Consequently in selecting the ingredients of a movie you have to ask what it is that will draw people away from other entertainment. So I think the future of movies lies with the ability of producers to make judgments ranging from the basic piece of material to the way the movie is made: To use stars that can’t be seen on TV and to employ techniques — like Sensurround — that can only be experienced in a cinema. These judgments have to do with timing and the need to appeal to a broad audience.

A movie has to have an identity that people will want to get out and spend some money to see. And that’s what we’re looking for in our line up.

All our movies will have, we hope, a special event and an unusual image that will make people want to see them. And I think that’s the only future of the business. • Cinema Papers, March-April — 17

PR.OOOC

• UN® UliiNH

W

THt 'N0°LL'<

.y jK & E L ^ 0000^ 0“

e s t o t a K

„ ft Hfe inothes

e « ^

«1 *%recall « * *■w Santa Susanna ~ . ^«c0ntaine0 ^ - £ t te- men ebusiness. ^rcame * * g ^ J £ * . V j » « ^ them ^ f ^ a r l o a l acres oi ^ Sa fluttering, ^ utcVies.0n®•J u V t its top was rocks near the J

f

fes movj^

learne-

ted Post,

«he r e f l e ^ j ; *The *» % £ & * * ^ thC e l had the insular

s i It.— fts r^ s s s r^ »« j s s a i - s s - « s i s » * « **• th e d in in g 1

18 — Cinema Papers, March-April

BYRON HASKIN

Alone, Too Late for Tears and The Crying Sisters. Over the two decades that followed, Haskin directed a number of films now regarded as minor classics. Among them were War of the Worlds, an updating of the H. G. Wells story combined with superior visual effects; The Naked Jungle, climaxed by the destruction of Charlton Heston’s plantation by soldier ants; and Robinson Crusoe on Mars, an effective transferral of the Defoe

original to a loneliest imaginable outer-space.

Since 1947, Byron Haskin has had very little personal involve­ ment in special effects. Yet the influence of his work in this field has had strong bearing on many of his own productions, and the most recent of these has been his last production to date, The Power. While not able to recall in detail many of his own in­ novations, his claim is that after eight years’ retirement he is still equal to any problems put before him.

The following interview was conducted at Byron Haskin’s home in Los Angeles by Cinema Papers Contributing Editor Graham Shirley during a recent study tour of the US.

The Australian crew of Byron Haskin’s Long John Silver (1954) recall that their director worked with unflagging dedica­ tion against what at times seemed insuperable odds. Among these were financial insecurity, the forsaking of two years’ development of a well-established career in Hollywood, and a leading actor whose drink problems continually threatened a halt to the production. Against these were set Haskin’s immense skill as a morale-booster and an undisputed expert in the field of special photographic effects. Dedication indeed, in a film climate which had not emerged from its eclipse by war. Haskin’s directorial career at that time was only seven years old, and still in the ascent. He had moved to direction in the late forties after a decade and a half in special effects; and now, unlike many who left Hollywood for a year or more, he was able to return and build his reputation as one of the most original, albeit stylistical­ ly variable, directors of the fifties and sixties.

Including the two years on Long John Silver, the career of Byron Haskin spanned almost 50 years. Beginning in 1919 as an assistant cameraman for Louis J. Selznick, working variously with Allen Holubar1, Marshall Neilan, Allan Dwan, Sidney Franklin and Raoul Walsh, Haskin progressed through the Metro and Goldwyn studios to become a leading cameraman for Warner Brothers. In 1927 he had his directorial debut with Matinee Ladies, followed closely by Irish Hearts, The Siren for Columbia, and Ginsberg the Great, again for Warners. After photographing John Barrymore in The Sea Beast, Don Juan and When a Man Loves, he accompanied Herbert Wilcox to England as a production executive and an expert on multiple-camera sound. With Tom Walls he brought several of the popular Aldwych Farces to the screen, but reaping few of the expected financial rewards, he returned to Warner Brothers in 1932.

Beginning afresh as a special effects process photographer, he shortly afterwards succeeded Fred Jackman as department head and held the post for eight years. In this period he worked on the company’s most costly productions, including Captain Blood, The Sea Wolf, Air Force and Action in the North Atlantic. In 1947 he accompanied Hal Wallis in his move to independent production and went back to direction with Wallis’ I Walk

Byron Haskin: I was top cameraman at Warners, shooting the Barrymore films and all of their specials, and by then in my late twenties when I should have had the break, I did. I talked to Jack Warner and he assign­ ed me to a picture called Matinee Ladies, with May McAvoy and Malcolm McGregor. The writer, who was also in charge of produc­ tion, had only given me half a script, and with half the film and a rough cut completed, I said to him: “Look, unless we change the stride of this thing, we’re going to have the dullest film ever made. And I’m inclined to think the best of it”.

“Oh don’t worry — we’ll have it”, he replied and the script he delivered was duller than the first half. I, sneaking fink that I was, knew that I’d have to save myself and went to see my personal friend Jack L. Warner. He was sitting on the can in his office and said: “I see what you mean. I’ve always had an idea about a party on board a houseboat that breaks loose and floats out to sea”. I jumped at that and said: “Let me have a writer and I’ll develop it”.

“Who are you going to get?”, he asked. I said: “There’s a little guy on the third floor of the old building back of the laboratory called Darryl Zanuck. He’s full of ideas”. So Zanuck rewrote this thing, we shot it and it was a successful silent film for all its confused, inept handling.

M echanically, I was a good director, but at this stage I really hadn’t the foggiest notion of what to do with actors.

The aftermath of this was quite amusing. There was a guy called Roy Del Ruth directing for Warners at the time who had been a powder fiend at Mack Sennett’s. He would chuckle for 10 years if he could see the biggest hotel in town blown four miles into the air. A weird sense of humor. Now the guy that I’d com­ plained about had been fired and Roy said to me: “I’ve got a great idea. We’ve got no executive producer at the moment, let’s put Zanuck in” . He roared and chuckled, it was like blowing up a 20storey building.

The two of us talked to Warner and worked it around that Zanuck

had saved the day with my film and so forth. And — boom! — suddenly Darryl Zanuck was announced as the executive producer of Warner Brothers’ film. And he came up from the third floor back of the laboratory, writer of dog stories for Mai St Clair and the other directors.

At this point in time, Darryl Zanuck, flushed with success, in­ itiated what must have been one of the first Hollywood economy waves.

With Warner always screaming about money, Zanuck decided that the first section he should land on was stories, and among these was my second film as director, Irish Hearts.

He chopped the middle out, so it made no sense at all. It was com­ pleted, became a dog, and Warner took Zanuck on. He said: “You bastard, you do that around here again and you’re fired. Maybe you’re fired now”. And Zanuck — my friend — sticks a sheath this long into my shoulder blades by saying, “That dumb Haskin is the guy who ruined it”. So we’ve been less than friends ever since.

The Siren I did over at Columbia, with Dorothy Revere and Tom Moore, a famous old silent star.

Then I made George Jessel’s first film, called Ginsberg the Great. It was snake-bit right from the start.

Jessel has been playing in a thing called The Jazz Singer with great success on the New York stage.

When Warners signed him up, he was under the impression that they had signed him to do The Jazz Singer, but not so. He didn’t read the fine print. They put A1 Jolson in Thé Jazz Singer and put Jessel in this crappy, cheap little story, to be made as cheaply as possible. Now Jessel was the original wooden Indian, and he couldn’t react to anything. You could face him with four tigers and nothing would come out of his face at all.

You couldn’t build him up as another Keaton?

No, Buster Keaton needed special tailoring and knew how to time this deadpan thing. But Jessel was com­ pletely uncontrolled, and all he’d de­ pend on in The Jazz Singer was a Cinema Papers, March-April — 19

BYRON HASKIN

trick he’s made his living on for years — he’d talk-talk-talk-talk, and peo­ ple had to break in on his lines. They thought that was great in New York.

Moving to a more technical approach, how did you become in­ terested in effects?

I don’t know, I just had a bent for it. I remember driving by cliffs as a kid and knowing that the rills left by water were a scaled-down reproduc­ tion of the Grand Canyon. I had a basic understanding of scale.

When I returned from working with Herbert Wilcox in England, I photographed two or three pictures around town and went out to work in the W arners special effects d ep artm en t, doing process photography. In other words, they needed a lighting cameraman and it was something to help recoup my broken fortunes. I started in the Effects Department under an old­ timer called Fred Jackman. Fred had had much to do with the develop­ ment of the ‘yellow key’ travelling matte process, and I confounded Einstein 2 with this damn thing. I photographed him and his wife in a buggy, and half an hour later he came back by and I said: “Now 1 have you Professor, come in”. We took him into the projection room and screened Einstein and wife in horse and buggy travelling down the street of a small town. He thought it was greater than relativity.

Back projection was just coming in at that time and was replacing the old yellow key process. Jackman had it so arranged that the company cameraman would get the day off and our cameraman would take over for the process scenes.

When did you take over the department?

Jackman quit after I’d been there for about a year. I didn’t particularly want the thing, and I tried to get Hans Koenekamp to take the job.

He was a genius with special effects but he was very shy, and while he was hiding from the studio people they said to me, “You take the job”, and I did.

Warners, like most other major studios at the time, repeatedly used rather familiar footage.

You bet your life. I made the mon­ tage for Twenty Thousand Years in Sing Sing (1935) which they used time after time. It was an illustrative montage that they were going to use on the main titles, but they didn’t know what to do with the end of the picture, so that’s where it went. The ‘chase’ I made for a picture called San Quentin (1937) was used in 25 pictures after that. God, it was the chase to end all chases — under railroad trains and off cliffs, ex­ plosions, dynamite, everything. All the stunt guys in Hollywood got rich.

What scale did you normally use for miniature work?

This was a thing I established in a picture called Air Force (1943). Peo­ ple at that time generally built miniatures on a scale of lA inch to a foot. This meant that one guy had to 20 — Cinema Papers, March-April

bend over them and tie tiny knots and it was a case of time meaning money. If we opened out to the bigger scale, five guys could work on it and you got the thing finished in a week instead of a month. Besides, you can’t go below an inch with water action and have anything that looks legal.

This is even using high-speed photography?

Yes, of course, and you become in­ stinctive about speed. In the Bobby Jones golf series we photographed eight times normal speed and burned up every Mitchell camera we used.

So with Air Force we had a Japanese plane attack at sea, and to have any reality with the water we had to move up to an inch scale. We could have done this in our tank but I heard that the Santa Barbara harbor had a very reduced scale of tur­ bulence and an unbroken horizon.

We got permission to use the harbor, and by rigging wires to fly the planes across the battleships, we shot the entire sea action of Air Force. When we came to Action in the North Atlantic, I knew exactly where to go with our full convoy.

Action had started in Hollywood under Lloyd Bacon, who’s since dead. Lloyd Bacon had reached one of those disagreeable points in his career where he’d made lots of money, but as an option was due on his new contract, Warner didn’t want to take it up at an increased figure.

Bacon could have gone on at the figure he was earning, but choosmg at this point in life to have a lot of professional pride, he decided to give the studio the goose. The picture, which was to have been a big convoy epic, was no longer the biggest thing in the world, and Bacon didn’t help by blowing the entire $500,000 budget on the first sequence he shot.

It was the big fire scene and he hadn’t even got into the story. It was completely out of control. Jerry Wald was producing it. He called me over and said: “My God, save my peck!” The editor didn’t know what he was doing. The fire sequence was all chopped up, you couldn’t tell who was burning or what was happening.

So when the film, which by then cost several million, was finished, we fired the cutter and employed George Amy to take the film apart and com­ pletely re-edit.

The cutting in that fire sequence is very impressive.

Well it was a joint effort. Amy was really good at this and I wasn’t too bad myself.

As department head I was in charge of budgeting and the choice of effect to be used. I picked anything up to six alternative ways of doing the effect and judged the value of that effort upon the story. I actually had five special effects directors working for me. If anything became tough on the set, they’d immediately say, “Forget it, we’ll have special effects do it”. I had a big expansion deal going, everything that goes into making pictures. I had a laboratory, generators, a whole staff of cameramen, soundmen, grips and

electricians. And as I told Don Siegel, a friend of mine that I started as montage director, “It would be a great joke on Warner Brothers to send my assistant onto the set and say I needed Bogie, or Cagney, or Bette Davis, and make the damndest film you ever saw”. There was no question about what I was doing. I had the authority you wouldn’t believe, and I was putting through literally millions of dollars a year by salvaging time from the set. It was an ideal situation. I was finally given an office up front to tell the producers what could and couldn’t be done, which way to go, and wh^t backgrounds to chose.

Did you strike trouble with the in­ troduction of color to effects work?

Yes I did. The back projection was very limited and you were confined to shooting in front of a 1.82m screen. As a rebellion against this limitation, I invented and built and received an Academy Award for the triple background projector. It enabled you to film on anything up to a 5.4m screen.

What was its principle?

It was built on a wedge principle, using three projectors. Two of the lamp-houses faced each other, the other shot straight ahead, and you had adjustments to ensure that the three images stayed superimposed.

Didn’t Farciot Edouart, from Paramount, have something to do with its invention?

Yes, he did. By this time we had reached a point of disastrous patent brawling, and Herman Beatty, a Warners attorney, had engineered an agreement between the 12 major studios to enter into a patent pool.

The terms of the pool stated that all signatory studios could share in one studio’s invention if they supplied money toward its development. As far as this project was concerned, I had a breadboard model built with the three projectors bolted to a piece of wood. I needed to build a preci­ sion instrument on a single stand, with the three projectors as units variable by tightly regulated con­ trols, but when I approached Warner he laughed in my face and told me that the application of such a device would be limited. Having now made a few pictures with the old model, I called up Farciot Edouart to have a look, and he persuaded Paramount to split the cost of the machine’s development. However, he also per­ suaded Paramount to finance his building of the machine and, eight months later, the head of our sound department, who was on the Academy Research Council, called me up and said: “Didn’t you get together that triple head projector?”

I said: “Yes, why?” And he replied: “There’s an application from Farciot Edouart for full credit of the inven­ tion”. I told this guy that it was all nonsense, and they issued the Academy Award to me3.

You moved from Warners in the late forties to work with Hal Wallis.

Yes, I made a couple of films for

him, one of them I Walk Alone (1947). And then he loaned me out for a thing called Man-eater of Kumaon (1948), which was a hell of a good picture. I went over to England, did Treasure Island (1950) for Disney, then I came back. I did a western and I did a Tarzan, which every director should have to do. Sol Lesser had acquired the ‘Tarzan’ rights from MGM and this one starred Lex Barker, with Dorothy Dandridge as the queen of an African village.

“War of the Worlds” (1953) was your first science fiction film.

George Pal and I collaborated on that film and I rewrote half of it with Barre Lyndon. A recent writer on science fiction films4 has said that it was bad to have removed the story from its identifiable background. It was identifiable to Americans, and that’s who we were making the pic­ ture for. In making our choice, we did as Orson Welles had done. We transposed it to a modern setting, hoping to regenerate some of the ex­ citement that Welles had with his broadcast. UCLA asked to screen it as a film definitive of its category, and of course they laughed at the girl’s costumes and at Gene Barry who in his first film was dreadful.

H. G. Wells’ conception of the Martian spacecraft had been an old tin-can with walls like a weather tower and long legs mechanically jointed. This was not what the Americans were up to, so we created an evolution of the flying saucer and had it supported on luminous anti­ gravity legs. The craft had two weapons — a ray which would dis­ solve anything into flames, and a blue dot-and-dash disintegration ray which brought about the destruction of Los Angeles. I’d originally intend­ ed to use many more creatures, But Charlie Gomorrah had tied up more than sufficient time and expense with his one Martian.

We spent six months building that Martian. We called him Louis Lump-Lump. Charlie Gomorrah worked him from the inside and could handle any number of movements, including veins that pulsated and eyes that flickered. He was on the screen for 18 seconds and was very important. Technically, War of the Worlds had a very am­ bitious itinerary. We had a technical advisor called Werner Von Braun and it was like a streetcar ride for him to chart up figures like the quarts of fluid required by the spacecraft.

What scale were your models?

An inch to a foot.

What about actual photography?

One of the biggest problems we had was in and around the space station, which was built in the shape of a three-spoked wheel and travelled at 4.2m a second to' create a perimeter gravity equivalent to the Earth’s. Much of the miniature work involving space vehiclescdocking and sky jeeps heading from the centre of the perimeter had to be done through matting. The central axis was sup-

BYRON HASKIN

Conquest of Space was Haskin’s second film with George Pal, a producer who had considerable experience working with Hollywood’s top special effects men.

Conquest of Space (1954): Superior visual effects achieved by clever model work and high-speed photography.

Conquest of Space (1954): “. . . the whole film was a series of impressive funerals.”

■' It

(y

ii

Above: Long John Silver (1954): Shot in Australia purely for economy and the English-speaking background.

Left: Byron Haskin demonstrating the hula to an actress during the shooting of Long John Silver (1954).

posed to be weightless and was revolved by studio hands concealed behind blue backing. As he leapt from the axis the guys in the jeep had to grab him, and it became quite a deal.

But the whole picture was a flop, because the personal story was far too intrusive. There wasn’t sufficient balance between this and the internal effect we were striving for.

“Conquest of Space” (1955) was another one for George Pal. Yes, and our co-producer was Macrea Freeman Junior, who in­ sisted that we involve this incredible father-and-son neurosis. In our story; the father is in charge of the Martian expedition and the son is one of the crewmembers. When they strike groundquakes on Mars, the father loses his cool and his son threatens and kills him, thus saving the expedition. Now a person chosen to be an astronaut is not going to blow his stack. He’s long since been tested to prove that he’s not the kind of guy that would succumb to that kind of pressure. Another crewman is lost in the lift-off toward the sun, and if anything the whole film was a series of impressive funerals.

I’d like to talk for a moment about the two years you spent shooting the feature and TV series “Long John Silver” (1955). Why was this shot in Australia?

Ideally, we needed a reduced economy for making motion pictures and wanted a locale with an English­ speaking background. Our producer Joseph Kauffman travelled down to Canberra, gave the politicians a load of bullshit and then approached the Commonwealth Bank, who said “yes” with a 100 per cent collateral.

We had American finance which we added to the Commonwealth’s ad­ vance, and also investment from other Australian contacts.

Having found the Pagewood studios unoccupied but in fair con­ dition, we refurbished them and started out with the feature. I used a great number of the people I had used on His Majesty O’Keefe in Fiji.

Ross Wood and Carl Kayser5 were two cameramen who seemed to have all the technical knowledge there was left in Australia, while on the per­ forming side we had Grant Taylor and his son Kit, who played Jim Hawkins. As Israel Hands we cast a young radio actor called Rod Taylor.

Now it wasn’t a good film, but as an adventure film it wasn’t too bad.

It ran into the general ill-fortune that beset the whole project. Our producer’s chief neurosis was that he was ill-satisfied with life unless it was at the uppermost point of a destruc­ tive climax, that we were going to lose everything — today! He made deal after deal, and one day one of his financiers reneged — a sinceinmate of a US penitentiary called Louis Wolfsen. We could never hang it on our producer, because all of his deals were made at 9,140m over in­ ternational water, and we ran up a whacking overdraft with the Com­ monwealth Bank. That was the beginning of their taking the thing over. We figured out later that havCinema Papers, March-April — 21

BYRON HASK1N

A lone U.S. astronaut pitted against all the odds beyond this earth!One adventure

in a million that could happen- tomorrow!

Captain Sinbad (1936): “For this I engineered over 300 special effects in the camera on Eastmancolor original negative.”

r rm s F u m m

1

SCIENTIFICALLY AUTHENTIC ..J T (S ONLY ONE STBP

r AH m oFpm m

t

Angry Marii&n Put sv« Him Cospiri^ Hi»i Lasl Oxygen Till .He glviovtSlooilslows* I Fiercely Across fewesume Ce&teVs1 Stumbles on Lif« Stawun«

ÄE4t/ry/ J .+2SSS*.

Original poster for Byron Haskin’s Robinson Crusoe on Mars, an effective transferral of the Defoe original to a loneliest imaginable outer-space.

22 — Cinema Papers, March-April

ing started with a budget of $476,000, we had spent almost a million dollars on the feature and the 26 half-hour television shorts. It was a case of mortgaging the mortgages, or like building a bridge and having to mortgage the first half to build the other. We never did get to shore with it.

In spite of this, were the conditions favorable at that time for production in Australia?

Anybody could make pictures out there. All you needed was a good professional guiding hand and to know where you were headed. Kauff­ man, who was never intended to be in on the triumvirate/artistic side of this deal, muscled in and dissension set in among the rest of us. Robert Newton started on the juice again and was irrational. For the first few months we were there, he was on the wagon and we made some time. But then he knocked a chandelier out into Vaucluse Bay and would dis­ appear whenever I’d be trying to work with him. The studio was very close to the airport and when he left, the whole crew stopped without direction, looked at his plane rising above the city, and prayed that it would not abort until he got to Fiji.

How much optical camerawork did you normally handle yourself?

Anything that was necessary. In September Storm (1960) we went over to Majorca and were on our own. I did any effects required in the camera and as we didn’t have a roll­ ing platform for the yacht, I rolled the camera and cued the actors to lurch this way and that. We used the same thing on Captain Blood and if the actors react accordingly, it looks real. I did it on Treasure Island and had a rear-projected horizon in the background.

I did a film for the King Brothers

in Munich called Captain Sinbad (1963). For this I engineered over 300 special effects in the camera on Eastman-color original negative.

While I was working with the art director in Vienna, the King Brothers hired the Academy Award winning cameraman from The Hustler, Eugen Schufftan. Now this rang a bell and I remembered we had sent effects work across to a German guy called Schufftan in the twenties. I thought, “ This guy’s probably related to the old man”, and when it was time for him to arilve, it was the old man himself. Eighty-something, and he had long shoes and he looked like the balding professor from Stuttgart: “Arrgh, vat ve got ’ere?”

And he didn’t understand one thing about special effects, hadn’t the foggiest notion of what the hell I was doing with this mirror. “Vel, dat’s vundervul”, he said, and when I pan­ ned he was standing in the shot. “Get out of there!”, I yelled.

A number of effects that I found difficult to matte together I had Tom Howard6 complete in London. There was no outstanding incentive for special effects because the King Brothers always made cheap films and I don’t think our effects budget went much beyond one million dollars. However, there weren’t 25 per cent of them that I would have approved as head of Warner Brothers’ special effects department.

I would have called them a first test, something we’d develop and run to see what improvements were needed.

With Sinbad, all my so-called first tests were in the picture.

• So your shooting effects on loca­ tion and in the camera was a rever­ sion to the old silent method?

That’s right. Shoot your first ex­ posure, then back it up. Count your footage to the nearest frame and roll

BYRON HASKIN

His Majesty O’Keefe (1953): Action packed pirate story about thejerring-do of a brave adven­ turer, Burt Lancaster.

it forward again. But a great many of the composites were done through the mirror. The hurricane that howl­ ed into Galgo’s laboratory I had reflected in the mirror from a projec­ tion screen. Wind scattered papers all over the set, so there was no need in this case for a back-up.

What about “Robinson Crusoe on Mars” (1964)?

I consider that film the best thing I’ve ever done, because it had basically one of the soundest stories ever written — a man conquering a hostile environment but finding that when the pressure’s off he can’t con­ quer his own loneliness. Unfor­ tunately, the film did not become a hit because of the bad judgment of the producer and the releasing com­ pany. I fought like a tiger to get rid of that silly-ass title. Robinson Crusoe on Mars immediately brings up a picture of Robinson Crusoe un­ der a broad umbrella, being enter­ tained by dancing dames on Mars.

And it wasn’t in that category. I wanted it called GPI Mars, which means Gravity Pull One — Mars.

We had John Glenn interested in preparing the way in 12 major cities around America, and the sales manager at Paramount said: “Aw, they’ll think it’s a documentary”.

And he hadn’t even seen the picture, let alone knowing what the story was.

Larry Butler, who did the effects for Marooned over at Columbia, has an optical printer that you wouldn’t believe. He’s fantastic, he can put anything together, and I had him do Robinson Crusoe’s special effects as a favor to me. He removed all our skies.

You see, we had to convince an audience dramatically that they were not on Earth. They were on a planet out in space somewhere. A blue sky

would be a quick giveaway, so he matted in an orange-red color. The skies up in Death Valley were very, very blue and gave us good travelling matte outlines. So that was shot provided its own matteline and we simply added the orange-red.

Death Valley has been shot 10 million times in movies. It has always been the scene of westerns, camel caravans and God-knowswhat, and has always been shot from the bottom of the valley. I never got to the bottom of the valley at all, but did all my shots across the ridge tops, where there was no weather erosion. The crew pulled out all the weeds in sight, and there wasn’t a thing you saw in the whole film that was alive. So there was the element of suspense and fear that this guy was under. He had conditioned himself to go half an hour without the oxygen mask, he had little pools that he could bathe in, plants he could eat, and oxygen he could ex­ tract from the rock. Then he yelled and the echo came back to him, and he became aware that this was the only voice he was ever going to hear again, and a hallucination of his dead comrade only increased his loneliness and sense of frustration.

Then he found beings from another galaxy who had come over to do some mining, and it seems that he and his ‘Man Friday’ — the ape — would become their slaves. The beings were in the same category as the cannibals in Defoe’s original story.

So the format worked out beautifully, and it worked out in a lot of other ways. I’ve not forgotten this format.

One of the most critically popular of your recent films has been “The Power” (1968).

Continued on P.86

STARRING

TECHNICOLOR

% JOSEPHI |% GEORGE

*

DEBRA

A METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER RELEASE From the Earth to the Moon (1958); A scientist discovers a new source of energy and plans to send a rocket to the moon — predictably the special effects take top honors.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 23

1 9 7 4 -7 5

A U STR A LIA N

FILM

AWARDS

FINAL JUDGES' COMMENTS

An unprecedented sixteen feature films were among the 213 entries fo r the 1974—75 Australian Film Awards.

NcNGrand Prix was awarded by the jury because no film attained the highest international standards. Despite this, we feel that the Australian cinema has reached a most exciting stage in its development.

Technically, quality oKproduction was at an international level. The standard of cinematographs and the use of original music were particularly impressive. The general level of acting has also risen.

Scriptwriting remains the most obvious weakness in Australian film making today, though there were somtNqotable exceptions to the general mediocrity.

The judges noted a continuing preference for masculinfesQrotagonists and male problems. Entries provided few significant roles fohvyomen.

We were impressed by the restrained and succinct use o f commentary' in the non-fiction subjects. The documentary preselectors detected a new measure of assurance in works dealing w ith current, and often contentious, social issues. It seems that Australian documentary film makers can now be relied upon to pursue a commitment w ithout jn to stridency and heavyhandedness.

However, the preselectioTr-paqglfor short fiction fe lt that the subjects explored in this section were concepftraWyjyeak.

AUSTRALIAN FILM AWARDS Established in 1958 to provide a stimulus to Australian film producers and to call public attention to the latest achievements of the nations film industry, the annual competition has become the most important film event for Australia's film makers.

CASH PRIZES in the 1974—75 Film Awards total $11,000 comprising: — ■ $5,000 from the Australian Film Development Corporation for the best story film over sixty-five minutes

Advertising film preselectors reported that Austral ¡an ~cdm«ie[cials maintained their usual standard.

Final selection proved difficuTi because production values were of a uniform ly high quality.

The judges o f the 1974—75 Awards conclude that Government support o f the Australian Film Industry has revitalised feature production: it now remains for more Australian films to reach an international audience.

■ $1,000 from Seven Keys Distribution (Alan Stout Awards) for the three most creative entries in the competition

Colin Bennett

■ $1,000 from Village Cinemas and Village Theatres fo r the Best Direction

Bruce Beresford

o $1,000 Hoyts Prizes for best performances.

Ted Ogden

Patricia Edgar Brian Robinson

■ $1,000 from the Department of Media for the most imaginative use o f film techniques to depict an aspect o f Australian life or endeavour ■ $1,000 from Greater Union for Best Screenplay ■ $500 from Filmways Distribution for Best Original Music ■ $500 from Kodak for the Best Photography

24 — Cinema Papers, March-April

Preselectors: Rod Bishop

Tony Buckley

Ross Dimsey

Celestino Elia

Tom Jeffrey

Chris McCullough

John Flaus John C. Murray

Jane Oehr

T im Read

Scott Murray Ed Schefferle

SPONSORED AWARDS.

G RAN D PR IX

Not Awarded.

AUSTRALIAN FILM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY FEATURE CATEGORY Golden Reel:

SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY

Silver Award:

PETtRSEN

Bronze Award:

BETWEEN WARS

Honorable Mentions:

THE

iREAT MACARTHY

VILLAGE PRIZE :OR THE BEST DIRECTION John Power ft

BILLY AND PERCY

GREATER UNION PRIZE FOR BEST SCREENPLAY David Will/amson for PETERSEN

THE TRUE STORY OF ESKIMO NELL Special Citation for the first featurè film shot in Papua New Guinea with an all-indigenous cast: \ WOKABÇUT BILONG TONTEN

DO C U M EN TA R Y C A TEG O RY

Golden Reel

MR SYMBOL MAN

Silver Awards:

A STEAM TRAIN PASSES STIRRING

HOYTS PHIZES FOR BEST PERFORMANCES A c to r/ Shared:

Jack Thompson in PETERSEN and .

SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY Martin Vaughan in BILLY AND PERCY-----—

Actress:

Julie Dawson in WHO KILLED JENNY LANGBY?

_

Honorable Mentions for Supporting Roles: Barrie Humphries in THE GREAT MACARTHY Reg Lye in SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE MEDIA AWARD Ken Hannam for SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY FILMWAYS PRIZE FOR BEST ORIGINAL MUSIC

IERAL CA TEG O RY

Golden Reel;

BILLY AND PERCY

Bruce Smeaton fo t THE CARS THAT ATE PARIS and THE GREAT MACARTHY

KODAK AWARD FOR PHOTOGRAPHY SHORT FIC TIO N CA TEG O RY

Bronze Awards:

MATCHLESS

Silver Medallion and $500: Vincent Monton fo r THE TRUE STORY OF ESKIMO NELL Bronze Medallions:

WHO KILLED JENNY LANGBY? Honorable Mention:

Geoff Burton for B ILL AND PERCY Brian Probyn for INN OF THE DAMNED Dean Semler for A STEAM TRAIN PASSES

LOVE IS HATE ALAN STOUT AWARDS First Prize of $500:

A D V E R T IS IN G CA TEG O RY Golden Reel

DRUM MATCHES

Silver Award:

JOHN WEST SLIDES

Honorable Mentions:

H IL T O N 79ers LEAP

John Pi

Equal Second Prizes of $250 each: Ian Macrae for LOVE IS HATE Chris Noonan for BULLS

AUSTRALIAN TOURIST COMMISSION "JEDDA AWARD' KANGAROO ISLAND

M ETTERSSUPER 10

Cinema Papers, March-April — 25

■

m i¡|§|S¡

Opposite Page: Gidget Goes Hawaiian (1961): Hollywood cashing in on the sixties surfing craze.

SURFMOWS The Quiet Industry

By Albie Thoms.

Research material by Rod Bishop, Phil Jarrett, Graham Shirley and Sue Adler.

There are currently about 15 surfing features being exhibited around Australia, half of which are Australian productions. Four of these were produced last year with investment from the Australian Film Development Corporation. In backing them the A FD C has acknowledged that the producers are among the most experienced in the country — responsible for 24 features since 1960 — and the only ones to have created an independent, vertically integrated film econom y to control production, distribution and exhibition.

It was from California that the first surf movies came, brought here in the late fifties by Bud Browne at the invitation of local PR man Bob Evans.

Evans had been a surfboard rider from an early age, and through a visiting American surf team, he had heard about Browne’s movies Hawaiian Memories (1945) and The Big Surf (1943).

Evans paid for Browne’s visit and arranged to exhibit them in beachside surf clubs. For most Australians it was their first glimpse of the giant Hawaiian waves that have made The Islands’ a mecca for surfers. .

Evans soon found that he was attracting as many as 800 people a night to see Browne’s movies and realized he had discovered a large and expanding market among the thousands of kids involved in the surfing culture. By renting what licensed halls he could, and making an oc­

casional rental or percentage deal with an in­ dependent cinema, Evans discovered that for an outlay of around $200 on rent and publicity he could pocket as much as $1,000 a night.

From a surf movie exhibitor it was a simple step to become a producer. Evans bought some equipment, established a contra deal subsidy for air tickets1and took off for Hawaii where he shot the first all-Australian surf movie, Surf Trek to Hawaii (I960).

Back in Australia, Surf Trek was put onto the circuit that had been established with Browne’s movies. Evans further expanded his market by producing a magazine called Surfing World.

This was all at the time of the surfing craze in California when the Beach Boys and Jan and Dean began to top the charts with their songs about surfing lifestyles, and Hollywood came up with Gidget Goes Hawaiian. Evans capitalized on

Muscle Beach Party (1964): a manifestation of the fad popularity of the surfing subculture of the sixties which eventually grew into a multi-million dollar industry.

Gidget and made Midget Goes Hawaiian (1961), featuring local surf champion Midget Farrelly, who the next year went on to win the World Championships in Hawaii.

Evans eventually quit his job as a PR man and went into full-scale surf movie production, turning out a feature a year between 1960 and 1971.2 Today, Bob Evans shares the bitterness of other Australian producers over deals where dis­ tributors take all their expenses off the top and leave the producers with nothing. He is equally critical of deals with foreign-owned exhibition groups and would prefer that the Australian Government channeled its efforts to establish a film industry into assisting producers gain access to the large number of public halls that cover the suburbs and coastlines.

Local surf star Terry Fitzgerald.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 27

HpBPIp HKâpwral M UÉ!

—

I

m

f9SIjH pí: • i M ¡ ¡ IMU W I IM i !3 « # 4 M â » «8mv"; «R im» *« -’

M fN

SURF MOVIES

Poster for Roiling Home. An example of a hard-sell campaign inspired by the success of Crystal Voyager.

This view is shared by Paul Witzig, another force in the early surf film industry, and was the basis of a submission to the Tariff Board enquiry into the Motion Picture Industry in 1972. Witzig told the enquiry of screenings in halls being stopped after complaints from local cinema owners, who initially refused to exhibit a movie, then later wanted as much as 60 per cent of the gate.

Witzig was introduced to surf movies by Bob Evans. Like Evans he became involved in distribu­ tion and exhibition. After meeting Bruce Brown in California he brought Barefoot Adventure and Slippery Wet to Australia. He also helped Brown shoot footage for the Endless Summer which became a world box-office smash, grossing over $10 million in the US alone.

Witzig distributed the Endless Summer in Australia and went on to make his own feature, ' "Life in the Sun (1966), which was released for a year, then re-cut, added to and re-released as The Hot Generation :— with just as much success.

In 1969 Witzig again trod the international sur­ fing path and came up with Evolution. The movie was a success around the world, grossing more than $150,000 in the US. Since then Witzig has made Sea of Joy, Islands and recently Rolling Home which takes a Leyland Brothers-type expedition around Australia.

Albert Falzon joined Bob Evans’ Surfing World as a photographer and layout artist and in 1967 went with Evans to South Africa to work on The Way We Like it.

However, Falzon had ambitions to publish his own surf magazine and produce his own features.

In 1970 he founded Tracks with Paul Witzig’s brother John (a former editor of Surfing Inter­ national) and Go Set editor David Elfick.

Following Evans’ example, Falzon and Elfick -used the magazine to help produce and promote their first feature Morning of the Earth — the biggest grossing Australian surf movie to date.3 ' With Elfick as producer, Falzon as directorphotographer and a gold award winning sound track by G. Wayne Thomas, Morning of the Earth had a production slickness beyond anything previously seen in surfing movies.

Opposite: Morning of the Earth: Chris Brock (top) and Stephen Coony (bottom).

The success of Morning of the Earth, made with $20,000 from the AFDC led to Crystal Voyager (1973).

Initially intended as a short to support the summer release of Morning of the Earth, Crystal Voyager has since become the most highly acclaimed surf movie ever produced in Australia.

Since Crystal Voyager, David Elfick has sold his interest in Tracks to move into the production of non-surfing documentaries and features.

However his brief stint as a suri movie producer revolutionized the Australian surf film industry, and has forced other producers to adopt higher standards and hard-sell promotional campaigns.

In the past, Australian producers have dis­ tributed their surf movies internationally through reciprocal arrangements with their production counterparts overseas. But following the disap­ pointing run of Morning of the Earth in the US, Elfick Took,Crystal Voyager to Cannes3, signed an agreement with Hemdale, (the British com­ pany) and secured the release of a new 35mm ver­ sion in London.

Paul Witzig is also heading for Cannes this year with Rolling Home, and it seems likely that Bob Evans will follow suit with Drouyn.

Evans' $50,000 budget for Drouyn (half of which came from the AFDC) is a long way from the maximum cost of his early movies, but today his grosses are smaller and he notes that distribu­ tion and exhibition costs now consume some 80 per cent of his total box-office compared to about 50 per cent 10. years ago.

Evans is currently involved in the production of 40 half-hour programs for a TV surfing series.

However, he is uncertain about making another surf feature.

While Evans managed to sell his first nine features to TV, he is bitter about the low prices paid, particularly in the light of repeated screenings in popular viewing time. Witzig, on the other hand, held out on TV sales. Given the pop­ ularity of surfing movies on the cinema-roadshow circuit he is probably right in assuming that they could draw big audiences on TV. However, the maximum price paid so far for a surfing feature, is $5,000 — low for a color feature.

Several non-surfing filmmakers have also made surf features for TV. Peter Thomson and Bill Fitzwater for the ABC in the sixties; Tim Burstall, who covered the 1971 Australian Championships; and John Phillips who covered the 1971 Smirnoff Championships in Hawaii. None of these have rated highly with the surf movie audience in spite of the fact that they are highly crafted.

It is the personal involvement of the filmmakers that has accounted for the success of surf movies in Australia. The commitment of the producers exceeds anything known in the rest of the industry and has parallels only in the dedication of so call­ ed ’underground’ filmmakers who have used similar production techniques and marketing procedures, While most Australian surf movies have not revealed sophisticated approaches to the craft of film, nor made any technical advances that could be considered innovatory (with the exception of George Greenough’s work)5, they have greatly extended the range of pictorial images in Australian film, and closely observed Australian lifestyles ignored by other filmmakers.

It is not enough to see one surf movie and to assume one has seen them all. They must be look­ ed at as a body of work, and the evolutions and changes in them seen as part of the general growth of both Australian surfing and Australian film­ making. They are, without doubt, the most significant indigenous film development in this country for many years.

Footnotes 1 Contra deals have accounted for more than 50 per cent of production expenses on Evans’ and other Australian' surf movies.

2 With the exception of Ride A White Horse (1967) — a com­ pilation from his earlier movies, scripted by Ted Roberts, Ride A White Horse was enlarged to 35mm and distributed

by BEF. 3 Morning of the Earth has grossed $200,000 in 16mm on the local market.

4 Crystal Voyager grossed $120,000 in its initial 16mm run in Australia and was released in London with Fastastic Planet.

In the first three months the movie had grossed 50,000 pounds and is expected to go as high as 100,000 pounds. It has also been sold for distribution in Germany, Canada, Spain and South Africa.

5 Refer John Flaus’ review of Crystal Voyager, Cinema Papers, July 1974.

Nat Young in Falzon and Greenough’s Crystal Voyager: the most highly-acclaimed surf movie ever produced in Australia.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 29

ivo Islands epic, a surfing safari 3 and others. ;afari with a few

L'TOtSm m m iM Im ai«fimilift!

ul W itzi

llfl U kSeBi^' '1;|

ill ÌM m

||j , s%

i i

»1*1fH

a s » porpoise view ot outsia

V Richard Neville.

1966— BO ARDRIDERS (Bill Fitzwater) - Australian v edited to Vivaldi for ÀSC-TV. ?'

1966— T H E SU R FIN G YEARS (Peter Thompson docum entary for ABC-TV. 1970— GÈTTJNG BACK TO N O TH IN G (Tim Burstali of the Australian surfing "championships.

1 9 7 2 -S U R F IN G O DYSSEY (John Phillips) — doc

On Our Selection (1932). directed by Ken G. Hall. The most successful and productive era-in Australian cinema Cinesound years.

-

In 1967 Anthony Buckley, film editor, industry spokesman and authority on Australian film history, wrote an article for the Sydney Cinema Journal in which he traced the history of Australian film production from its inception, and commented on the state of the industry. He concluded with the following remarks; “As matters stand at the present with the two main cinema circuits owned and con­ trolled by overseas interests and conservative government apparently not willing to listen from afar, the situation is not. likely to change . . . a country with a population of 11 million cannot compete in a laissez faire situation without some form of a quota at long-term finance for indigenous films. It’s not a question of a lot of frustrated esoteric filmmakers complaining. For the most part they would only be too happy to be giv the opportunity to be ‘commercial’. In reply to the assumption that Australians only want foreign films (as distinct from good films) one can question; How does the public know whether it likes or dislikes what it hasn’t seen . . .?

“There are few genuine and creative filmmakers in Australia. There would be many more if there was a film industry of a permanent nature no matter how small. Do we as a nation really want our own indigenous cinema or are we to drift into the 1970’s with the memories of a small, but once flourishing, industry becoming dimmer and dimmer Has the candle finally blown out?”

In the light of recent developments Cinema Papers asked Anthony Buckley to give his impression of the situation eight years later.

Kelly Gang (1906). Possibly the world's first feature film.

The only really positive thing about the mission Bill appears to have completed its tor­ Australian cinema is at least we know where tuous and protracted path through Parliament. we’ve been.

But do we have a plan and a policy for the future?

We know that Johnson and Gibson's Kelly Unfortunately the answer is NO. Gang (1906) is possibly the world's first feature In 1975. the production of Australian films is film, and that Raymond Langford made the same as it has always been, an ad hoc situation Australia's premier classic The Sentimental Bloke with producers and directors going from one pic­ in 1918 — but died as a tally clerk on Sydney’s ture to another spending valuable time in trying to waterfront in 1959. We know about the work of raise the money for their next, then having made it the pioneers Frankiyn Barret, the McDonagh trying to find a distributor on favorable terms who sisters, the famous Higgins brothers and about in turn has to find the right deal from the ex­ Efftee Films, successfully built up by Frank Thr- hibitor that will return all three parties some ing in the thirties with the talents of Pat Hanna revenue, particularly the producer. The one excep­ and George Wallace. And we know that Ken Hall tion is Roadshow-Village, through their continu­ was at the helm of what was probably the most ing support of Hexagon.* successful and productive era in Australian Ken Hall was lucky. Stuart F. Doyle believed in cinema — the Cinesound years.

Australian films and backed Cinesound and We knowr that with World War 2 production Hall all the way. but if one is to be practical and virtually stopped but did not prevent Charles businesslike you really can't blame Norman Chauvel from making one of Australia's most Rydge for ending Cinesound's operations. When successful films, 40,000 Horsemen — that Smithy Rydge took over Union Theatres in the late thir­ was Ken Hall's last film and that Eaiing came to ties the group had not paid a dividen'd to its Australia to set up production — only to be shareholders since 1929. Why spend up to 20,000 swallowed up by Rank and closed. pounds to make a local film which would return We know of the sporadic production of the only 30.000 pounds when the group could get im­ overseas companies during the sixties; of Lee ported films for 5000 pounds and get returns of Robinson and Chips Rafferty’s attempts to set up anything up to 45,000 pounds! This accounted for continuous co-production through their own com­ the decline of Cinesound and Union Theatres’ pany, Southern International Films. strict bricks and mortar policy. Much the same And we know that by 1967 there was virtually applies to the American distributors operating nothing left — except the echoes of various here. For them it is a far better proposition to dis­ government enquiries: the abortive 1927 Royal tribute than to produce. Take last year's figures Commission; the ineffective and somewhat absurd for example — a cool 522 million in film rentals Victorian and NSW Cinematograph Acts; and from Australia to the US! This is where w'e seem the 1963 Vincent Committee. to have all our priorities in the wrong order.

Since then the industry has struggled to regain We have moderate quota provisions for its feet. The Liberal Gorton government helped with the establishment of the Australian Film *Greater Union and BEF have also recently invested in the The Man from Hong Kong, a co-production with Development Corporation. And under the Labor leatures:Harvest Films (Hong Kong) and Picnic at Hanging Whitlam government, the Australian Films Com- Golden Rock. Peter Weir’s latest film.

32 —«Cinema Papers, March-April

Australian pop and serious music on radio: there are reasonable quotas to encourage local televi­ sion shows, but there is nothing to ensure the production of Australian films. The Film and Television Board receive $2 million from the Council for the Arts, The Film and T.V. School S2.5 million and the AFDC topped up with 5340,000+ — 52.5 million to train people for an industry that doesn't exist and has no direction for the future!

Since 1967 there has been an upturn in produc­ tion — even in its ad hoc way — but there has been a severe decline in facilities and an even sharper decline in the number of young people coming into the industry. All the major sound stages have closed — Pagewood long ago, and in the early seventies Ajax’s Bondi facilities. Artransa’s Frenchs Forest studios and two major Melbourne facilities.

Most disturbing of all is the disappearance of Fauna from the local scene. There are now on.lv three laboratories of international standard for the processing of feature films and series — Colorfilm and Atlab in Sydney, Victorian Film Laboratories in Melbourne. Laboratory costs are becoming prohibitive for local filmmakers and. regrettably, release' prints of locally-made films are often made in overseas labs.

There is only one mixing and dubbing suite to be found in Australia that measures anywhere near to international standards — United Sound.

Sydney.

We cannot think of an Australian industry in purely local terms, we must think in international terms. Film is international whether we like it or not. The mere budget of a film nowadays dictates +The AFDC has requested supplementary funds from the Government and with the passage of the Films Commission Bill through Parliament it has been reported that an ad­ ditional SI.3 million will be allocated.

m cm hundred Auatmian beauties m the cast / story of the anginal sextette horn , the phenamena/fy successful Comic Open Florodom in which is one of the moat ¿ realistic fire scenes ever filmed ¿Á 77 ' The sequel to the recent screen tests^ > ^conducted by Union Theatres L¥fpresented} 'f with a special musical scare urtroduang/t l* the exquisitely beautiful 'FJarodom *% V. musica/ numbers J tf; J

Vf whirl cfjDorfsc Mack in Australi fo r Australia— > Y

/

*

g to n o u ö

ou Australians A

IVBKYONB*.

I'd®,

A TRIUMPH FOR AUSTRALIAN PRODUCTION and a Worthy Successor to “THOSE WHO LOVE”

Wholly produced in d iastraila Á

by Ihe

T h e P ic tu r e

^Misses

th a t C au se d a n U n h e a rd o f D is p l a y o f E n th u s ia s m at its P r e m ie r e a t th e R o d e n t T h e a tre , Sydney.

BOOKED FOR FIRST RELEASE IN EVERY CAPITAL CITY BY HOYTS THEATRES LTD.

narte

or rain *

Now Proving a Box Office Attraction in New South Wales.

For Available Dates Apply to

(/astori ¿Huevóle Paul longuet < ¡urt/iurvHc(hghlei lohn Taulkiney^m nj

.

I hr<.kii>hout Austrslia

/ ’aland bv-------- —

*It should be noted that, the managing directors of MPDA companies in Australia neither have a say in the production decision-making process of their companies nor are they em­ powered to invest their company's money-jn local production.

34 — Cinema Papers. March-April

•A u l

B .D .K 305 PITT ST.

SYDNEY.

BRITISH DOMINIONS FILMS LTD

that we must think internationally. The basic cost of the average Australian feature film is $300.000 and will move up to around $450^000 next year.

For a producer to just break even at the box­ office, the film must earn at least $800,000 — and not many films achieve that distinction in Australia. ‘ , ■ Costs are an important factor but don't be hoodwinked. Australian crew costs have gone up but not to the extent that some industry people would have one believe. For example directors of photography, editors, soundmen and other key personnel are getting much the same now as they were in 1970-71. So let’s do away with'the myth that Australian crews are more expensive than their overseas counterparts.

American companies operating in Australia must be involved in production of Australian films. It's not unreasonable to ask- for some of that $22 million to be reinvested! American studios must be encouraged to back local talent ... and not just technicians, but also writers and directors. It's nearly 30 years since Columbia Pic­ tures backed Ken Hall in the making of Smithy (Pacific Adventure in the US), but since that time only overseas directors have been used on in­ ternationally financed features shot in Australia.

-It is admirable that MCA reinvested monies earn-' ed in Australia by making Sidecar Racers but not so admirable that they chose an American direc­ tor.* ' " • ' - . . : • ■ - - ■ • ■ '• ■ ' We must also face up to our shortcomings. We lack creative and financially-oriented producers.

We do have directors and writers, but are short on production managers and art directors if more

|

ABOUT THE AUTHOR . From an apprenticeship at Cinesound under Ken Hall, Tony Buckley quickly established himself as a leading editor, both overseas — through work in Canada and London — and in Australia.

■ Buckley has worked for numerous production houses — including Cinesound as supervising editor — worked on a number of features, cut numerous documentaries and made two movies: Forgotten Cinema, a complete history of the Australian industry, and Sun Sand and Savages, the story of Frank Hurley’s life.

Recently Buckley has been working for Film Australia, and has edited Margaret Fink’s production of The Removalists. He has also produced Peter Weir’s Whatever Happened to Green Valley and.

Donald Crombie’s The Fifth Decade.

Buckley is currently trying to raise money to produce his own feature Caddie, the story of a young Sydney barmaid in the Depression, to be directed by Donald Crombie.

Tony Buckley was also a founding member and chairman of FEGA, a foundation member of the Sydney Filmmakers’ Co-op, a board member of the AFI and is one of the vice-presidents of the Sydney Film Festival. Until recently he was president of the Australian Film Council.

BRANCHES IN ALL STATEN

American directors in Australia: Norman Dawn’s The Adorable Outcast (1928). .

• '

than two films or TV series are in production at any one. time. We have to train and give more chances to people to fill these roles. ; ; The pressing question now is — Can any positive plan be laid down which will fundamen­ tally change the course of the Australian film in­ dustry? The answer is YES! There has to be a functioning Australian Film Commission, there is no other way. Whatever faults there were in the legislation — and there were many — the Australian Films Commission has to become a reality and not a political foot­ ball. If any blueprint for the future is to be worked out, if any continuity of production is to be -achieved then it has to be through one central organization with the powers to achieve the near impossible. It must involve all sectors of the in­ dustry, whether on the Board or in a consultative panel. Exhibitors, distributors and producers must be brought around the sametable.

Heavy government investment is top priority.

Not hundreds of thousands but nothing less than $3 million should be ploughed into the industry by next year and certainly nothing less- than $5 million at any one time thereafter. , Reinvestment is the next priority. American, major s and Australian producers have to be brought together. It’s got to stop being a one-way street in terms of talent being brought in and profits being taken out. Compulsion is not a good thing but a partnership is and this can only be achieved by all parties facing each other head on through the Commission. Sense and sensibility must prevail. There is no use in the Government crying ‘constitutional problems’ When'challenged about the reinvestment of monies earned here into local production.

•/ V ^ \ The third -priority is costs and facilities. Firstly the laboratories: Their costs are prohibitive and out of all: proportion to costs overseas, in spite of

heavy reinvestment. Government 'legislation to enforce .the bulk printing of all features shown here would help increase laboratory turnover and reduce print costs to the local industry. This has been done before in the black and white days and it can be done again. Distributors are already sav­ ing $800,000 a ye^tr in the repeal of the Customs duties on imported films, a decision which defies any explanation. Secondly, studio facilities: All the large studios have closed because they are too expensive to run.The Commission must look at the viability of studios and further at the role Film Australia plays in the commercial industry. Film Australia is currently expanding their studios to the tune of $2 million. Why not expand further to provide studio and production facilities at low cost to the private sector? While Film Australia’s function as film producer is essential-to a viable local industry as is the commercial or private sec­ tor, few.people understand its role, including the Department of the Media.* ; Film Australia, through an Australian Films Commission, could become a spearhead for local production. Its sole function is not the production of TV documentaries, but goes further and embraces the broad spectrum of filmmaking ac­ tivity that constitutes, Australian- cinema. Their films, however, can only be exhibited properly if they are given" their own library, distribution facilities and are more closely involved in the commercial industry. , • Finally, it’s always easier to say something than to do something, but if there is to be a future, a plan for the future, only the Government, through the Films Commission, can lead the way. It must lead with aggressiveness and moneys-co-operation' and consultation. • ■ This is intended as constructive comment, not criticism

Restrictive Trade Practices Legislation and the Film Industry - Part I

By ANTONY I. GINNANE

In a two-part article Antony Ginnane examines the Australian exhibition and distribution system, its ownership, attitudes and practices. The local industry is found to be a giant duopoly fiercely antagonistic to competition. Legislative attacks on the vertically integrated film industry are already history in the United States and the United Kingdom. Attempts have been made in Australia in the past to break up the industry status quo and indeed the Tariff Board Report recommended divorcement of distribution and exhibition in­ terests and the divestiture by the chains of some of their theatre holdings. These proposals have been shelved.

Finally, Ginnane considers the new Federal Restrictive Trade Practices Legislation and the effects it may have on the industry.

TH E AUSTRALIAN FILM INDUSTRY - A DUOPOLY DISTRIBUTION AND EXHIBITION The Australian film industry, like film industries all over the world operates at a three-tier level — production, exhibition and distribution.

Traditionally these three branches of the industry have tended to operate as a vertically integrated unit until courts or legislatures have chosen, for reasons which will be examined, to intervene.^ In Australia the production side of the industry has, since World War 2, been virtually non­ existent until recently when it has begun to reappear quite spectacularly in a fit of government-led sponsorship and tentative private financing. It is thus only marginally relevant to this introductory section, but it will be argued later that the origins of the ownership of the dis­ tribution and exhibition sections of the industry have in fact been responsible for the non-existence of production; and that the absence of a visible production industry until recently is one major result of the exhibition — distribution duopoly.

Two overseas-owned companies in effect con­ trol the exhibition-distribution scene in Australia.

One, the smaller of the two, Hoyts Theatres Ltd is 65 per cent owned and controlled by Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation of America. It thus has exclusive access to Fox films in this territory and has distribution arrangements with Avco Embassy Pictures and control of the library of the now defunct ABC Films and the largely defunct (at least as a production entity) Cinerama Releasing Corporation. It maintains exclusive franchises for exhibition with United Artists and Columbia Pictures, which latter, Twentieth Cen­ tury Fox handles in Australia since 1, January, 1975. It controls over 60 cinemas and drive-ins in the Commonwealth and books for another dozen or so. . V v1, . • - ’• .

The other, the Greater Union Organisation, was originally an Australian theatre group, known as Union Theatres. It is now 50 per cent owned by the British conglomerate, the Rank Organisation, and is the largest distribution­ exhibition group in Australia. Directly or indirect­ ly it controls the release in this "country of films from Paramount Pictures, MGM, Universal Pic­ tures, W alt Disney Productions, EMI Distributors and the Rank Organisation. Through its subsidiary, BEF Film Distributors, it main­ tains an almost total monopoly of English films imported.

In Victoria, it is associated with the indepen­ dent Village Theatres Group (who, incidentally, control the output of the only two other produc­

IN

tion sources — the major Warner Brothers and the mini-major American-International Pictures).

GUO appears to hold only 33-1 ¡3 per cent in the Village Group, but many of Village’s exhibition outlets are operated on a joint venture basis with GUO. Village maintain close top management liaison with GUO, but state that they regard the latter as their day-to-day competitors.

Victoria, too, has the small Dendy Group, as an independent outlet, but of late they have been in­ volved in joint ventures with Village Theatres.

Until the Tariff Board Report, there was no in­ dependent activity of any sort in NSW. Even Village, much to their chagrin, were prevented from breaking in. Table I sets out the major distributor-exhibitor links:

TABLE 1: DISTRIBUTOR-EXHIBITO R LINKS Links/agreements with

Major distribution companies 1. CIC (distributing Paramount, MGM and Universal) "2. Twentieth Century Fox (distributing Columbia Pictures) 3. Warner Brothers (Roadshow Int.) ' 4. BEF Film Distributors (distributing Disney Productions) 5. Roadshow 6. United Artists 7. Seven Keys 8. Filmways

GUO Hoyts

,

Village and GUO GUO »

Village and GUO Hoyts Hoyts ’ Dendy Theatres

Cinema Papers, March-April — 35

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

LOCAL PRODUCTION:

Australia had a substantial production industry in the silent era, and in 1900 made the first fulllength film. During the 1920’s the industry ex­ perienced difficulty in raising finance for larger scale and then sound productions. At the same time it found itself faced with more and more competition from imported productions, notably from the US. The 1928 Royal Commission Report on the Motion Picture Industry in Australia1referred “to the lack of success of most Australian pictures; the limited return available from the local market, and the need to secure in­ ternational distribution”. The Commission found, however, “that although most of the distributing companies in Australia were connected with American producers, there was then no combine in existence exercising ‘a stranglehold’ over the local industry”.

In the early thirties Australia ventured into sound production and the Australian production company, Cinesound, enjoyed a unique relationship with the major Australian theatre chain, Union Theatres. Cinesound produced a series of continuous features — a string of tightly budgeted, largely folksy dramas hnd comedies and Union Theatres gave them a guaranteed city release and suburban runs.2 In 1937, however, the production oriented head of Union Theatres, Stuart Doyle, retired and was replaced by Sir Norman Rydge, who in one of his reorganization moves closed Cinesound (osten­ sibly for the duration of the War, in fact for good).* Union Theatres began its accumulation of theatre real estate, and over the next decade the Rank Organisation bought up its issues capital.

The same year saw Fox acquire their interest in Hoyts Theatres.

For the next 20 years or more, both companies abstained from any major filmmaking in­ vestment. The industry stagnated and ossified.

Both Hoyts and Greater Union now had not only a guaranteed source of exploitable foreign box of­ fice product for their theatres, but moreover a duty to protect the box-office potential of their overseas owners’ productions. Thus, not only was there no incentive for the exhibitors or associated distributors to invest in further local production, but there was a positive incentive to keep the local industry nonexistent.

Thus, if local production is in the public in­ terest3 then some modification to the present exhibition-distribution structure must be under­ taken.

OTHER EFFECTS OF THE STATUS QUO:

Another disturbing effect of the present in­ dustry structure is the fate of exhibitors (and, to a lesser degree, distributors) outside the net of the two major concerns and the business dealings which they must, perforce, have with the giant dis­ tributors. The distributors fill the central role in the film industry in that they obtain the product from filmmaking sources and hire it to exhibitors for screening in cinemas.

Overseas, a distributor is generally deeply in­ volved financially in funding film production. In Australia, as the majority of films screened are from overseas sources, the distributor is virtually an agent, and little more, for the foreign producer-distributor. Only Roadshow in Australia has, since the Tariff Board Report, become engaged in a full-scale production program, although Filmways and BEF have now ventured into funding. There are about 30 dis­ tribution companies in Australia but only seven of them provide a significant flow of ‘product’ to the commercial film industry. These distributors and the product they handle are set out in Table 2: *Cinesound’s last film was Dad Rudd MP (1940).

36 — Cinema Papers, March-April

TABLE

2:

AUSTRALIAN DISTRIBUTORS T H E I R PRODUCT

AND

Distributor

Product distributed in Australia

Fox

20th Century Fox, Columbia Pictures, Avco Embassy Films United Artists The Rank Organisation; EMI Film Distributors, Walt Disney Warner Brothers; American International and Independent product.

Universal, Paramount, MGM Independent product Independent product

United Artists BEF Film Distributors Roadshow CIC Seven Keys Filmways

Of these seven, Filmways and Seven Keys are totally Australian operations. The Roadshow organization comprises the locallyTOwned Roadshow Distributors which handles American International and independent releases, and the joint venture, Roadshow International, which handles the Warners releases, and accounts for some 75 per cent of Roadshow’s output. s Filmways is run by a small group of indepen­ dent Victorian exhibitors who own or control at least six cinemas in the Melbourne area, and who are still developing their outlets.4 Seven Keys is a privately-owned venture which has recently branched into theatre operation in Melbourne and Sydney and operates closely with Hoyts Theatres Ltd. Roadshow was initially started by the Village group to provide them with direct access to foreign product and has been spectacularly successful. Although the local industry does not disclose its figures, it is believed that overseas con­ trolled distributors (including the international division of Roadshow) account for over 80 per cent of box-office takings in Australia.

When dealing with independent exhibitors (i.e. exhibitors not operated or controlled by their overseas owners) the foreign distributors use a “Standard Form of Contract” which is, to say the least, an imposition of grossly inequitable terms on the exhibitor party to the contract. This con­ tract is too lengthy to be reproduced, but the clauses referred to in this article are reproduced in Appendix A. .

Clause 1 purports to set up an offer and accep­ tance for formation of a contract, but it seems in reality that an exhibitor is presented with a short list of films available at a certain rate of hire and his signature obtained to the contract schedule im­ mediately. The deeming of the signing of the schedule as an offer is a fiction that is belied by the wording of a typical letter of acceptance from a distributor which is set out along with the rele­ vant contract schedule in Appendix B. The ex­ hibitor has no choice in the films or terms offered him, as he will only be able to obtain similar films at similar prices from other distribution sources.

Clause 3 and 4 refer to termination or suspen­ sion on breach by exhibitor and distributor respectively; but there are no reported examples of the latter, although a number of controversies concerning alleged exhibitor breaches are on record.5 Appendix C contains correspondence dealing with one exhibitor-distributor controversy from the standard form of contract: the right to check.

Further clauses concerning deficiencies in the number of films imported, substitute films, prior runs, switching film at exhibitor’s risk, inspection of equipment, freight charges, stamp duties, dis­ tributor’s right to check; all are heavily biased in favor of the distributor. Some exhibitors had in fact never seen the full standard form of contract, and some believed the schedule (Appendix B) was the whole contract form.

Further, film hire terms (i.e. the amount of gross takings payable as hire by exhibitor to dis­ tributor) between independent exhibitors and the distributors are excessive as opposed to deals done with associated theatre groups. BEF may sell a film to a GUO theatre on a 90/10 deal, which means that after the theatre expenses (which in­ clude a built-in profit to the associated exhibitor) have been deducted, the film hire is to be split 90 per cent to the distributor and 10 per cent to the exhibitor. There would, of course, be a minimum percentage payable, say 25 per cent, with a rising formula in the event the theatre expenses were not equalled by gross ticket sales. On the other hand the same film may be sold to an independent sub­ urban or country cinema for a minimum film hire of 50 per cent.

The independent exhibitor has no allowance for profit, and must pay an exorbitantly high film hire regardless of how the film performs. The dis­ tributors have attempted to justify this situation on the grounds that independent exhibitors have a tendency to ‘cheat’ in their film takings returns, but the independents argue that many of them have been forced to understate their returns to stay in business.6 (See Appendix C).

Further, the distributors have frequently provided long clearance periods after which a film has been played by the chains, before it can play the independents. Fox or UA may release a film to Hoyts city theatres where it may run for 10 weeks. At the conclusion of the run in the city, it may transfer immediately to a suburban"Hoyts cinema, or wait until it is programmed there, which may be up to six to 10 weeks. Follow­ ing its run through the suburban theatre or theatres, it will then rest for three to six weeks before it plays an eight drive-in. Hoyts splash for one week. Then a further period of weeks, generally four, must elapse before it is available to an independent exhibitor; by which time, of course, its money making potential is severely diminished.

The Tariff Board Report7 commented as follows: “Evidence was given by the MPDAA (Motion Picture Distributors Association of Australia — no Australian distribution company has membership) that, bad debtors apart, no ex­ hibitor is ever denied access to a film. In theory this may be so, but other evidence shows that in­ dependents often have little chance of exhibiting a film within a reasonable period of its first release. One owner of an independent suburban drive-in quoted the example of the film The Secret of Santa Vittoria which he contracted for after seeing the initial previews. It was subsequently played for three months in the city, and was ‘held over’ for a further six months before being releas­ ed to the suburbs (in this case to Hoyts). After that suburban release there was a further delay of eight to 10 weeks before it was released to the in­ dependent for showing at his drive-in.” (App.D) Since the Tariff Board Report a number of dis­ tributors, notably CIC, RoadshowfColumbia and

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

UA, have relaxed this rule to the extent that many independents are now granted access to a film prior to its drive-in splash. Only Roadshow, however, has allowed access of independents to a title while it is still playing its first city run, the normal pattern in the US and UK save for ‘hard ticket’* releases.

Further distribution sales methods to in­ dependents include the procedure known as ‘block booking’. This is a method used to ‘move’ the less successful films on the distributor’s books along with the more successful ones. It is defined as “where the right to exhibit one feature is con­ ditional upon the licensee’s taking of one or more other features” .

Cinema Center Group, a Canberra independent exhibitor comments: “Conditions frequently in­ clude a requirement for ‘block booking’ or the acceptance of a ‘package’. The ‘package’ in­ variably consists of one or more successful box-of­ fice films grouped with another product which has an indifferent to poor rating at the box-office.”8 Independent city houses are in a similar situation. The tying-up of virtually all available product for the major chains means that there is in fact virtually no competition for films in the Australian market. As I stated in my evidence to the Tariff Board concerning the Capitol Theatre, which was then a Melbourne independent house with a prime location and an excellent box-office record:9 “Subsequent to the amalgamation of MGM with BEF (in July 1971) it has been im­ possible for this theatre to obtain first release MGM products any longer. It is impossible in fact for the Capitol Theatre to acquire any product from any source. Four weeks ago, Capitol Theatre did not know what film it would be show­ ing next. Fortunately it chased up the Australian film Barry McKenzie and now it has a film to go onto next.”

In the past 12 months Prudential Theatres, the Capitol Theatres operators, were forced to tie their interests to Village Theatres in a complex deal which gave Village a 50 per cent interest and booking rights. Another independent Melbourne city theatre ceased to exist.

Discriminatory terms and indeed outright refusal to deal have been reported by various in­ dependent exhibitors. Many Victorian indepen­ dent exhibitors have, for example, built a sizeable business in the past few years by screening, either in theatres or in school premises, film versions of texts prescribed for upper secondary English and other subjects. Recently one of the major chains has bought into the school screenings market and have attempted to secure exclusive use of various text movies. Documentation concerning two ex­ amples of such practice are provided in Appendix E. As a result of such activities, the number of Australian-owned cinemas has decreased rapidly as Table 3 indicates. Table 4 compares the present ownership of those Melbourne cinemas indepen­ dent in 1966-67 with their ownership in 1971-72 and their ownership in 1974. The trend in ownership patterns is similar in other capital cities. ♦ Industry term for an anticipated high grossing release.

TABLE 4: PRESENT OWNERSHIP OF CINEMAS INDEPENDENT IN 1966-67 (MELBOURNE) 1966-67 Albany Century (now Swanston) Australia (now Australia 1) Curzon (now Australia 2) Palladium (now Eastend 1 and Eastend 3) Em bassy (now Eastend 2) Capitol Star

All now operated

by City Theatres, a subsidiary of Village Theatres

All now operated

by City Theatres: a subsidiary of Village

Independent Operated in association with Village

Operated in association with Village

The three main Australian chains in fact con­ trol over 75 per cent of the city locations in Australia and as these account for the vast ma­ jority of first release houses, they have a strong in­ fluence in the exhibition field. In the past three years Melbourne has acquired three new indepen­ dent first release houses, Sydney two, Adelaide one and H obart one. The three major chains have acquired three each in Brisbane, Sydney and Perth, two in Melbourne and one in Hobart. This trend towards an increase in the number of city locations controlled by the three major companies appears to be further on the in­ crease if plans already announced for 1975-76 come to fruition. Table 5 shows the actual number of cinema seats controlled by the majors and is a further indication of their strength.

TABLE

5: C I NE MA SEATS THE MAJORS

City Melbourne Sydney Adelaide Perth Brisbane Hobart

1974

1971-72

> Sydney, which was vetoed after Greater Union lodged an objection with the Commission10, is an example of their alleged bias. They operate in vir­ tual secrecy, and do not make annual reports.

One major effect as a result of the duopoly programming policies is that much less choice is available to filmgoers in a particular week than would otherwise be the case. Village’s blanket release policy in Victoria — yirtually one program a week on its drive-in circuit — has, perforce, been followed by Hoyts (which used to provide a choice of three different- programs).

Thus, instead of the choice of six to eight programs which the public had to choose from in an average week when the independent Bix 6 Chain11 were competing with Village or Hoyts, there is now a mere two or three.

IN CAPITALS CONTROLLED BY

Total Seats

Total controlled

Percentage controlled

20,125 21,068 7,331 6,678 6,242 2,300

18,911 20,318 7,011 3,865 6,242 2,300

93 96 95 58

Further, it is claimed that the effects of the Theatres and Films Commission in NSW (allegedly to be abolished in 1974) and in Queensland — the former run by a former ex­ ecutive of Greater Union, Mr Hayward and the latter run by the Queensland Lands Minister, Mr McKechnie — has aggressively supported the status quo. Both these bodies administer the licensing requirements of the Cinematograph Films Acts of their respective states. They are concerned with the requirements for cinema operation (in Victoria, SA and WA the field is wide open). The notorious example of the propos­ ed cinema in the Oxford Square Development,

100 100

Further, the power of the duopoly has forced a continuous stream of reactionary thinking con­ cerning cinema activities on the Australian public.

They used every means at their disposal to prevent the introduction of the ‘R’ certificate legislation; they fought against the introduction of daylight saving; and they fought against the introduction of Sunday screenings (till 1971 Victorian cinemas were unable to open before 8.30 p.m. on Sun­ days). They have resisted moves towards 16mm installation. In short, they initially opposed many of the progressive moves that have been mooted in recent years in the Australian film industry.

TABLE 3: NUMBER OF SUBURBAN INDEPENDENT CINEMAS 1966-67

Victoria NSW S . Australia W. Australia Tasmania Queensland ... , • . ■. . c. .,.c. ' ■•- i .. ÛU

■ :.;,;c-j.

29 28 12 20 0 36

1971-72

1974

Decrease

24 21 10 8.

0 27

16 16 8 6 0 21

13 12 4 14 0 15

Cinema Papers, March-April — 37

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

OVERSEAS REACTION TO FILM INDUSTRY MONOPOLIES -T H E UNITED STATES '

History of Anti-Trust in the US

The Attorney-General’s Committee Report in 1955 stated that the general objective of the anti­ trust laws of the US is “promotion of competition in open markets”. During the second half of the nineteenth century the emergence and growth of large industrial trusts and combines led to increas­ ing demands for legislative intervention to restrict the ever increasing concentration of economic power and the resultant restraint of trade, produc­ ing higher prices, production restrictions and other market controls detrimental to the public interest.

The original anti-trust statute introduced to meet these demands was the Sherman Act of 1890 which prohibited inter alia: (1) Every contract combination or conspiracy in restraint of inter­ state or foreign trade or commerce of the US; and (2) the monopolization or attempt or conspiracy to monopolize any part of such trade or com­ merce.

Offenders faced equity and/or criminal proceedings at the suit of the Attorney-General and private treble damages suits. The Sherman Act was supplemented by the enactment of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Acts of 1914. The former established a new ad­ ministrative body with wide investigatory powers and the authority to issue orders directing offenders to “cease and desist” from indicted practices. The latter Act enumerated certain prac­ tices which were outside the scope of the Sherman Act, but would be prohibited if their probable effect was “to substantially lessen competition or tend to create monopoly”. Federal Trade Com­ mission could enforce the Act and again private treble damages suits were provided for.

The growth of huge chains (not just in the film industry, but also in retail selling) in the thirties to the detriment of the smaller, independent operators led to the enactment of the RobinsonPatman Act of 1936 which tightened the price dis­ crimination provisions of the Clayton Act. The Act prohibited unjustified price discrimination whose effect may be substantially to lessen com­ petition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure or destroy or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimina­ tion or with customers of either of them”.

Defences to actions could include a cost justification for a price differential or an attempt to show that the lower price was made in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor.

Again enforcement rests with either the Attorney­ General and the Federal Trade Commissioner and private treble damages suits are maintainable.

The motion picture industry and Anti-Trust:

The motion picture industry in the US has provided the courts with some difficult exercises in applying the above acts and in distinguishing mere similarity of action on the part of the major companies from collusion between them. There are, of course, sound reasons for not treating all cinemas alike. At the same time there are power­ ful incentives, too, to indulge in restrictive ac­ tivities. It is proposed firstly to examine the struc­ ture of the film industry in the thirties and then to overview the pre-Paramount cases before ventur­ ing onto the consent decrees and_ US v.

Paramount Pictures.12 During the 1930s there were five major com­ panies which had substantial interests in produc­ 38 — Cinema Papers, March-April

tion, distribution and exhibition in the US. They each had their own studios which they used largely for the production of their own films, and they maintained their own ‘stables’ of artists, producers, directors and technicians. They each had important circuits of cinemas, the smallest of which contained over 100 cinemas and the largest well over 1,000. There were also three other com­ panies of importance, of which two were engaged in production and distribution, and the other in distribution only. The five integrated companies have commonly been referred to as the majors and the other three as satellites.

Various attempts were made, with limited suc­ cess in the thirties, to curb some of the excesses of the majors. Concerted refusals to deal save on certain restrictive terms were discussed in Paramount Famous Lasky v. US'3 in 1930. The defendant film producers and distributors agreed that they would contract with exhibitors only un­ der a standard contract requiring exhibitors to submit all disputes to arbitration or to post a $500 deposit with each distributor. An exhibitor’s failure to comply with any one contract with one distributor is grounds for all distributors’ suspending service on all their contracts with the exhibitor. Holding that a violation of the Sherman Act had been proved Mr. Justice McReynolds said: “It may be that arbitration is well adapted to the needs of the motion picture in­ dustry, but when under the guise of arbitration parties enter into unusual arrangements which un­ reasonably suppress normal competition their ac­ tions become illegal”.

A precursor to the Paramount case was Inter­ state Circuit v. US15 in which there were two groups of defendants — eight motion picture dis­ tributors in one group, and two large cinema cir­ cuits operating in Texas and Mexico in the other.

The two companies were affiliated and run by the same people. The Interstate Circuit had an almost complete monopoly of first run cinemas in six Texas cities. The Consolidated Circuit operated in various cities of the Rio Grande valley and elsewhere and in most of the leading cities had no competition for first runs.

In 1934, the manager of both circuits sent a letter of demand to each of the eight major dis­ tributors asking that they should set a minimum admission price for subsequent runs of those pic­ tures which the two circuits took on first runs. A second demand was that these pictures should not later be exhibited as part of double bills. The pur­ pose of the demands was to protect the box-office potential of the first runs as the public would know they would not be able to see two programs together later at a lower price. The letter was worded so that each distributor knew the others had received a similar letter. After some dis­ cussions the demands were met. The Supreme Court held that a conspiracy by the distributors could be inferred from their course of conduct: Justice Stone said: “ It taxes credibility to believe that several distributors could, in the cir­ cumstances, have accepted and put into operation with substantial equanimity such far reaching changes in their business methods without some understanding that all were to join, and we reject as beyond the range of possibility that it was the result of mere chance.”

In 1938, the US Department of Justice began litigation under the Sherman Act against the ma­ jors and the satellites. It sought to compel them to abandon various allegedly unfair and monopolistic practices. Also in the case of the five majors it sought to divorce their exhibition in­ terests from their production and distribution in­ terests, as well as to divest the successor exhibi­

J

•

tion companies themselves of some of their cinemas.

In 1940, the case was halted as far as the maiors were concerned, by consent decrees under which the companies undertook to abandon a con­ siderable number of the contentious practices, provided the Department of Justice dropped its demand for divorcements of production and dis­ tribution from exhibition. In 1944, however, the Government revived its demand for divorcement.

Oppenheim and Weston16 trace a number of cases that occurred virtually simultaneously with the crucial Paramount case. In US v. Griffith17 four corporations that controlled various cinemas had 62 per cent of its circuit in closed towns (i.e. towns in which there was no competing theatre).

In negotiating films for the circuit from the dis­ tributors, the corporations lumped together towns in which they had no competition and those generally licensed first run release for their theatres of all films to be released by a distributor in a year, and they frequently included second run towns rental in their first run film hire.

The complainant charged “that certain ex­ clusive privileges which the agreements granted the appellant exhibitors over their competitors un­ reasonably restrained competition by preventing their competitors from obtaining enough first or second run films from the distributors to operate successfully”. These privileges included first choice of available film. It was claimed that the use of the buying power of the entire circuit in ac­ quiring these privileges violated the Act. Mr Justice Douglas commented: “Monopoly rights in the form of certain exclusive privileges were bargained for and obtained. These exclusive privileges being acquired by the use of monopoly power were unlawfully acquired.” He further noted: “It is not always necessary to find a specific intent to restrain trade or to build a monopoly in order to find that the anti-trust laws have been violated. It is sufficient that a restraint of trade or monopoly results as the consequences of a defendant’s conduct or business arrangements.”

The matter was remitted to the District Court which ordered an injunction restraining the ex­ hibitors from licensing films for their closed towns and competitive towns in a single contract.

The companion case to Griffith is Schine Chain Theatres. v. United States'8 where the court held that a theatre circuit and subsidiaries conspired to restrain trade. The court upheld the view that the circuit’s monopoly power, represented by combin­ ing the buying power of its theatres in open and closed towns which enabled it to deprive com­ petitors of first and second run films and to main­ tain long-term film rental agreements, had been used. Schine had threatened to build or open theatres to force sales of theatres or prevent entries and obtained covenants not to compete from competitors it bought out. Further it had cut admission prices and engaged in other unfair practices.

Mr Justice Douglas commented: “The combin­ ed-action was a conspiracy.”

Paramount and beyond:

The final 1948-52 consent decrees were brought about via United States v. Paramount Pictures'9 in which the major and satellite distributors were held guilty of a conspiracy to restrain and monopolize trade in the distribution of films. The Continued on P.82

Top: Rider on the Rain: Women are present as background extras to forbear, be ignored, slapped or raped.

Centre: The Mean Machine: exulting the all-male world of mythical rugged creatures who are either indifferent or hostile to women.

Below: The Last Detail: celebrating manhood — mateship and man against the elements.

By Patricia Edgar

SLAPPED,

For the past eight years the Academy Award for the ‘Best Picture of the Year’ has gone to a Film without a major female role: A Man for All Seasons, In the Heat of the Night, Oliver, Mid­ night Cowboy, Patton, The French Connection, The Godfather and The Sting.

To this list could be added another series of successful films which exalt the all-male world of mythical rugged creatures, who are either in­ different or hostile to women. They are: Easy Rider, The Wild Bunch, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Deliverance, The Candidate, M*A*S*H, The Friends of Eddie Coyle, Scarecrow, Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, Five Easy Pieces and The Last Detail.

Then there’s the super-cop series — The French Connection, Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, The Stone Killer and McQ. Film policemen have become very popular subjects in the 70’s.

There are several themes included in this cinema celebration of manhood — mateship, man against the elements, the search for meaning in life, competition, stability in a lawless society —

AND IGNORED

all of which are worthy themes. But they are all being explored without women. The key relationships are between men. Women, if they are included at all, serve only as whores, mothers, sisters and irrelevant wives. Women are present as background extras to forbear, be ignored, slapped or raped.

There are, of course, a few exceptions. There have always been popular songbirds in Films which are built around their talent — like Barbra Streisand and Liza Minnelli. They dominate their Films and their male co-stars are simply foils for their vitality. As a result, Michael York’s perfor­ mance in Cabaret was much underrated by the critics and, in praising Liza Minnelli, they failed to recognize that her accomplished stage perfor­ mances were quite out of keeping with the inept, struggling performer Sally Bowes was meant to be. In Funny Girl, On a Clear Day You Can See Forever, and Hello Dolly, Barbra Streisand runs rings around her male co-stars.

But these Films are no substitute for the matching of minds that occurred when Katherine Cinema Papers, March-April — 39

40 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Cinema Papers, March-April

Illustration by Greg McAlpine

RAPED & IGNORED

Hepburn met Spencer Tracy or Cary Grant and Bogart met Bacall. In fact the prostitute seems to be the only type of contemporary woman scriptwriters and directors are now comfortable with. She is the only female who has been allowed to become the romantic interest in film roles with some depth — Jane Fonda in Klute, Barbra Strei­ sand in The Owl and the Pussycat, Julie Christie in McCabe and Mrs. Miller. These women are the remnants of the tough heroines of the thirties and forties.

Until now every period in cinema history has had its female heroines such as Mae Marsh and Lillian Gish, Mary Pickford, Theda Bara, Gloria Swanson, Garbo, Constance Bennett, Jean Arthur, Carole Lombard, Jean Harlow, Claudette Colbert, Katherine Hepburn, Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Lana Turner, Barbara Stanwyck, Susan Hayward, Rosalind Russell. They played virgins, vamps, adulteresses, neurotics and murderesses in parts that would not be appropriate today, but they were worthy of a competent actress. Today’s actresses are not so fortunate. They are not even today’s sex symbols.

Streisand drools over Redford’s body in The Way We Were and Jack Nicholson has the centre of the screen, while Faye Dunaway’s head lies ad­ miringly at the edge of the frame in the bedroom scene in Chinatown.

12 to 1 in current American films is worth deeper study. How can we explain the dominance of men and the disappearance of women in American films today?

IOLENT adventure films have always been popular with audiences. Our tolerance of screen violence has un­ doubtedly increased over the years. One of the popular myths has been that women and violence don’t, or should not, mix. So is the increase in films of violence part of the ex­ planation? The Western and Gangster genres have usually treated women as ornaments but they are now being written out of these films altogether — unless of course they are needed to be murdered or raped more viciously than previously. films provide no substitute for the matching of Are women slowing down the action in such Today'sminds that occurred when Bogart met Bacall. films? According to David Denby, women are be­ ing written out to “avoid any slowing down of the While some women are pushing strongly for slam-bang stuff’. Such an argument doesn’t changes which will alter profoundly the wash. Not today when we have the Rose social relationships between the sexes and having some Dugdales, the Price sisters, the Leila Khaleds, success, men and women are uneasy. Whether it is Ulrike Meinhofs, the Symbionese Liberation a conscious or unconscious response by film­ Army and Patricia Hearst: hi-jacking, kidnap­ makers a most opportune time to promote ping, robbing banks and art galleries, throwing masculineit ismythology. myth represents the bombs. There is ample evidence for scripwriters fantasy some men wantThe to retain. Whereas once that women in Western society can hold their own we believed firmly in marriage, motherhood and and get to the top in crime. the family, now we believe in rugged in­ If the ‘women-don’t-commit-violence’ myth has dividualism, not been shattered yet, other myths have. between men. man against the world and. love Conventional relationships, happy endings and The cinema reflects social trends. The dis­ marriage are definitely out and since women are appearance of women and exaltation of men is no usually associated with all those things, they’re doubt passing phase. There should be out too. Romance is gone but sex is in. Sexual much toanother forward to, for when the filmmakers liberation makes conversation unnecessary, so all turn theirlookattention women there will be so the wit and wisecracks of the old romance films much virgin territoryto for the creation of new have become redundant. A Touch of Class tries to myths; revive romance with a realistic modern touch; the area is the Western. Jenni Calder in her liberated woman takes on a lover for her own con­ newOnebook4 on the realities and myths behind the venience and satisfaction. While the film is enter­ women of the Old West discusses the potential taining in parts, it is unconvincing. We are ex­ legends that have been overlooked in the Western pected to believe that the vicious confrontation between Glenda Jackson and George Segal, and genre.

The modern Western heroine has become more what it reveals, is forgotten once the two fall into versatile.

She does as well as the hostess in an bed. evening gown as she does on a horse, and she’s HIS so-called new realism in films is socially at ease with State governors and cow­ simply a new myth. It is more ‘honest’ to boys. But when the crunch comes she’s the symbol make films about deteriorating of community and conformity. relationships than fulfilling relationships, The hero, fighter and drifter, has to ride off because that’s the way it is. It is more womanless to retain his integrity, for the effect of ‘honest’ to make films about corruption, aliena­ the Western heroine’s influence can only be tion and the complexity of life, for that’s theparalyzing. life In the history of the West, of course, about us. But the ‘realism’ portrayed is justthere as were women who did not negate their men. fake as the myths that have long been shattered.

Their stories are untold on film and they must The America of Easy Rider, Midnight Cowboy provide a bonanza for filmmakers. They are and other male epics is ‘nowhere land’, where men necessary to regenerate the Western and only are sublime when they are pathetic and noble women who share the mythic potency will protect when they are absurd. The increased blood, the legend. obscenities, grubbiness, sweat and tears in these HEN more women filmmakers films provide a cloak of neo-realism, but it’s simp­ with a knowledge of their own ly covering a new myth. Part of the myth is the history and a political sense of the depiction of a world without women; a vacuum present become integrated into where women can’t intrude on the essential commercial filmmaking, there will masculine intimacy; where men are somehow be a change. But the change will not come w more divine than women can ever be. effort.

Women need to articulate and establish a Why is this new myth so popular? It’s hard to to what is also rightfully theirs. If this is believe that women’s liberation can be respon­ claim we can look forward to a new screen iden­ sible, that it “has paralyzed the film com­ done and with it, perhaps, some fun will return to panies”3 as David Denby claims. Looking from tity, Australia it’s even more difficult to accept that films. claim. No one has proposed here that Barry McKenzie, Alvin Purple and Petersen represent a FOOTNOTES: backlash against the rising militancy of 1.

Mellen, Joan, Women and Their Sexuality in the New Film, Australian women. Australian women haven’t Davis Poynter, 1974 done anything.

Rosen, Marjorie, Popcorn Venus, 1974 Yet it is ironic that at a time when many women Haskell, Molly, From Reverence to Rape, Holt, Rinehart have seized on a more productive and selfand Winston, 1974 Walters, Margaret, “At Odds With the Image”, Spare Rib, actualising life style than ever before, the film No. 25, pp. 36-38 industry has turned away from reflecting it in any Denby, David, “ Men Without Women, Women Without constructive or analytical way. On one level we Men”, Harpers, Sept. ’73, pp. 51-54 have the si.ck chauvinism of Policewomen, The Bennett, Colin, “ Hollywood cannot cope with modern The Age, August 17,1973 Female Bunch and The Doll Squad. On another 2. woman”, Denby, David, op. cit., p.54 we have the masochism of Diary of a Mad 3. Ibid., Housewife, Play It as It Lays and Such Good 4. Calder,p.54Jenni, There Must be a Lone Ranger, Hamish Hamilton, 1974 Friends.

V

T

Above: Barbra Streisand, a popular songbird.

Top: Liza Minnelli in Cabaret: a foil for the vitality of her male co-star.

T has become fashionable to make the claim that women are neglected in current movies. Joan Mellen, Marjorie Rosen, Molly Haskell, Margaret Walters, David Denby and Colin Bennett*12have all done so relatively recently.

It has become unpopular, too. It’s always been easier to send up the feminists’ claims than to con­ tribute further analysis which might add some in­ sight.

This commentary on modern films doesn’t stem from a desire to have screen roles with women winning all the points.. It doesn’t assume that the filmmakers automatically endorse the values represented in many of the films men­ tioned. It doesn’t see a conspiracy as the ex­ planation.

The fact that male roles outnumber female by

I

W

.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 41

TOP TEN JANUARY

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

The Baby (T. Post) La Samourai (The Godson) (J.P. Melville) Legend of Hellhouse (J. Hough) Fever (A. Bo) Lady Ice (T. Grles) The Neptune Factor (D. Petrie) Kid Blue (J. Crawley) Legend of Frenchie King (C. Jacque) A Gunfight (L. Johnson) Threesome (L. Beale) Man from the East (Clucher) French Sexy Go Round (Fleury) 13. Sex in the Office FEBRUARY

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

Carmen Baby (R. Metzger) Virgin & The Vampire (Caged Virgins) (J.P. Rollln) Horrible Sexy Vam pire (Davidson) la m Curious Yellow (V. Sjoman) Westworld (Crichton) Lady Kung Fu (Klang) Quiet Days in Clichy (Thorsen) The Amazons (A. Bradley) Naked Decameron (P. Vlvarelll) Jonathon Livingstone Seagull (Bartlett) The Mackintosh Man (Huston) The Sensualist (Verhoeven) The Way W e W ere (S. Pollack) Kill Charley Varrick (Siegel) Emperor of the North (Aldrich) Trash (Morrissey) 4 Dimensions of Greta (Walker) The Dirt Gang ->■ The Booby Trap (D. Avery) Love (Mark) Dear Parents (Salerno) School Girl Report

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

In 1974 well over 300 movies were released in Melbourne and Sydney — many of which have never been seen anywhere else in the world outside Lon­ don’s West End, New York and Paris. A large proportion of these were cheap skin flicks. In fact, 1974 saw a number of well established cinemas switch to showing exclusively “R” releases and a record was set for the number of soft and medium core movies on our screens.

Last year cinema attendances were once again on the increase and the latest figures from overseas indicate that Australia is now America’s third most important market after Britain and France (moving up from fifth place in 1973).

As the number of entries in this year’s Australian Film Awards vividly il­ lustrates (see pages 24 and 25) 1974 saw a dramatic increase in the production of Australian feature movies, documentaries and shorts. Although some of these have been released both theatrically and on television — with varying degrees of success — the real spotlight will fall on the achievements of the new industry in 1975.

In this special feature Cinema Papers has invited Australia’s leading critics to make a selection of the top 10 movies of 1974 from a listing of all theatrical releases as well as through festivals and other non-theatrical screenings.

This list has been reproduced below. It should be pointed out that because of erratic release patterns, many of the movies on this list may not have been released in some capital cities.

M ARCH

36.

37.

36.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

Tombs of the Blind Dead (A. De Ossorlo) Dracula Prisoner of Frenkenstein (C. Brown)

Stock Car Hero (L. Johnson) Man from Deep River (U. Lenzl) Venus in Furs (Damlano) The Exorcist (Frledkln) Brian's Song (Kullk) The Other Canterbury Tales (Guerlnl)

Sex on Wheels 45. Ooh You Are Awful 46. Breezy (Eastwood) 47. Day for Night (Truffaut) 48. Canterbury Tales (Pasolini) 49. Comm uter Husbands (Ford) 50. Man Who Loved Cat Dancing (Saraflan) 51. Le Sex Shop (Berri) 52. Heavy Traffic (Baskhi) APRIL

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

The Sting (G.R. Hill) Papillon (Schaffner) Swedish Wild Cats (Sarno) Black Belt Jones (R. Clouse) Guess Who’s Sleeping in my Bed Los Olvidados (Buñuel) The Don is Dead (Fleischer) Massage Parlour (E. Schroeder) Blazing Saddles (Brooks) Outlaw Riders (T. Houston) Corpse Grinders (T.V. Mlkels) Ash Wednesday (L. Pearce) Marne (G. Saks) Save the Tiger (J.G. Avlldsen) McQ (Sturges) Don't Look Now (Roeg) School Girl Report, Part 2

MAY

70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

Dillinger (Mlllus) Day of the Dolphin (Nichols) That’ll be the Day (C. Watham) American Graffiti (Lucas) Leo the Last (Boorman) Badlands (Malik) Deep th ro a t Part 2 Cesar et Rosalie (Sautet) Death on a Horse (Petronl) Hamm er (Clark)

JUNE

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

69.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

The Paper Chase (Bridges) Kazablan (Golar) Electra Glide in Blue (Guerclo;) Last Detail (Ashby) I Am Frigid, Why? (Pecas) Tales That Witness Madness (Francis) The Angry Dragon Exposed (G. Wlcklund) Long Swift Sword of Siegfried (A. Hoven) Slaves of Sex Even Angels Eat Beans (Clucher) Summ er Wishes W inter Dreams (G. Cates) The Midnight Man (Klbbee and Lancaster) Love in 3D (Boos) Don’t Just Lie There Say Something (B. Kellett) Nearest and Dearest The Butcher (Chabrol)

42 — Cinema Papers, March-April

JULY

97.

98.

99.

100.

101.

102.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

109.

110.

111.

112.

113.

114.

115.

Stone (S. Harbutt) My Name is Nobody Love Hotel Siddhartha' (Rooks) Crazy Joe (Llzzlanl) Quintana (Harris) Please Don’t Touch me I’m a Virgin The Doll Squad (Mlkels) The Female Bunch (Lewis) The Teacher (Avldls)

27A (Storm) White Lightning (Sargent) Across 110th Street (Shear) The Conversation (Coppola) The Outfit (Flynn) Weekend Murders (Lupo) Lady Godiva Rides The Policewoman (Avakian) Run Angel Run

AUGUST 116. M adame Sin (Greene) 117. Carry on Girls (Rogers) 118. Lonely Wives (Frank) 119. Diary of a Nymphomaniac (Brown) 120. Cleopatra Jones (Starrett) 121. Serpico (Lumet) 122. The Dove (Jarrott) 123. Maid in Sweden 124. The Wickerman (Hardy) 125. M arianne’s Temptations (Leroi) 126. Schlock (Landis) 127. Sunshine (Sargent) 128. Richard 129. Optimists of 9 Elms (Simmons) 130. Sex & the other Woman (Long) 131. Secret Rites 132. Super Dad (McEveety) 133. Amarcord (Fellini) 134. The Magnificent (De Broca) 135. Revenge of Dr. Death (J. Clark) 136. No. 96 (P. Bernados) 137. What Will I Tell the Boys at the Station? (O’Reilly) '138. The Great Gatsby (J. Clayton) 139. Resort Girls 140. The Gentle Sex (Casarll) 141. Guilty Until Proven Innocent (Loy) 142. Three Musketeers (R. Lester)

SEPTEMBER 143. Daisy M iller (P. Bogdanovltch) 144. Erotic Adventures of Zorro (Friedman) 145. All The Way Boys (Clucher) 146. Jory (J. Fors) 147. Seduction of Mimi (Wertmuller) 148. Yakkety Yak (Jones) 149. Wet Dreams (Multiple) 150. Super Cops (Paths) 151 The Stewardesses (Sillman Jnr.) 152. Busting ( H y a m s ) 153. The Pawnbrokers (J. Lindsay, L. Barnett) 154. Keep it up Jack (Ford) 155. Soft Beds Hard Battles (Boulting) 156. Truck Stop Women (M L. Lester) 157. Death Wish (Winner) 158. Mr. Majestyk (Fleischer) 159. Man Called Noon (Colllnson) 160. New One Armed Swordsman 161. The Devils Angels (Haller) 162. Angel Unchained 163. Black Windmill (Siegel) 164. Matchless (Papadopoulos) OCTOBER

165.

166.

167.

168.

169.

170.

171.

172.

173.

174.

175.

176.

177.

178.

179.

180.

181.

182.

183.

184.

185.

186.

187.

188.

189.

190.

191.

192.

193.

194.

195.

196.

Marijuana: Possession & The Law (Carey) Spys (Kershner) Best of Benny Hill (J. Robins) Holiday on the Buses (Izzaro) Sex Clinic 74 (Schroeder) Roommates (A. Marks) Class of 77 (A. Marks) Cars That Ate Paris (P. Weir) For Pete’s Sake (P. Yates) Sugarland Express (S. Speilberg) Man on a Swing (Perry) Warhol's Flesh for Frankenstein (Morrissey) Golden Needles (R. Clouse) Zandy’s Bride (Troell) Sleeper (Allen) Billy Two Hats (Kotcheff) Goodbye Stork Goodbye (Summer) Swinging Wives (Thorn) Andrei Rublev (Tarkovsky) Percy’s Progress (Thomas) The 7-Ups (De Antoni) Honor Thy Father Under the Covers (Arnotrum) Juggernaut (Lester) Petersen (T. Burstall) Little Miss Innocence (Warfield) Hot Lips (Kalfon) Zapata A City’s Child (Kavanagh) Doll’s House Slaughter’s Big Rip Off (Douglas) Paul & Michelle (Gilbert)

N OVEM BER 197. Parallax View (Pakula) 198. The Sex Thief (M. Cambell) 199. Frustrated Wives (Arnold) 200. Pictures at an Exhibition 201. Vampira (Conner) 202. Dirty Mary Crazy Larry (J. Hough) 203. Baxter (L. Jeffries) 204. Kamouraska (Jutra) 205. Airport ’75 (Smight) 206. Chosen Survivors (Rolley) 207. Dirty Money (Melville) 208. Troll (V. Sjoman) 209. Way of the Dragon (B. Lee) 210. Wide Open (G. Wlcklund) 211. Camille 2000 (Metzger) 212. Hot Bed of Sex 213. Money Money Money (Lelouch) 214. Love in the Suburbs 215. Black Belt (Shlng) 216. Girl from Petrovka (Ellis Miller) 217. Horror Hospital (Balch) 218. World Sex Report 219. Pets 220. Bunny Caper (Arnold) 221. Newman’s Law (Heffron) 222. School for Swingers 223. The Big Bird Cage (Hill) 224. Wonderwomen (O’Neill) 225. The Winners (Nofal) 226. Legend of 7 Golden Vampires (Baker) 227. Tamarind Seed (Edwards) 228. Cinderella Liberty (Rydell) 229. Investigation of Murder (Rosenberg) 230. Ericka’s Hot Summers (Novak) 231. Maris in Lace (Novak) 232. The Marseille Contract (Parrish) 233. Beach of the War Gods (Lo Wei) 234. Doberman Gang (Davids) 235. Exorcism’s Daughter 236. Detroit 9000 DECEMBER ' 237. That’s Entertainment (Haley Jnr.) 238. War Goddesses (Young) 239. The Long Goodbye (Altman) 240. Girls with Open Lips 241. The Blockhouse (Reeve) 242. Raw Meat (Sherman) 243. Fright (Colllnson) 244. Barry McKenzie Holds His Own (Beresford) 245. Benji (T. Camp) .

246. Full Time Females 247. The Female Response (T. Kincaid) 248. Earthquake (Robson) 249. Robin Hood (Peltherman) 250. Herbie Rides Again (R. Stevenson) 251. Ladies & Gentleman: The Rolling Stones 252. Thunderbolt A Lightfoot (M. Cimlno) 253. Alvin Rides Again (Bllcock & Copping) 254. The Odessa File (R. Neame) 255. Piaf (Casarll) 256. Nurses Report FESTIVAL: MELBOURNE A SYDNEY

„

Adult Fun (Scott) Asylum (Robinson) Belle (Delvaux) Between Friends (Sheblb) Black Holiday (Leto) Blood Wedding (Chabrol) Chung Kuo: China (Antonioni) Coup D’Etat (Yoshida) Days of Betrayal (Vavra) 'D istant Thunder (Ray) Earth, Our Sinful Song (Mollberg) Giron (Herrera) Goalie’s Fear of Penalty (Wenders) Heart’s Desire (Drujlnlna) Here Comes Everybody (Whitmore) History of Post-War Japan (Imamura) Illumination (Zanussl) Invitation (Goretta) Love in the Afternoon (Rohmer) Mean Streets (Scorsese) One Man’s W ar (Jarva) Overnight (Thome) Pedestrian, The (Schell) Photography (Zolnay) Pirosomani (Shengelaya) Rejeanne Padovani (Arcand) Return from Africa (Tanner) ‘ Sinbad (Huszarlk) Spirit of the Beehive (Erlce) Sweet Games of Last Summer (Herz) Themroc (Faraldo) That Sweet Word Liberty(Jacakyavlchus) Timon (Papic) Traitors, The (Gleyzer) Village Performance of Hamlet (Papic) Wanderers, The (Ichikawa) Wedding, The (Wajda)

And films seen at the Perth, Adelaide, Canberra Brisbane Festivals and N.F.T.A.

TOP TEN

Australian Broadcasting Commission

b ra id -

Andrew McKay

Amarcord (Fellini) Day for Night Truffaut) The Last Detail (Ashby) Save the Tiger (Avildson) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) The Long Goodbye (Altman) Electra Glide in Blue (Guercio) Kill Charley Varrick (Siegel) Serpico (Lumet) 27A (Storm)

♦

John O’Hara

Love (Makk) Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie Day for Night (Truffaut) (Bunuel) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) Los Olvidados (Bunuel) The Conversation (Coppola) Mean Streets (Scorsese) Amarcord (Fellini) The Conversation (Coppola) Seduction of Mimi (Wertmuller) Chinatown (Polanski) Rublev (Tarkovsky) Ladies and Gentlemen: The Rolling Andrei Goalie’s Fear of Penalty (Wenders) Stones (M. Spector) Love in the Afternoon (Rohmer) Themroc (Faraldo) Andrei Rublev (Tarkovsky) The Wedding (Wajda) Flesh for Frankenstein (Morrissey) Tim Pigott

Colin Bennett-

Mike Harris

Day for Night (Truffaut) Love (Makk) The Last Detail (Ashby) The Mother and the Whore Los Olvidados (Buñuel) (Eustache) Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie Coup d’Etat (Yoshida) (Buñuel) Black Holiday (Leto) The Adversary (Ray) Spirit of the Beehive (Erice).

Company Limited (Ray) Death of a Flea-Circus Director Serpico (Lumet) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) (Koerfer) Andrei Rublev (Tarkovsky) Duel (Speilberg) Land of Silence and Darkness (Herzog) Blood Wedding (Chabrol) The Three Musketeers (Lester) Belle (Andre Delvaux) Jack Clancy Day for Night (Truffaut) Mary Armitage Los Olvidados (Buñuel) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) The Last Detail (Ashby) The Last Detail (Ashby) Save the Tiger (Avildson) Le Boucher (Chabrol) Optimists of Nine Elms (Simmons) The Conversation (Coppola) Piaf (Casarii) Amarcord (Fellini) Bill Howie Cries and Whispers (Bergman) Andrei Rublev (Tarkovsky) Siddharta (Rooks) Return from Africa (Tanner) Cinderella Liberty (Rydell) Badlands (Malik) Sinbad (Huszanik) The Long Goodbye (Altman) The Cars that Ate Paris (Weir) The Wedding (Wajda) (Fellini) The Spider’s Strategy (Bertolucci) Amarcord That’s Entertainment (Haley Jnr.) THE BULLETIN Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (Buñuel) Sandra Hall The Sting (Hill) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) American Graffiti (Lucas) Day for Night (Truffaut) Duel (Speilberg) Happiest Days of your Life The Last Detail (Ashby) The Conversation (Coppola) (Launder) The Pedestrian (Schell) The Sting (Hill) * The Long Goodbye (Altman) Blazing Saddles (Brooks) Blanche (Borowczyk) Kill Charley Varrick (Siegel) ADVERTISER NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

Day for Night (Truffaut) The Sting (Hill) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) The Last Detail (Ashby) Love (Makk) The Exorcist (Friedkin) Daisy Miller (Bogdanovich) The Great Gatsby (Clayton) The Three Musketeers (Lester) The Parallax View (Pakula)

THE AGE

MRROR AUSTRALIAN TELEGRAPH PUBLICATIONS

Mean Streets (Scorsese) The Pedestrian (Schell) Kill Charley Varrick (Siegel) Day for Night (Truffaut) Los Olvidados (Buñuel) Blazing Saddles (Brooks) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) The Conversation (Coppola) Amarcord (Fellini) Three Musketeers (Lester)

Jim Murphy

Scott Murray

Ivan Hutchinson

Badlands (Malik) Don’t Look Now (Roeg) The Conversation (Coppola) Electra Glide in Blue (Guercio) The Seduction of Mimi (Wertmuller) Kamouraska (Jutra) * The Paper Chase (Bridges) Day for Night (Truffaut) The Exorcist (Friedkin) INDEPENDENT Antony I. Ginnane

The Samourai (Melville) Kid Blue (Crawley) Emperor of the North (Aldrich) Kill Charley Varrick (Siegel) Day for Night (Truffaut) Badlands (Malik) Le Boucher (Chabrol) Truck Stop Women (Lester) Sugarland Express (Spielberg) The Long Goodbye (Altman)

Cinema Papers, March-April — 43

Charles Chauvel stands with Raymond Longford and Ken G. Hall as one of the three great Australian directors of commercial entertainment films. Although his body of work was relatively small and spread over a period of nearly 30 years, Chauvel emerged after World War 2 as the only director of any note to persevere with production in the repressive context of increasing foreign con­ trol of Australian cinemas. He maintained this struggle until his death in 1959.

Chauvel was born in 1897 in rural Queensland.

He spent most of his boyhood on country proper­ ties before going to Sydney to study art and drama. In Sydney he found work as a stable hand on two Australian ‘westerns’ — The Shadow of Lightning Ridge and The Jackeroo of Coolabong — made by Snowy Baker.

When Baker went to Hollywood, Chauvel followed him and spent two years writing articles on Australiana and doing minor jobs in Hollywood studios — as an extra in Fly by Night and The Man From the Desert and as a hand in the property department at MGM. Eventually he became assistant director to Fred Niblo on Strangers of the Night.

Chauvel returned to Australia in 1923 and resolved to direct his own films. By 1925 he had completed his first feature, The Moth of Moonbi.

This and his next film, Greenhide, were produced under makeshift conditions in the Queensland bush and in a small Brisbane studio.

After developing his skills on three more productions, he reached maturity as a director during the war with Forty Thousand Horsemen and The Rats of Tobruk, both dramatically tight and visually spectacular productions.

Probably Chauvel’s finest achievement was Sons of Matthew (1949), an epic story of a pioneering family. Working against the enormous physical odds of locations in the wild rain forests of the Lamington Plateau in south-eastern Queensland, the film took him several years to complete. His next and last feature, Jedda (1954), again set his characters against a spectacular but hostile environment, this time with a story about the aborigines in central Australia.

With these last four films, Chauvel expressed an intensely romantic epic vision of Australia. He sought to present Australia to the world as a rich, exotic land populated by spirited sons of the soil — a sincere vision, vigorously realised, which es­ caped the worst excesses of jingoism or

The Moth of Moonbi (1926): A romantic melodrama in which a young country girl sets off to discover life in the city. After many bitter experiences she returns to her lover at Moonbi Station.

Produced, directed and written by Charles Chauvel; based on the poem“ 77!c Wild Moth” by M. Forest; Photography, A1 Burne; Presented by Australian Film Productions Ltd. Actors: Marsden Hassall (Tom Resoult), Doris Aswin (Dell Ferris), Arthur Tauchert (Jack Bronson), Michael Dwyer (Rodger Down), Charles O’Mara (Ferris), Darla Townend (Little Dell), Jack Reed (Bill Devine), Colleen Richards (Margery Daw), Edward Lyon (Martin Brooks), Bille Stokes (Josephine).

Greenhide (1926): A romantic melodrama which is almost the reverse of The Moth of Moonbi. A city socialite visits her father’s property in the bush and falls in love with the manager ‘Greenhide’.

Written and directed by Charles Chauvel. Photography, A1 Burne.

Assistant Director, Edward Lyon. Titles and Art Titles, Frank White. Art Furnishings, Arabian Art Salon. Presented by Australian Film Productions Ltd. Actors: Elsie Sylvaney (Margery Paton), Bruce Gordon (Greenhide), Frank Thorn (Tom Mullins), Alfred Greenup (Bill Mullins), Gerald Barlow (Sam Paton), Jules Murray­ Prior (Slab Rawlins), Phil Mackin (Joe Mackaway), Irma Dearden (Polly Andrews), Billy (himself).

In the Wake of the Bounty (1933): Partly a narrative reconstruction of the mutiny against Captain Bligh on the Bounty, and partly a documentary on life on Pitcairn Island where the descendants of the mutineers still live.

Directed and written by Charles Chauvel. Photography, Tasman Higgins. Monologue, Arthur Greenaway. Musical Director, Lionel Hart. Film Editor, William Shepherd. Sound engineers, Arthur Smith and Clive Cross. Cinesound recording. Presented by Ex­ peditionary Films. Actors: Mayne Lynton (Lieut. Bligh), Errol Flynn ■ (Fletcher Christian), Victor Gouriel (Michael Byrne, the ‘Bounty’s blind fiddler), John Warwick (Midshipman Young). 72 mins.

Heritage (1935): An historical reconstruction of the early settlement of Sydney.

Directed by Charles Chauvel from his own novel. Photography, Tasman Higgins and Arthur Higgins. Assistant to Director, Chick Arnold. Sound recording, Alan Mill. Film Editress, Lola Lindsay.

Script, Ann Wynn. Settings, James Coleman. Research, Ray Lind­ say. Modern frocking bv Yvette. Musical score, Harrv Jacobs. RCA Photophone recording. Presented by Expeditionary Films (1933) Limited. Actors: Frank Harvey (Governor Phillip), Franklyn Bennett (James Morrison/Frank Morrison), Margot Rhys (Jane Judd), Peggy Maguire (Biddy O’Shea/Biddy Parry), Harold B. Meade (Frank Parry), Joe Valii (‘Short), Norman French (Gover­ nor Macquarie), Ann Wynn (Mrs Macquarie), Leonard Stevens (Greenway, Macquarie’s architect), Austin Milroy (Major Ross), Victor Fitzherbert (William Charles Wentworth), Gertrude Boswell (Mrs Judd), Dora Mostyn (Mother Carey), Godfrey Cass (Harding), Florence Esmond (Mrs Boggs), Victor Gouriet (Artist), Field Fisher (Gerald Cracknell), Rita Pauncefort (Mrs Cobbold), David Ware (‘Long’), Kendrick Hudson (Morrison Jr). 96 mins.

Uncivilised (1936): The story of a white man living wild with aborigines in northern Queensland and his relations with a woman journalist who enters the unexplored jungles.

Directed and written by Charles Chauvel from a story by Chauvel in collaboration with E. V. Timms. Photography, Tasman Higgins.

Assistant directors, Frank Coffey and Ann Wynn. Sound recordist, Dennis Box. Film Editor, Frank Coffey. Assistant Editor, Mona Donaldson. Musical arrangement, Lindley Evans. Settings, James Coleman. Dance direction, Richard White. Special effects, George D. Malcolm. Gowns, Farmers Ltd. Hosiery, Prestige. British Acoustic Sound Recording. Presented by Expeditionary Films (1933) Ltd. Actors: Dennis Hoey, Margot Rhys, Ashton Jarry, Kenneth Brampton, Marcella Marney, E. Gilbert Howell, Victor Fitzherbert, John Fernside, Edward Sylveni, Norman Rutledge, and aborigines from Cape York Peninsula led by Harri Weipa and ‘Booya’. 93 mins.

Forty Thousand Horsemen (1941): The adventures of the Australian Light Horse in the Sinai Desert campaign during World War I. -

Produced and directed by Charles Chauvel from a story by Chauvel in collaboration with E. V. Timms. Continuity, Elsa Chauvel.

Photography, George Heath. Film Editor, William Shepherd.

Sound, Arthur Smith and Clive Cross. Art Director, Eric Thompson.

Exterior Art Director and Special Effects, J. Alan Kenyon. Musical Score, Lindley Evans in collaboration with Willy Redstone and Alfred Hill. Additional Exterior Photography, Capt. Frank Hurley and Tasman Higgins. Military advisors, Major G. H. Ferguson and Sgt. Roy Mannix. Assistant Director, Ronald Whelan. Location Assistant, George Hughes. Optical Effects, Garnett Lowry. Make­ up, Alec Ezard. Production Manager, John Soutar; Dance Routines, Gertrud Bodenweiser. Stunt Shooting, Lionel Bibby; Turkish Ar­ maments supplied by E. J. Millett. Presented by Famous Feature Films; produced with the co-operation of the Department of Defence and officers and men of the 1st and 2nd Australian Cavalry Divisions. Actors; Grant Taylor (Red Gallagher), Betty Bryant (Juliet Rouget), ‘Chips’ Rafferty (Jim), Pat Twohill (Larry), Harvey Adams (Von Hausen), Eric Reiman (Von Schiller), Joe Valli (Scot­

44 —'Cinema Papers, March-April

ty), Albert C. Winn (Sheik Abu), Kenneth Brampton (German Of­ ficer), John Fleeting (Captain Gordon), Harry Abdy (Paul Rouget), Norman Maxwell (Ismet), Pat Penny (Captain Seidij, Charles Zoli (Cafe Proprietor), Claude Turton (Othman), Theo Lianos (Abdul), Sergt. Roy Mannix (Light Horse Sergeant), Edna Emmett, Vera Kandy, Iris Kennedy, Joy Hart (Dancing Girls). 99 mins.

During the war, Chauvel directed four short propaganda films under contract to the Department of Information: Soldiers Without Uniforms, The Power to Win, While There is Still Time, and A Mountain Goes to Sea. He also assembled another short film, Russia Aflame, from Russian newsreel footage.

The Rats of Tobruk (1944): A tribute to the Australian fighting spirit.

Produced and directed by Charles Chauvel. Screenplay, Charles and Elsa Chauvel. Photography, George Heath. Sound, Jack Bruce and L. J. Stuart. Editor, Gus Lowry. Musical Direction, Lindley Evans in association with Willy Redstone and Charles MacKerras. Settings, Edmund Barrie. Filmed at the Studios of Commonwealth Film Laboratories Pty Ltd. Panophonic Raycophone recording. Special Designs, Eric Thompson. Assistants to the Director, Harry Freeman and Roy Sebastian. Unit Management, George Barnes. Commen­ tary, Maxwell Dunn. Extra Photography, Army Film Unit. Army Liaison, Major G. K. Austin. Assistant Army Liaison, Lt. A. F. Dunbar, M.M., and Lt. G. Woods. Miss Garrick’s Costumes, Curzon’s. Home furnishings, Bebarfalds. Presented by Chamun Produc­ tions. Actors: Grant Taylor, Peter Finch, Chips Rafferty, Pauline Garrick, Mary Gay, George Wallace, Joe Valli, John Sherwood, Walter Pym, Norman Blackler, Gilbert Ellis, Robert Carlyle, Joe Anderson, Toni Valla. 105 mins.

Sons of Matthew (1949): An epic story of a pioneering family.

Produced and directed by Charles Chauvel — original screenplay by Charles and Elsa Chauvel, inspired by the books Green Mountains and Cullenbenbong by Bernard O’Reilly; Collaboration by Maxwell Dunn. Directors of Photography, Bert Nicholas and Carl Kayser.

Film Editor, Terry Banks. Art Director, George Hurst. Recording supervision, Clive Cross. Sound Recording, Allyn Barnes. Associate Producer, Elsa Chauvel. Western Electric recording. Musical Director and Composer, Henry Krips. Assistant Director, Julian Savieri.

Narrator, Wilfrid Thomas. Special Effects, William Symonds.

Business Manager, William Broun. Unit Manager, Jim Donohue. Se­ cond Assistant, Bert Carlon. Period costumes by Rockman’s from designs by Thelma Afford. Presented by Greater Union Theatres Pty Ltd in association with Universal Pictures Pty Ltd. Actors: John O’Malley, Thelma Scott, Tom Collins, Michael Pate, Max Lemon, Ken Wayne, Rodney Fielder, Tommy Burns, Doug Smith, John Unicomb, Jimmy White, John Ewart, Marion Dickson, Baby Lawson, Dorothy Allison, Diane Proctor, Jack Fegan, Robert Nelson, Jean McAllister, Charmian Young, Margaret Young, Barbara Armstrong, Wendy Gibb, Laurel Young, Nonnie Peiffer, Betty Orme. Released in 1949. 105 mins.

Jedda (1954): A story about the aborigines in central Australia. .

Produced and directed by Charles Chauvel. Screenplay, Charles and Elsa Chauvel. Photography, Carl Kayser. Color, Gevacolor. Process­ ed by Denham Laboratories. Special Photography, Eric Porter.

Dialogue Direction, Elsa Chauvel. Editors, Alec Ezard, Jack Gar­ diner, Pam Bosworth. Sound, Arthur Browne. Assistant Director, Philip Pike. Unit Manager, Harry Closter. Music composed and con­ ducted by Isadore Goodman. Special Aboriginal Recording by Professor Elkin. Art Director, Ronald McDonald. Research, Bill Harney. Costumes, Mendels. Western Electric recording. Presented

by Charles Chauvel Productions. Astors: Ngarla Kunoth (Jedda), Robert Tudawali (Marbuk), Betty Suttor (Sarah McMann), Paul Reynall (Joe, a half-caste), George Simpson-Little (Douglas McMann), Tas Fitzer of the Northern Territory Mounted Police (Peter Wallis, Police Officer), Watson Byers (Felix Romeo, Boss Drover), Willie Farrar (Little Joe), and aborigines of various tribes of north and central Australia. 96 mins.

In 1957-8, Chauvel and his wife produced 13 half-hour episodes for a BBC television series on the Northern Territory, Walkabout (later screened by the ABC).

Above: Charles Chauvel (centre) poses with visiting American producer Fred Niblo (right) and Lloyd Nozler.

Left: Charles Chauvel.

G r e a t e s t epic of HEROISM EVER FILMED!

CHARLES CHAUVEL’S

Above: Outdoor script conference in southern Queensland for Sons of Matthew (1949). Left to Right: Gwen Meredith (writer of Blue Hills), Chauvel, Maxwell Dunn and Elsa Chauvel.

Right: A script session on Forty Thousan Horsemen with E. V. Timms (right), Charh Chauvel. Elsa Chauvel is seated in t' foreground.

isrumjTTObv * X O » A L IO

w ith

GRANT TAYLOR-CHIPS RAFFERTY PETER FINCH-PAULINE GARRICK JOE VALLI • MARY GAY GEORGE WALLACE Below: Publicity still from Jedda (1954) with Ngarla Kunoth and Robert Tudawali.

Errol Flynn as Fletcher Christian in The Wake of the Bounty (1933).

Pat Twohill, Chips Rafferty and Grant Taylor as Australian cavalrymen in Forty Thousand Horsemen (1941).

'Cinema Papers, March-April — 45

A Matter of Fact —.“

.

Ken Hall

The December issue of Cinema Papers carried an interview between Bill Shepherd, veteran Australian film editor, and Graham Shirley, which simply must be challenged.* I am concerned only with the sections relating to Cinesound where there are so many inaccuracies and gross distortions of the truth that — with very genuine reluctance — I am compelled to endeavor to put the record straight. Individually and in the sum total Bill Shepherd’s statements leave a totally incorrect impression of the Cinesound organization of the thirties and forties, who was in it and how it worked. There are in­ stances also where some individuals — and I do not include myself among them — got no credit at all for the work they did and are not even mentioned in the recital. This must be adjusted.

• Anything I have to say is not intended as pointless criticism of Bill Shepherd. I have always had, and still have, a genuine regard for him and a full appreciation of the work he did for Cinesound as its chief film editor on all features, except Smithy, and after Squatter’s Daughter.

But if what Shepherd, now in his eighties, has to say is left unchallenged it will go down into the history of film production in this country as fact. And so much of it is just NOT fact.

Cinema Papers is now the only record, to my knowledge, of film production in Australia. Many of the still surviving members of the original Cinesound people of the thirties have reacted to Shepherd’s interview and would want to have the facts on the historical record with credit fairly apportioned to those who earned it.

I propose dealing only with major matters, discarding many minor incorrect statements.

S q u a tte r’s D au ghter

Shirley: Malcolm gets a co-editor’s credit on Squatter’s Daughter.

Shepherd: I know but he didn’t cut a foot of it.

That is an untrue statement. Malcolm got first editing credit on that film because that is what he was. I worked with them both right through the editing period, as I did on all my films, and there is no doubt that Malcolm did the major job and more. He went right through to the fine cut, with Shepherd doing the sequences allotted to him of course, and was engaged with Shepherd and Phyllis O’Reilly, cutting assistant, in matching the negative to the edited work print when he was stricken with a serious respiratory problem which troubles him to this day. Shepherd and Phyllis. O’Reilly went on to finish the neg. matching, made very difficult by the absence oi edge-numbers, especially in some bushfire scenes shot without slate markings because of difficulty and sometimes danger.

Bill Shepherd was still finding his feet in film editing at that time. He had had no previous ex­ perience of feature sound film cutting. He developed, I believe, into a first class film editor and eventually became probably the best in the country in the thirties. But he learned his trade at Cinesound as we all did. And surely there is nothing shameful in acknowledging the truth of that.

I endeavored to give George Malcolm, whose pioneering work in so many branches of Australian film production has not been suf­ ficiently recognized, full credit for his work on On Our Selection and Squatter’s Daughter and on matters like building up from scratch the first pro­ jection printer in the country, in a previous issue of Cinema Papers. *Cinema Papers — December, 1974 — p. 297.

46 — Cinema Papers, March-April

S ou nd

Shepherd takes a side-swipe at the efforts of Arthur Smith and Bert Cross to get sound on film, at the beginning of the thirties, by talking of them disparagingly, as “mucking about” with the problem. Their successful wrestle with the dif­ ficulty made it possible to found Cinesound and make more than 25 feature films — 18 for Cinesound, three for Chauvel, two for Harry Southwell, one each for Beau Smith and Joe Lippman, besides innumerable ‘shorts’ and 1,300 weekly newsreels up to the time I left Cinesound in 1956.

All said and done that seems to me to be a satisfactory piece of mucking about.

Shirley: What was your feeling about the use of loca­ tion sound?

Shepherd: With all due respect 1 think you lose a lot of atmosphere by trying to use an alternative. Tall Timbers (1937) had the best outdoor sound we ever did.

In fact it’s probably the best outdoor sound that’s ever been done anywhere.

Shirley: Why was that?

Shepherd: Because it was done in the clear blue yonder

This, apart from the obvious over-statement that it was “the best outdoor sound ever done anywhere”, overlooks the fact that all Cinesound outdoor sequences, with the exception of a Wallace musical, were recorded in the clear blue yonder. Looping or post-syncing were at that time not available to us or to anyone else I should think. The major factor in the recording of Tall Timbers was the brilliant and frightening sound on the Timber Drive. This was a manufactured sound made, not in the clear blue yonder but in the studio and environs through the resource and ingenuity of Clive Cross and his assistant, Alan Anderson, now of Film Australia. The sound unit operated, of course, under the overall control of the Chief Engineer, Arthur Smith. Credit where

credit is due — these people made tremendous contributions to the success of Cinesound on all its films. Their most notable achievement, in my view, was the splendid recording of the operetta sequences of Broken Melody. There they controll­ ed — in one operation — more than 50 members of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra jammed into a space underneath the first floor dressing rooms with the studio lavatories on one side and the generator room on the other. The orchestra was there because we could put wooden rostrums over the concrete floor and the dressing rooms provid­ ed us with a wooden roof. The Sydney Male Choir of about 40 voices was in the studio proper and the soloists in another section of it, all walled in by three-ply flats.

It was an incredible, almost impossible set-up.

But it worked. They made it work, recording all three — orchestra, soloists, choir — together, finding balance, light and shade and the real beau­ ty of Alfred Hill’s original music.

Shirley: Were there any special demands on you with Broken Melody? ' Shepherd: Only in getting the playback tracks ready.

Clive Cross brought Playback and all the details of how to use it back to Australia in the mid-thirties. He was in Hollywood (at his own ex­ pense) in 1935 while I was there seeking backprojection. Clive was able to work for months at MGM, in the sound department, and of course every Hollywood musical, including those splen­ did examples now showing around the world in That’s Entertainment, were made on playback.

It was the fact that, through Clive Cross, we now had all the necessary gen on Playback, in­ cluding rhythm-punching,** that influenced me greatly in deciding to make Broken Melody.

Looking back, it was quite a shocking risk to take back in 1937 — to make a film with a major musical sequence upon which it was entirely dependent for its climax. If the musical section did not work we had no film. It had not been attempted in Australia before nor has it since.

Clive Cross marked up all the playback tracks on Broken Melody. If that film had failed we would have been dead ducks. But it did not fail due to the work of the whole team and especially Arthur Smith and Clive Cross.

P re -p re p ro d u c tio n

Shirley: How involved were you with pre-production?

Shepherd: I usually estimated the footage and we had a pre-production conference of all concerned. There’d be the director, cameraman, soundman, myself — all the key members of the crew — and we’d talk about the script and the Film as a whole.

Shirley: Were the shots planned before Hall went out to shoot?

Shepherd: Oh yes, we all had a rough idea to start with.

Now let’s have the facts. Thexe were NO pre­ production conferences at Cinesound on any pic­ ture with the single exception of Smithy, and that ♦ ♦ (Footnote) Rhythm-punching is the method under which the sound engineer marks out the positive musical playback tracks with a set of three, or four, punches equally spaced in order to get rhythm so that the clapper sync marks can be. made exactly on the last punch. The placement of these punches, and there can be six or even morein one number, is worked out with the director and put into the places where he expects to change angles.

A MATTER OF FACT

Production stills from Ken Hall’s Orphan of the Wilderness (1936) . . . the real bone of contention between Hall and editor Bill Shepherd.

was abortive. The general conference idea just does not work. The discussions invariably get side-tracked up a dozen blind alleys. Inter­ departmental rivalry is almost always injected — like the never ending war between camera and sound departments that has been going on in studios all around the world since sound films began. Instead of time-wasting big conferences I had frequent talks with the heads of the creative departments during the pre-production period.

Sometimes heads of two departments — like set design and camera for instance. The film editor was given the script to time — as far as any script can be timed — and two or more staff men, ex­ perienced actors like Alex Kellaway, Frank Harvey or Ron Whelan, under the direction of whoever was going to be dialogue director, sat in to read the dialogue scenes at the right, or at least, likely to be used, tempo.

O rphan of th e W ildern ess

The real bone of contention is Orphan of the Wilderness, where Shepherd’s complete lack of acknowledgment of others involved, let alone appreciation, is painfully obvious.

Shirley: You’ve often said that your favorite film at Cinesoimd was Orphan of the Wilderness.

Shepherd: Yes, it was. I’ve always considered it ‘my’ picture because I took particular care with the animal sequences. For weeks we filled the studio with trees, ferns, streams, kangaroos, rabbits, snakes and koalas and let them settle in. Altogether we shot between 6,000

Ken Hall describes the “bushland” sets for Orphan of the Wilderness as so realistic that the animals behaved completely naturally, making it possible to get “authentic” shots of Australian fauna. m and 7,000 m, and I didn’t really know how it was go­ ing to work until I'd run the footage and decided how to cut one shot with the next (sic). I wouldn’t say the first two reels were without a story but I certainly hadn’t been given a storyline for that section beyond knowing the way it was going to start and end. We had footage of a frog.

We had the ostrich being attacked by the kangaroo, the rabbits being frightened by the hawk*, and while there was nothing preplanned it all worked out magnificently.

This is sheer stuff and nonsense. All films are the result of a combined effort and a film editor cannot be better than the material provided him *It was in fact Chut, the joey menaced by the hawk and by preplanning, not accident.

by the production crew. That must stand as a self­ evident fact.

If I were asked to nominate the technical star of the film I would certainly name George Heath whose photography stands up as really splendid right to this day. I am sure I would be supported in this by all living members of the old crew — with apparently one exception. Close behind Heath would come George Kenyon, who, with his staff in the Art and Special Effects Department, created a bushland setting complete with waterfall and pool, which was so realistic that all the animals were completely taken in by it. They Continued on P.90 Cinema Papers, March-April — 47

Cinema Papers, March-April |

VOLUME ONE 1974 INDEX KEY 1. Film titles appear in bold type. Magazine, play and book titles appear in italics.

2. The following appear after index items (where applicable) d — director p — producer c— cameraman e — editor t — technician ds — distributor ac— actor sc — scriptwriter.

3. The following appear after page numbers (where applicable) a — articles i — interviews f — filmography st — stills cr — production credits r — film reviews ,

Contributors Index ADLER, SUE

Amarcord 375 (r) AUSTIN, ARTHUR

NFTA 136-137 (a) BEILBY, PETER

Alan Finney (ds) 123-125 (i) Arthur Smith (t) 131-135 (i) Sanford Lelberson 171-173 (I) John Phillips 251-252 (I) Peter Fenton 254-257 (I) BERTRAND, INA

Francis Birtles — cyclist, explorer, Kodaker 31-35 (a) Not Suitable for Children.

BISHOP, ROD

Tony Glnnane (ds) 38-43 (i) Alan Finney (ds) 123-125 (I) Richard Brennan (p) 201-203 (I) Mean Streets 234 (r) The Great Gatsby 370 (r) BOYES, PETER

Esben Storm (d) and Hadyn Keenan (p) 64-65 (i) Sandy Harbutt (p, d, ac) 184-185 (I) BRANDES, DAVID

William Frledkln (d) 263-266 (i) BRENNAN. RICHARD

Peter Weir (d) 16-17 (a) CLARKE, JOCELYN

Book review 379 COOPER, ROSS F.

Raymond Longford Filmography 51 W. Franklin Barret Filmography 164-165 Towards an Australian Film Archive 217 (a) Harry Davidson 218-221 (i) McDonagh Sisters 261 (a) EDGAR, PATRICIA

US Surgeon-General's Report on Causes and Preven­ tion of Violence 112-116 You Don't Blow Up Ladies (report of research into violence) 321-330 EDMONDSON, RAY

Film Archives — the Edmondson Report 343-347 FLAUS, JOHN

Melville, Le Samourai 56-57 (r) The Cars That Ate Paris 275 (r) Crystal Voyager 277 (r) Great Moments from Morocco 361 Between Wars 367-368 (r) GINNANE, TONY

Cannes Film Festival 1974 237-239 Film Censorship Can Still Be Heavy 313 Bob Ward 331-335 (I) GLENN, GORDON

Jim and Hal McElroy (p), Peter Weir (d) 20-21 (I) Jim McElroy (p) 21-22 (I) John McLean (c), Tony Tegg (t) 23-24 (I) Ken Hammond (t) 25-26 (i) Mike Thornhill (d) 142 (i) Russell Boyd (c) 144 (i) Bill Hutchinson (t) 146 (I) Hal McElroy (p) 148 (i) Richard Franklin (d) 246-248 (i) Vince Monton (c) 249-250 (i) Franklin and Monton 253 (I) David Baker (p, d) 356-359 (I) HAY, DAVID

Nicholas Roeg (d) 175-177 (I) H O D S DO N,BA RR ETT

View of the Tariff Board Report on Motion Picture Films 36-37 A State of False Consciousness — Australian Film 126­ 127

HODSDON, BRUCE

Genre — A Review 338-341 JONES, DAVE

David Williamson (sc) 7-9, 93 (I) Dario Pulgar (d) 167-169 (I) M ACKIE, FIONA

Tidlkowa and Friends 235 (r)

Themroc 235-236 (r) MATTHEW S, FREYA

Solaris 61-62 (r) Zardoz 267-269 (r) MONTON, VINC EN T

Peter Watson (VFL) 52-53 (i) MORA, PHILIPPE

Notes on Comic Strips and Cinema 28-29 I've Also Quit Beating My Wife 178.

MORRIS, MEAGHAN

Asylum 372-373 MURRAY, SCOTT

Jim and Hal McElroy (p), Peter Weir (d) 20-21 (I) Jim McElroy (p) 21-22 (I) John McLean (c). Tony Tegg (t) 22-24 (i) Ken Hammond (t) 25-26 (i) Gillian Armstrong (d) 45-46 (I) Graeme Blundell (ac) 54-55 (I) Richard Prowse 102-109 (i) Mike Thornhill (d) 142 (I) Russell Boyd (c) 144 (I) Bill Hutchinson (t) 146 (I) Hal McElroy (p) 148 (i) Melb and Sydney Film Festivals 1974 227-234 (r) Richard Franklin (d) 246-248 (I) Vince Monton (c) 249-250 (I) John Phillips (t) 251-252 (I) Franklin and Monton 253 (I) Perth Film Festival 1974 303-307 (r) Werner Herzog (d) 314-320 (I) Bob Ward (ds) 331-335 (i) David Baker (p, d) 356-359 (I) NAGORCKA, RON

Sound in Cinema 157-159 OSBORNE, ALAN

Father of Kong — animation techniques of Willis O'Brien 211-215.

PIKE, ANDREW

Tokyo Story 161-163 QUINNELL, KEN

Frank Moorhouse (sc) 138-140 (I) Number 96 272 (r) Stone 273 (r) Sleeper 365-367 (r) READE, ERIC

Pat Hanna 129-130 (a) The Adventures of Dot 259 (a) RICHARDS, MIKE

Dirty Pix — a Report of Film Censorship Meeting, Canberra 1970 110-111 SHIRLEY, GRAHAM

Promised Woman 204-206 (a) Bill Shepherd (e) 297-302 (I) STONE, LUCY

Petersen 368-369 (r) STRATTON, DANIEL J.

Performance 66 (r) Ed Lewis (p) 152-156 (i) TAYLOR, MAX

A Portrait of John Papadopoulos 207-209 TAYLOR, PHILIP

Ken G. Hall (p, d) 71-91 (I) Arthur Smith (t) 131-135 (i) Harry Davidson 218-221 (i) THOMAS, JEREMY

Ray Harryhausen 13-15, 70 (i) THOM S, ALBIE

Book Review 381 TITTENSOR, JOHN

Dalmas 63 (r) Alvin Purple 179 (r) Exorcist 183 (r) Don't Look Now 271 (r) Cliff Green (sc) 309-311 (I) Yakketty Yak 371-372 (r) W ASSON, M. T.

Raymond Longford Filmography 51.

Cinema Papers Index 1974 — 1

General Index A

Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein 15 Above and Beyond 80

fVckerman, Forrest J. 215 Across Australia in the Track of Burke and Wills 33, 34 Across Australia with Frances Birtles 31, 33 Across the Wide Missouri 339

Actors and Acting 54-5, 184-85 Adams, Phil 253 Adam’s Woman 20 Admiral Was A Lady, The 152 Adorable Outcast 78 Adventures of Barry McKenzie 93, 125, 201, 253 Adventures of Dot, The 2'58~9 AFDC 20, 64, 142, 246, 355 AFI 136

AFI Awards 17 Age of Consent 20, 357

Agee, James 263 Agents — Hollywood 170 Aguirre, Wrath of God 304, 314, 317, 318, 320 (cr) Ahmih, Akin 317 Airport 7 5 334

Akon, Kosta 16 Albee, Edward 155 Aldrich, Robert 153, 322 Alexandrou, Alex 205 Along the Great Divide 339 All About Eve 263

Allende — Film Under Allende, interview with Dario Pilger 166-69 Allen, Woody 365 All Fall Down 154 All for Gold 165(cr) Alloway, Lawrence 339, 340, 341 auteur-theory 7; 339-40 All Those Called Ali 306 All Turks Are Called Ali 239 Alvin Purple 20, 54, 55, production of 123-4, 125,179 (r), 248, 254, 357, 368 Alvin Rides Again 349 (cr) Amarcord 238, 375 (r; cr.)

American Graffiti 235-236 American Poet’s Visit, The 138 Amin 239, 307 And Hope to Die 41 Andrei Rublev 229 An Eye for an Eye, a Tooth for a Tooth 111

Anger, Kenneth 381 Animation 13 Anna 307 Answer to October, The 168 Antonio Das Mortes 39 Ants in His Pants 86, 133 (st) Apache 339 APG 54 Arabian Nights, The 376-7 (st)

Archive — Australian Film 216-17, 342-47 Ardell, Graham 21 Arden, Eve 379 Armstrong, Gillian (d) 44-46 (I); 46 (f) Armstrong, Robert 212 Arsenic and Old Lace 331, 379 Arthur Chubb and the Widow 31 Art Theatre Guild (Japan) 161, 163 Assassination of Trotsky, The 332 Astrolent Films 259 Asylum 373-74 (r); 373 (cr) Atlantis 212 Audry, Jacqueline 379 Austral Photoplays Ltd. 33 Australasian Films (Union Theatres) 131 A u s t r a la s ia n P h o t o - R e v ie w , T h e 32 Australia Calls 51 (cr) Australia Marches With Britain 301 Australian by Marriage, An 51 (cr) Australian Film 126-7 (a) Australia’s Lonely Lands 33 Australia’s Peril 165 (cr) Au Hasard Balthazar 264

Avant-g'arde Film 381 Avventura, L’ 375

Black Holiday 229-30

Blake, Sally 207, 8 Blair, Linda 266 Blanch, Roy 134 Blatty, Peter 264 Blazing Saddles 332 Blind Husbands 137 Blood of the Condor 39, 41 Blood Wedding 227, 230 Blow-up 263 Blue Mountains Mystery, The 51 (cr) Blue Güm Romance, A 165(cr);

Blundell, Graeme (ac) 54-5 (I); 55 (f) Bogarde, Dirk 324 Bogart, Humphrey 66 Bogdanovich, Peter 264 Bond, Graham 16, 17, i 9; 248 Bonnie and Clyde 341 Bono, Sonny and Cher 264 Bookseller that Gave Up Bathing, The 103

Boorman, John 19, 267, 269 Borges, J. L. 66 Borgnine, Ernest 322 Bormann, John 266 Bourke, Terry 203 Bout de Souffle, A 66

Box, Allan 299 Box Car Bertha 341 Boy 161

Boyd, Bill 77 •Boyd, Russell (c) 144 (i) Boyfriend, The 266 Boys in The Band 263, 266 Bradbury, Ray 13 Bradman, Don 131 Brahage, Stan 381 Brake Fluid 17

Brando, Marlon 266 Breaking of the Drought, The 165 (st); 165 (cr) Brealey, Gil 16, 139, 203 Breathless 264 Brecht, 13, 9 Breer, Robert 381 Brener, Sylvia 75 Brennan, Richard (p) — and Peter Weir, 16, Homesdale 17, 64; 200-206 (I); 203 (f) Bresson, Robert 264 Breton, Michele 66 Brewster McCloud 341 British Board of Film Censors 106-7 Broken Blossoms 315 Broken Melody, The 85, 90 (cr), 300 Bronson, Charles 322 Brother Can You Spare A Dime 171 Broughton, James 381 Brown, Kevin 16 Bruce, Jack 298, 299 Buchanan, Larry 334 Buchanan Rides Alone 341 Buckley, Tony 201 Budden, Phil 298 Budgets 9, 93 Bullocky 16 Burbidge, Richard 266 Burke and Wills 33 Burns — Johnson Fight 51 (cr) Burstall, Tim (d) 7, 8, 55, 123, 124, 369 Burton, Richard 266 Bushwackers, The 51 Buzo, Alex 9

c

Cabaret 146

Cabot, Bruce 212, 214 Caddie 348 (cr) Call me by my Proper Name 201 Called Back 165 (cr) Cameo Productions 259 Cammell, Donald 66 Campus (Petersen) 7, 8, 146 Cannes Film Festival 1974 41, 237-9 Capra, Frank 301 Captain Midnight — the Bush King 51 (cr) Caretaker, The 177

Carmody, Peter 371 Carmen 146 Carrick, Noel 237 Cars That Ate Paris, The 16, 17, 18-26 (pr), 19 (cr),

production of 22, lighting of 23-4, sound of 25-26, 144, 148, 209, 237, 246, 254, 274-5 (r), 357 Carter, Claude 77 Cassavetes, John 322 Cat and the Canary, The 16 Babysitter, The 111

Back projection and early Australian films 83 Back Street General 348 (cr) Bad Company 341 Bailey, Bert 77, 79 (st), 80, 132 Baker, David ( p, d) 7, 8, 10, 11, 203, 355, 356-59 (i) Bananas 365 Baneth, Roy 246 Banks, Terry 300, 301 Barkley, Edmund 81 Barret, W. Franklin 164 (st), 165 (f) Barrymore, John 266 Bass, Saul 156 Bates, Alan 155 Battle of the Coral Sea 13 Battleship Potemkin 321 Baxter, John 86 Bazin, Andre 338-9, 341 Beard, The 173 Beast From 20,000 Fathoms, The 18, 70 Beatty, Warren 173 Becquer, German 169 Bed Sitting Room, The 332 Beery, Wallace 83 Behind the Green Door 334 Belle 227, 231-2 Beison, Jordan 381 Ben Hur 152 Bennett, Sarah 255 Benson & Hedges Awards 17 Bergman, Ingmar 7, 56 Bespoke Overcoat, The 356 Between Friends 234 Between Wars 139, 140, 141, 143, 135, 147, 149, 150 (all st), 141-50 (prod, report), 203, 306, 357, 367-8 (r) Biches, Les 230, 332 Big Risk, The 57 Bilcock and Copping 123, 124, 249 Billabong 111 Billy Jack 43 Birds, The 248 Birthday Party, The 266 Birth of a Flivver 211 Birth of a Nation 88, 321 Birth of White Australia, The 259, 298 Birtles, Francis 30-35 Bitter Tears of Petra von Cant 306

2 — Cinema Papers Index 1974

Causes and Prevention of Violence, The — examination of US Surgeon-General’s Report 1 1 2 - 1 6 Celine and Julie Go Boating 227 Censorship — and exploitation (items 43), and K.G. Hall 74, Prowse (interview) 102-9 ratings/classlfications 102-7, British 106-7, Board of Review 107, Customs procedures 107, report on Film Censorship Meeting 1970, 110-11, Australian 117, 120-1, 312-13 (a), 334 Cercle Rouge, Le 56 Chaffey, Don 15 Chaliners, Jack 297 Channel Country 302 Charge of the Light Brigade, The 297 Charles Chauvel: Action Director

Chauvel, Charles 71, 72, 86, 261 Chauvel. Elsa 86 Cheaters, The 261 (cr); 299 Cherney, Peter 64 Chester, H. 13 Chien Andalou, Un 281-3 (st) Children of the Moon 151 (cr) Children's Cinema Council of Victoria 120, 121 Chilla and Bert 348 (cr) China 235 Christian, The 165 (cr) Christie, Julie 271 Church and the Woman, The 51 (cr) Cine-Action Australia 39 Cinemateca 211 Cinesound 301 Cinesound Productions 71, 72, 81, 87; 131 -5;133 (st) Cinesound Varieties 81 Citizen Kane 66; 159; 263 City’s Child, A 202 City Lights 331 Clair, Rene 381 Claire’s Knee 7; 231 Clayton, Jack 356; 370 Clearing House 201 Clements, B. 14 Clements, Steve 212 Clift, Montgomery 266 Clockwork Orange, A 106 (st); 106; 109; and soundtracks 159; 330 Coe, Barry 172 Colombia 13, 14 Colombo 125

Coleman, Jim 78; 134 Come Up Smiling 86, 90 (cr) Comic Strips and Cinema 28-9 Commercial Film Labs. 251 Commonwealth Films 259 Commonwealth Film Censorship Board 117 Community Aid Abroad 39 Community Films 259 Conditioned Response in Cinema 159 Conformist, The 228 Conner, Bruce 381 Conquest Films 211 Constable, Bill 46 Conversation, The 234 Cooper, Gary 361 Cooper, Merian C. 212, 213, 214 Coorab in the Island of Ghosts 33, 34, 35 Corpse Grinders, The 38, 40, 43 Correll, Joseph 381 Corridor, The 332 Count Vims Last Exercise 17 Country Cuzzins 334 Country Jazz 16 Country Town 272 Coup d’Etat 227, 228

Cowan, Tom 204-6 Crabbe, Byron 212, 14 Crawford Productions 309 Creation 212 Creative Management Associates 171, 172 Creelman, James 212 Cries and Whispers 249 Coward, Noel 75 Cross, Bert, 78, 83; 132; 299 Cross, Claude 78, 85; 132/133; 299 Cross, George 81 Crystal Voyager, The 237; 276-7 (r) Cubic 348 (cr) Cul-de-Sac 66; 168

Cuilen, Carmel 205 Culpepper Cattle Co., The 341

Cummins, Peter, 63 Curious Pets of Our Ancestors 211

Curtis, Tony 152

E Eagles Over Israel 41 Earth 315 Earth Our Sinful Song 233 Earth Versus the Flying Saucers 13, 70 Easy Rider 341

Edeson, Arthur 212 Edison Company 211 Editing 296-302 Edmonson Report — film archives 342-47 Edols, Michael 64 Edwards, Blake 264 Efftee Productions 129, 219; 299 van Effenterre, Bertrand 305 Egg and I, The 302 81/a 375 Electronic music in cinema 157, 159 Eliza Fraser 125 Ellis, Bob 16, 17 Ellis, M.H. 33 Elsaessar, T. 341 Emden 77

Emmanuel, Takis 205 Emperor Tomato Ketchup 163 Empire 381

Enami, Kyoko 161 Enemy Within, The 164 (st) Enfants du Paradis, Les 228 Enter The Dragon 112 (st); 115 (st) Entr’ Acte 381 Environment 220 Erica Minor 305 Ernie Game, The 168 Erotic Adventures of Zorro, The 313 Eskimo Nell 245-53 (prod, report); 246, 247 (st), 249 (st);

253 (cr); 333-34 Etcetcet 41 Eureka Stockade 135

Eustache, Jean 304 Evans, Robert 370 Even Dwarfs Started Small 304, 314-5, 317, 318; 320(cr) Every Man For Himself and God Against All 317, 319,

320 Daff, Al 87 Dad and Dave Come to Town 85, 86, 90 (cr), 300 Dad Rudd M. P. 81, 86, 91 (cr); 135 Dalmas 63 (r); 273 Dante’s Inferno 83

Darling, John 142 Davidson, Harry 218-221 (i) Davies, Brian 17; 38 Davies, Per 19 Davis, Bette 66 Dawkins, M. 17 Dawley, Herbert M. 212 Dawn. Norman 297 Dawson, Peter 331 Day For Night 264 Day The Fish Came Out, The 332 Dead End 207

Dean, James 266 Death By Hanging 161 Death of a Flea Circus Director 304 Deep Throat 109; 239; 313; 334

De Forest Phonofilms 298 •Degenmark Pia 38 Delgado, Marcel 212, 13, 14 Delgado, Victor 214 Deling, Bert 63 Deliverance 266; 330 Dellitt, J. 16 Delon, Alain 56, 57 Del Rio, Delores 76 De Mille, Cecil B. 213 Demonstrator 125 Dendy-Fiimways 331-35 Denial 151 (cr) Deren, Maya 381 Dern, Bruce 370 Destroy All Monsters 161 Devil in Miss Jones, The 313, 334 Devils, The 109 Dexter Bob 74, 81 Diary of a Chambermaid 332 Dietrich, Marlene 361 Dietz, Jack 13 Diggers 129; 128 (st); 130 (cr) Diggers in Blighty 51 (cr); 129; 130 (st); 130 (cr) Dignam, Arthur 141; 369 Dillenger 341 .Dillinger is Dead 41

9 Dingwall, John 309 D im b o o la

Dinkum Bloke, The 51 (cr) Dinosaur and the Baboon, The 212 Dinosaur and the Missing Link, The 211, 212

Dioramas 13 Directing 16-17; 20-21; 64-5; 72-89; 142-43; 184-85; 207­ 209; 246-48; 263-66; 314-20; 356-59 Director's Company 263 Dirty Dozen, The 322; and violence 325-27, 330 Dirty Pix — report of Film Censorship Meeting, Canberra, 1970 110-11 Disney, Walt 14, 15 Distant Thunder 227, 233 Distillation of Orange Flowers 31 Distribution etc. — 38-43; 123-25; 331-35 Dixon, Ivan 307 Dominion Films 259 Donald, S.M. 16 Donaldson, Mona 298, 299 Donelly, B. 16 Conner, Jorn 17; 307 D o n 's P a r ty 7, 8 Don Quixote 20; 144, 146 Don’t Look Now 66; 103; 175; 177; 270-71 (r) Doors 64 Dorgan, T. J. 259 Dorleac, Francoise 66 Double Suicide 161

Douglas, Kevin 15 Douglas, Kirk 152 Doulos, Le 56 Dovzhenko 315 Down on the Farm 83

Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan 212 Doyle, Stewart 72, 80, 81; 131; 132; 135 Dream Life 39, 41 Drive, He Said 341 Duel in the Sun 339 Duffy 66

Dunlap, Scotty 298 Durrant, J. 15 Dust, Sweat & Gunpowder 341

Duval, Daniel 307 Dycon, Danny 246 Dynamation 13. 14, 15, 70

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex But Were Afraid to Ask 365 Evil Touch, The 64 Evolution of The World 13 Executive Action 152, 156 Exorcist 109, 112, 182-3 (r); 263-66; 271

Experimental Film Fund 17, 93 Exploits of the Emden, The 72, 77; 221; 222 (st) Extradition, The 304-5 Extraordinary Seaman, The 154

F

Fahrenheit 451 177

Fair, Dick 133 Fairfax, Marion 212 Falzon, Albert 277 fa m ily Life 65; 373 Family Man, The 7, 8, 10-11 (st); 356 F a m o u s M o n s t e r s o f F il m la n d 215 Fantasia 13 Far From the Madding Crowd 177 Far Paradise, The 261 (cr) Farrow, Mia 370 Fassbinder, W. R. 306 Fata Morgana 304, 315, 318; 320 (cr) Fatal Wedding, The 51 (cr) Faust (1920) 219, 220 Feldman, Charlie 171, 172 Fellini, Federico 375 Fenton, Peter (t) 45; 251; 254-7 (i) Film Archive — Australian 216-17; 342-347 Film archive legislation 343 Film archives — functions 343-46; recommendation for Australia 346-7; concept 342-3 Film collecting 218-21 Film Festivals — Melbourne 1974 227-236; — Sydney 1974 227-236; — Perth 1974 303-307 F ilm F u n 218 Filmmaking Courses 317 Film House 134 Film Technicians 22-24; 146-47 Filmographies: Gillian Armstrong 46; W. Franklin Barrett 164-65; Graeme Blundell 55; Richard Brennan 203; Ken G. Hall 89-91; Pat Hanna 130; Ray Harryhausen 70; Werner Herzog 320; Cliff Green 311; Raymond Longford 51; M cDonagh Sisters 261; John Papadopoulos 209; Bill Shepherd 302; Peter Weir 17; revision to Ray Longford 187.

Film and TV Board 136; 137 Film and Violence — examination of US SurgeonGeneral’s Report 112-16 Filmways — Dendy 246; 331-35 F ilm W e e k ly Y e a r b o o k 219 Finpen (Stubby) 307 Final Programme, The 171 Finch, Peter 86 Fink, Margaret 201 Finney, Alan (ds) 123-25 (i) Firm Men, The 350(cr) First National Studios 212 First Year, The 169 Fisher’s Ghost 51 (cr) Fitzgerald, F. Scott 264 Fitzpatrick, Kate 16, 204 Five Easy Pieces 93 Fixer, The 154

FIAF 342-41; 346-7 Flames Across the Adriatic 39 Flaming Youth 76 Flashpoint 201

Flaus, John 139;339; 371 Flavin, James 212 Fletcher, Jack 297, 298 Flying Doctors of East Africa, The 320(cr)

Flynn, Errol 299 Foghorn, The 13 For Anothers Guilt 31 Forbidden Decameron 106 (st)

Ford, John 84; 338, 339; 340 Fort Apache 339 Forty Thousand Horsemen 73, 86; 297; 301 For the Term of His Natural Life 77, 84 Four Nights of a Dreamer 303 Fox, James 66 Francis, Freddie 38 .

Frankenheimer, John 154, 155, 171 Frankenstein 212; 313 Franklin, Richard(d) 246-8(i); and Monton 253(i) Freckel, Jasmine 261 French Connection, The 263 French Connection II 154 French, Norman 129 Friedkin, William (d) 263-66 (i) Friedman, David 313

INDEX VOL 1, 1974 Friends of Eddie Coyle, The 57

Fry, Ron 33 Frye, Northrop 339 Fuck offl images From Finland 307

Fuller, Benjamin Sir 261 Funeral Rites 204 Funny. Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, A 177

G

Galley, Peter 17 Gallery, The 16

Game in the Sand 320(cr) Ganster film genre 339, 341, 330 Garden of the Finzi-Continis, The 168

Gardner, Bob 251 Garfield, John 266 Garland, Judy 379 Gatty, Andrew 39 Gavin, John 152 Geer, Will 156 General Exhibition classification — 102-3 General Idi Amin Dada 239,307 Genre — A Review 338-41 Gentle Sex, The 335 Gentle Strangers 16,17; 201 Gentlemen of the Road — Captain Starlight, A51(cr)

George D. Malcolm Productions 80 Gerissimou, Nikos 205, 206 Gershe, Phil 171 Gertie the Dinosaur 29 Gestapo Victim 218

Gibson, Buzz 214 Gilford, Jack 155 Gilles, Max 248 Ginger, Mick 51 (cr) Ginnane, Tony(ds) 38-43 (I) Girl from the Family of Man, The 138 Girl of the Bush, A 165(cr) Girl with the Golden Eyes, The 379 Ghost of Port Arthur, The 299 Ghost of Slumber Mountain, The 212 Gladiators, The 39 Goalkeeper’s Fear of Penalty, The 234 Goat’s Horn, The 168

Godard, Jean-Luc 9; 264 Godfather, The 330 Godson, The 56 Going Home 39 Goldfinger 379 Gold Rush, The 367 Goldwyn, Samuel 70 Gone to the Dogs 86, 91 (cr) Gone With the Wind 84 Goodbye 163 Goodbye Norma Jean 334 Good Film League of NSW 117-8; 120-1 Good Times 263 Goodtimes Enterprises 171 Goopy and Bagha 233-4 Gow, Keith 16, 19 Grade Organization 171, 172 Granddad Rudd 84, 89 (cr); 134; 300 Grand National Steeplechase 31 Grand Prix 154, 156 Gray, Zane 134 Great Great Great Great

Ecstasy of the Sculptor Steiner, The 320(cr) Escape, The 379 Gatsby, The 333; 370(r); 370(cr) Northfield, Minnesota Raid 340, 341

Green, Billy 185 Green, Cliff(sc) 21; 308-311 (i); 311(f) Greenough, George 277 Gretel 46 Griffiths, Howard 309 Guerra, Tony 375 Guilietta Degli Spiriti 375 Guilty Until Proven Innocent 335 Gunfighter, The 340 von Gunten, Peter 304-5 Guns in the Afternoon 340 Guy, George 259 Guzman, Patricia 169 Gypsy Moths 154

H Hackman, Gene 154 Haddrick, Ron 205 Haikl, Willi (dir. Billabong(short)) 111 H ail the Woman 74 Hall, Ken G.(p.d) 71-91(i); 89-91{f); 135; 299; 300; Hammeras, Ralph 212 Hammond, Ken(t) 17, 20, 21; 25-26(i); 201; 252 Hands of Cormack Joyce 20, 22 Handicapped Future 320(cr) Hani, Susumu 161 Hanna, Pat 128-9(a); 130(f) Hannan, Brian 17 Hannant, Brian 16 Hansen, Gillian 16 Harbutt, Sandy (d, p, a) 184-85 (I); 273 Hardy, Frank 7 Hardy, Sam 212 Harmon, Cash 144 Harmony Row 51 (cr) 129 Harold and Maude 152 Harryhausen, Ray 12-15, 70(i); — with W. O'Brian 13-15; Puppetoons 13; with W. Scheer 13-15; Dynamation 13, 14, 70; step motion 15; background 15; superlmposltlons 15; models 15, 70; music 70 (f) filmography 70 (f).

Harvey, Frank 80, 83, 85 Haunted Barn, The 118-19(st); 221 Hayseeds, The 51

Heath, Errol 313 Heath, George 297 Helga’s Web 349(cr) Hell-Cats of the Navy 13

Heller 8 Hepburn, Katherine 379 Herakles 320(cr) Heritage 86

Herman, Al 213 Herman, Bernard 70 Herzog, Werner(d) 304; 314-20(1); 320(f) Hestler, Gordon 15 Hexagon — estab. of 123-24; 203; 334 Hibbard, Jack 9 Hlggens, Arthur 134; 298 Higgens, Tas 299 High as a Kite 350(cr) High Noon 331, 338, 341 Hill, Alfreda 85 Hill, George Roy 172 Hills of Hate 51 (cr) Himiko 161 His Royal Highness 51 (cr); 259 Histoires D’A 307

History Lessons 305-6 Hitchcock, Alfred 16; 137-264 Hollywood is Like This 167

Holmes, Cecil 16; 64 Home of the Blizzard 33 Homesdale 16, 17; 20; 201 Homme Qui Dort, Un 239 Honours System, The 76

Hood, Clyde 77 Hopgood, Alan 179, 246 Horsemen, The 155 Hound of the Deep 33 How McDougal Topped the Score 259 How Willingly You Sing 350(cr)

Howarth, Joy 133 Howes, Oliver 16 Hudson, Earl J. 212 Hudson, Rock 154 Hughes, Lloyd 300 Hughes, Wendy 369 Hull, Ross 131 Hunchback of Notre Dame, The 76

Hungaroflim 154-5 Hunter, Bill 64, 65 Hurley, Frank 33; 74, 81, 83 Husbands 379 Huston, John 154 Hutchinson, Bill (t) 146 (I)

I I Found Joe Barton 134 I Walk The Line 155 I. F. Stone’s Weekly 239; 307 I Vitelloni 375

IATSE 302 Ice Iceman Cometh, The 154, 155

Ichikawa, Kon 163 Iconography 339, 341 Idaho Transfer 239 If . . . 206 If I Had A Million 224-6(st) Illumination 232 Illusions of a Lady 239 Importance of Being Ernest, The 379 Impossible Object 155 In His Prime 64 In Old Arizona 132

In Production Surveys 151; 242-44; 348-51 In the Villain's Power 211 In the Wake of the Bounty 86; 299 In Which We Serve 75 Incident at Owl Creek 207 Incredible Floridas 17

Independent distribution 38-48; 331-35 Indian Fighter, The 152 Inferno of First Love 161 Inn of the Damned 203, 252, 254; 349(cr) Innocents, The 370 Into Australia’s Unknown 33, 34 intolerance 88

Invicta Films 259 Iron Horse, The 137 It Came from Beneath the Sea 13, 70 It Isn’t Done 84, 85, 90(cr); 297 It's a Long Way to Tipperary 51 (cr) It’s Not Enough To Pray 169

Iwashita, Shima 161

J

Jackal of Nahuettoro 167 Jackeroo, The 165(cr)

Jacobs, Ken 381 Jaffe Agency 171 Jagger, Mick 66; 175 J. Arthur Rank organisation 87 Jason and the Argonauts 13, 70 Jazz Singer, The 78; 132 Jedda 87 Jesse James 340 Jewelled Nights 220 Joan of Arc of Loos, The 165(cr) Joe 168; 261 Jog’s Trot 208 Johnny Got His Gun 332 Johnson, Noble 212 Joker 205 Jones, Dave 371 Jones, John C. 75, 76 Jordan, Larry 381 Josem, Mark 332 Judy 16 J u g g le r s T h re e

7, 8

Jumping Jeweller of Lavender Bay, The 246 Jungle Woman 33 Jusqu’au Coeur 131 Just Cricket 131

K

Kael, Pauline 263 Kagal, Maurico 159 Kamouraska 333 Kanai, Kutsu 163 Kanshu 163 Kareinaru Ichizoku 161 Kauffman — Lerner Associates 171, 172 Kaufman, Philip 340 Keaton. Diane 365 Keays-Byrne, Hugh 184 Keenan, Haydn(p) 64-5(i) Kelly 350(cr) Kellaway, Cecil 85 Kennedy, Madge 74 Kennerdale, Rosalind 85 Kenyon, George 83 Kid, The 83 Killers, The 57 Killing of Sister George, The 111 Kind Hearts and Coronets 331 King’s Henry 340 King, Ross 45 King Kong 13, 15; production, effects etc. 211-15 King Kong versus Godzilla 15 King of Kings 213 King of Mervin Gardens 93; 341

Kingsford-Smith, Jack 300 Kinski, Klaus 320 Kirsanvou, Dimitri 381 Kitses, J. 340 Kluge, Alexander 314 Klute 271 Knock, Don 131; 132 Know Thy Child 165 Know Your Ally: Australia 301

Koerfer, Thomas 304 Kokoda Front Line 86; 134 Korda, Alex 70 Koya no Suronin 161 Kubelka, Peter 381 Kubrick, Stanley 152; 159

L

Labs — VFL 52-3

.

Ladies’ Man, The 367 Lafont, Bernadette 303 Laing, R. D. 372 Lancaster, Burt 156 Lancelot du Lac 237 Land of Silence and Darkness 314, 315, 319; 320(cr)

Landau, Saul 167 Langlois, Henri 342 Language of Love 109; 333, 334

Larrinaga, Mario 212, 14 Last Detail, The 239 Last Run, The 57 Last Last Last Last Last

Sunset, The 153 Tango In Paris 106; 109; 263 Wombat, The 180, 181(st) Words 320(cr) Year At Marienbad 29

Lastfogel, Abe 171 Laughton, Charles 152 Lauste, Eugene 131 Lawrence, Charlie 78 L’Avventura 263 Lazar, Irving 154 League of Nation’s and censorship 121 Lear, David 75 Lear, James 16 Learn to Swim 220 Leaud, Jean-Pierre 303 Lebrun, Francoise 303 Le Clos, Wayne 16 Leehy, Pat 141; 139(st) Lend Me Your Stable 202 (st) Leon Fink Productions 201 Leray, Jacques 56(st) Let George Do It 83, 86, 90(cr); 301 Letter to Jane 38

Lew's Films 203 Lewis, Edward (p) 152-3(1) Lewis, Jerry 367; 379 Lewis, Millie 152 Lewton, Val 154 Libido 7; 10-11; (st) 53; 201; 356 Lieberson, Sandy (agent) 170-73(1) Life and Adventures of John Vane, The Australian Bushranger 51 (cr) Life and Flight of the Reverend Buckshotte, The 16, 17 Life of Rufus Dawes 51 (cr) Limelight 331

Lind, Graham 201 Lindon, Edward 213 Line, The 16

Lippert Pictures 173 List of Adrian Messenger, The 154 Listen to the Lion 349(cr)

Litten, Miguel 169 Little Caesar 338 Lorn, Herbert 152 Loneliness of a Long Distance Runner, The 202 Lonely Are The Brave 152 Long Arm, The 184 Long Goodbye, The 238 Long Voyage Home 248

Longford, Raymond 51 (f); 129; 187 (f revised); 261 Loos, Anita 379 Loren, Sophia 379 Lorraine, Marie 261 Los Olividados 279(st) Lost Horizons 39 Lost World, The 14; 212; 213, 214, 215 Love Affair 261 Love Epidemic, The 124 Love in the Afternoon 227; 230-1 Love Me Tonight 234 Love Parade, The 137 Love Story 370 Lovable Cheat 152 Loving and Laughing 333

Mark of the Devil 109

Markopoulos, Gregor 381 Marks, Walter 217 Marion (TV play) 309, 310 Marshall, Alan 46 Marshall, Bill 299 Marshall, Vaughan 220 Marvin, Lee 154, 155; 322 Masque of the Red Death, The 177 Matatabi 162(st), 163 Matchless 208-9 Mated in the Wilds 297

Matsumoto 161 Meale, Richard 21 Mean Streets 277; 234-5(r); 239; 341 Medium Cool 111; 341 Meisnes, Gunther 141 Mekas, Jonas 381 Melbourne Film Festival 1974 227-236 Melville Jean-Pierre 56, 57 Memories Within Miss Aggie 239 Menace, The 298 Menilmontant 381 Merchant of Four Seasons 306

Merrick, David 370 Message from Mars, A 165 (cr) Metropolis 219; 223(st)

Metty, Russell 358 Mickey One 341 Mickey’s Naughty Nightmares 211 Midnight Wedding, The 51 (cr) Midnight Cowboy 332

MIFED Film Festival 41 Mifune, Toshiro 161 Mighty Joe Young 13, 70 Mille Mots 303 Miller, David 153, 154, 156 Mitchell, Lex 273 Mitchum, Robert 16 Mr Chedworth Steps Out 73, 74, 85, 86, 91 (cr); 301 Moby Dick 356 Mojin Shokan 163 Moloney, Kevin 259 Mon Oncle Antoine 168 Monk and the Woman, The 165

Monkman, Noel 88 Montage 29 Montez, Maria 70 Monton, Vince (c) 249-50 (i); 253 Moon is Blue, The 331

Moor, Colleen 76 Moore, Stan 300 Moorhouse, Frank(sc) 7; 138-40(i); 367 Morley, Robert 171 Morning Class Schedule 161 Morocco 361 -63(st) Morpheus Miko 211, 12

Morris, Judy 141 Moss, James 205 Most Dangerous Game, The 213 Mother and The Whore, The 227, 303-4, 315

Moulson, Miles 144 Movie Journal: The Rise of the New American Cinema 381 Mujinretsuto 163 Murder of Captain Fryatt 165(cr)

Murphy, Steven (British Censor) 102; 109 Murphy of Anzac 165(cr) Murray, Dan 259 Murray, Dr John 113 Murray, John 55; 251; 357 Music Corporation of America 171, 172 Music Lovers 332 Music with Balls 159 Mutiny on The Bounty, The (1916); 51 (cr); 164(st) My Darling Clementine 338 My Night At Maud’s 231 Myra Breckinridge 379 Mysterious Island 13

Myth — (in genre & westerns) 339

Lovelace, Delos W. 212 Lovers and Luggers 300 Ludwig II — Requiem for a Virgin King 229; 306 Ludwig Van159 Lure of the Bush, The 165(cr)

Lye, Len 381

Naked Bunyip, The 53, 54, 55; 251; 357 Naked Spur, The 339 Naming the Federal Capital of Australia 51 (cr)

Nankervls, Debbie 10-11 (st) Nanny, The 332 Nanook of the North 88

M Certificate 102 Ma Hogan’s New Border 51 (cr) McCabe and Mrs Miller 102; 341

McClure, Ellie 248 McDarra, Robert 64, 65 McDonagh, Isobel 261 McDonagh, Phyllis 261 McDonagh, Paulette 261 McDonagh Sisters, The 260-1 (a); 261(f); 299 McElroy, Hal(p) 20-21 (i); 148-203(i) McElroy, Jim(p) 20-21, 21-22(i); 203 McGowan, Jock 266 MacGraw, Ali 370 MacIntyres Pictures 73 McLaine, Christopher 381 McLarin, Terrence 34, 35 McLean, John (c) 21; 22-24(i) McLean, Johnny 144 McNeil, Chris 264 McQueen, Steve 173 Macbeth and soundtracks 159 Machine Gun, The 138 Machine Gun McCain 39 Macon Country Line 239 Mad Dogs and Englishmen 65 Mafia 39 Mahler 237-239 Mahomet. Cassim 129 Magician, The 263 Magnificent Seven 253 Magnum Force 264 Magus, The 332 Mainka-Jeliinghams, Beate 314 Malcolm, George 80, 81; 299 Malloy, Lilley 164(st) Malone, Geoff 16, 17 Man and His Mate 15 Man and a Woman, A 264 Man from Deep River 109, 114(st) Man from Hong Kong 348 (cr) Man of Arran 31 Man of the West 340 Man They Could Not Hang, The 51 (cr); 259 Man Who Died, A 227 Man Vanishes, A 161 Man Without a Star 339 Manchurian Candidate, The 154 Maori Maid’s Love, A 51 (cr)

Mann, Anthony 152; 340 Margaret Fink Productions 201 Marin, Leon 56

Nash, Wyn 259 National Council of Women and censorship 120, 121 NFI 136 NFTA — organization, problems etc. 136-7 National Library 137 Navigator, The 125 ’Neath Australian Skies 51(cr) Ned Kelly 20, 66 Negatives 332

Nelson, Robert 381 New Line Cinema Corporation 38 Newman, Paul 172 Nickel Queen 202 Nickel, Ride, The 239 Night and Day 332 Night They Raided Minsky’s, The 263, 266 Nine Lives of Fritz The Cat 239 Nippon Chinbotsu 161 No Name on the Bullet 341 North West Horizon 302 Northern Safari 33 Nothing But the Best 177 Notorious Cleopatra 334

Not Suitable for Children — censorship 117-21 Nottie di Cabiria, Le 375 Novarro, Ramon 379 Noyce, Phil 16 Nuigini Culture Shock 350(cr) Number 96 272(r) Nutty Professor, The 367 Nykvist, Sven 249

o

O'Brien, Willis 13,14, 15; animation techniques of 210-15 O’Donoghue, Rory 17 O'Reilly, Creswell 74; 81; 217 Office Picnic, The 201, 203, 204 Offering, The 207 O Koku 163 Old Dad 220 Old Man and Dog 46

Olivier, Lawrence 152, 153 Oliver Twist 117 On Our Selection 51(cr); 72, 77, 78, 80, 81, 88, 89(crV

132(st); 133; 259; 299 On the Track of Unknown Animals 151 Once 239 One Hundred A Day 45, 46; 47(screenplay); 48-49(st) 100,000 Cobbers 91 (cr); 135 One Man Bike 64 One Man’s War 232; 307 One Million Years B.C. 13, 15, 70

Cinema Papers Index 1974 — 3

INDEX VOL 1, 1974

One Minute to Zero 16 1001 Nights 238; 240-1 (si) Orphan of the Wilderness 84, 90(cr); 297 Orphans In the Wilderness 134 Orphee 57 Oshima 155

Oswald, Gerd 152 Oswald, Richard 152 Out of Africa 177 Out of Mind 207 Outlaw Riders 38 Our Mother’s House 324, 370; and violence 328-30 Over 70 Club 299, 301 Overlanders, The 87 Ox-Bow Incident, The 338, 340

P Pacific Screen Plays 259 Paddington Lace 16

Pal, George 13 Pallenberg, Anita 66 Panagiotopoulos, Jim 205 Pandemonium 161 Panorama Blue 239; 334 Papadopoulos, John(d) 207-9; 209(f) Papas, Irene 204 Paper Moon 102; 263 .

Parade 239 Parer, Damien 86 Parker, George 83 Parnham, Dorothy 129 Parrish, Robert 66 Pasolini, Pier Paolo 377 Pat Garret and Billy The Kid 341 Paths of Glory 152; 263 Pather Panchali 66

Patrick, Bert 259 Patrikareas, Theo 203, 204 Pearls and Savages 33; 74 Penal Colony, The 167 Pendragon Films 208 Penetration 239 Performance 66(r) 67-69; (script extracts) 171, 175, 177 Perth Film Festival 1974 303-307 Persona 111 Peter Vernon’s Silence 51 (cr) Petersen 7-8; 123-4; 254; 368-9(r); 369(cr) Petersen, Sidney 381 Petulia 177; 341 Petrified Forest, The 66

Phillips, John(t) 251-2(i) Piaf, Edith 379 Picnic At Hanging Rock 19; 21; 309; 310-11; 349 (cr) Pied Piper 171 Pioneers, The 51 (cr); 165 (cr) Pirosmani 234 Pit of Loneliness 379 Planet of The Apes 154 Play It Again Sam 365 Player, The 41

Pleasance, Don 66 Plugg 348 (cr) Point Blank 57; 341 Point of Departure, A 350(cr)

Polifilm 38 Pommy Arrives in Australia, A 51 (cr) Pommy the Funny Little new Chum 51 (cr) Pontius Pilate 171 Poseidon Adventure, The 41 Power and the Glory, The 51 (cr); 88 Power Without Glory 309

Pram Factory 9; 54 Pravda 38 Precautions against Fanatics 320(cr) Prehistoric Poultry 211 Pretre 56

Prior, Will 77 Producers and producing 20-21; 21-22; 64-65; 72-89; 148-49; 184-85; 200-03; 356-59 Production reports — Cars that Ate Paris 16-26; Between Wars 141-50; True Story of Eskimo Nell 245-53; Salute to the Great M cCarthy 353-59 Production Surveys 151; 242-44; 348-51 Promised Land, The 169; 239 Promised Woman 206 (cr), 201, 203, 204-5 (st) Prowse, Richard 102-09(i) Psolokoskowitz, Andrew J. 180(1) Psycho 103, 264 Public Enemy 338 Pulgar, Dario 166-69 Pumpkin Eater, The 370 Punishment Park 39

Puppetoons 13 Pursued 339

Q

Que Hacer? 167 Queen Christina 234 Quick, Follow that Star 350(cr) Quiet Man, The 84

Quinn, Anthony 152

R

R Certificate 102-3 RFD 10,000 BC 211 RKO 212, 13 Rain People, The 341 Rainbow, Farm 151 (cr) Ramster, P. J. 261; 297 Ramster Photoplays 297 Randolph, John 154 Rank 135 Rapture 332 Rats of Tobruk, The 73, 86 Read, Adrienne 17 Red River 339 Reddy, Roma 204 Redford, Robert 370 Redgrave, Corin 141; 139-141 (st); 367 Red Psalm 168 Reed, Lou 379 Reed, Rex 266 Reicher, Frank Reilly, Phyl 300 Rejeanne Padovanni 234 Reluctant Flame 350(cr) Removalists, The 7, 8, 9; 201; 202(st); 310; 348(cr) Rene, Roy 81, 83, 86; 134 Republic Died At Dien Bien Phu, The 239 Response — In cinema 159 Retribution 259 Return from Africa 234 Return of the Boomerang, The 20 Reverend Dell’s Secret, The 297 Reynolds, Burt 379 Rice, Ron 381 Richmond, Anthony 271

4 — Cinema Papers Index 1974

Sound recording 25-26; 131-35; 251-52 Soundtracks and conditioned response 159 South West Pacific 91 (cr) Southern Cross Productions 34, 35

Ride Lonesome 341 Rififi 203; 263; 331

Rigas, Helena 204 Riley, Terry 159 Rio Grande 339 Rltt, Martin 152, 172 Rhodes, Jon 17 Roadshow 123-5 Robinson 350(cr) Robinson, Michael 273 Robinson, Peter Roche 203, 204 Roe, David 237 Roeg, Nii 66; 174-77(1); 271 Rolling Home 351(cr) Roma 375 Romance of Runnibede, The 298 Romance of the Burke and Wills Expedition of 1860, A

165_(cr) Romantic story of Margaret Catchpole, The 51 (cr)

Romani, John 355 Roof Needs Mowing, The 46 Room At The Top 370 Roos, Len 259 Rose, Ruth 212 (Mrs Ernest B. Schoedsack) Roseanna 332 Ross Wood Productions 184, 201; 203 Rothacker, Watterson J. 212 Rough Passage, A 165(cr) Royce Smeal Productions 20; 203 Rozsa, Miklos 70 Rudd’s New Selection 51 (cr) Ruiz, Raoul 167 Run for Cover 339 Ryan, Gerald 246 Ryan, Robert 156; 322 Ryan’s Daughter 41 Rydge, Norman 87

Spartans 152

Special effects 13-15, 70 Special Operation 302

Spence, Bruce 7 Spirit of the Beehive 237

Splvak, Murray 213 Splendid Fellows 51 (cr) Spook Who Sat By The Door 307 Sporting Proposition 348 (cr) Squatter’s Daughter, The 76, 71,81, 83, 89 (cr); 133,134;

299, 300 Squeaker’s Mate 356, 359 Stacey, Tom 184; 237; 246 Stagecoach 338, 339, 340 Standard Laboratory 298 Stander, Lionel 66 State of False Consciousness, A — article on Australian Film 126-7 State of Seige 332 Stavisky 237 Steiner, Max 213 Stephanie 64 Sterling, Phil 252 , von Sternberg, Joseph 361 Sting, The 333 Stirring the Pool 17

Stlven, David 206 Stockwell, Dean 152 Stone 184-5; 203; 209; 257; 273 (r); 334 Stone, Lewis 76 Stork 7, 8, 9; 53; 93; 201; 357; 368 Storm, Esben (d) 64-5 (i) Storm Over Asia 315 Storry, Walton 45 Straw Dogs 106; 109; 330 Strawberry Statement, The 341 Streetcar Named Desire, A 172; 365 Streisand, Barbra 173

s

Strike 66 Strike Me Lucky 81, 83, 89 (cr), 134 Struck Oil! 165 (cr)

Safe Place, A 341

St. Ledger, JM 259 Saito, Koichi 161 Salamander, The 234 Sally 76

Studio Films 39 Sturgess, John 173 Succubus 38, 43

Salute to the Great McCarthy, A 353-59 (prod, report);

Sugarland Express, The 237

201; 355(cr) Samurai, Le 56-59(r) San Francisco 299, 301 Sanctuary 57 Sarris, Andrew 399 Satdee Nite 46 Satyricon 111; 332 Saunders, Don 297 Savalas, Telly 322 Scarface 338 Schepisi, Fred 45 Schneer, Charles H. — with Harry Lausen 13, 14, 15 Schoedsack, Ernest B. 213, 14 Screening the Sexes: Homosexuality in the Movies — Book Review 379 Script-writing 6-9, 93; 138-40; 308-11 Schroeder, Barbet 307 Sea Hawk, The 76 Searchers, The 340 Seconds 154; 156 Secret of the Skies 77 Secrets of a Door to Door Salesman 103(st) Seige of Pinchgut, The 87 Selleck, Bruce 331, 332; 335 Selleck, Sir Frank 331 Selznick, David 84; 212 Sentimental Bloke, The 51 (cr); 74, 80; 209; 216(st); 220; 259 Sequoia 301 Serling, Rod 154 Service, Robert 246

Sully, Walter 131 Summer Shadows 351 (cr) Sunday Too Far Away 203; 348(cr) Sunrise 51 (cr); 137 Sunstruck 20 Superfly 307

Supreme Sound Studios 17 Surrealism and Soundtracks 159 Sutherland, Don 66; 156; 271; 322 Swagman’s Story, The 51 (cr) Swanson, Gloria 74 Swastika 171 Sweet Movie 239 Sweet Nell of Old Drury 51 (cr) Switchboard Operator 239

Syberberg 306 Sydney Film Festival 1974 227-236 Sydney Filmmakers Co-op. 17 Sympathy for Summer 38 Sympathy for the Devil (One Plus One) 38

Synaesthetic Cinema 157, 159

T Take the Money and Run 365 Taking His Chance 51 (cr) Tall Timbers 51 (cr); 78, 82(st), 83, 84, 90(cr); 300

Talmadge, Norma 76 Tariff Board Inquiry — recommendations by Fllmways, Studio Films and Independent Theatres 42-43 Tariff Board Report on Motion Picture Films — 36-37; 39; 332-3 Taskovsky, Andrei 61, 62 Taylor, Alma 259 Technicians 22-24; 146-47 Tegg, Tony (t) 21; 22-24(i); 144

Seven Days Seven Days in May 154 Seven Keys 39 Seven Little Austrelians 46 Seventh Heaven 137 Seventh Voyage of Sinbad, The 13, 14, 70

75:25 — Interview with Al Finney 123-25 Sex Aids and How to Use Them 313 Shaft 307 Shane 338, 341

Shannon, Johnny 66 Sharpe, Alec 332, 335 Sharpe, Cy 298 Shaye, Bob 38 Shepherd, Bill 296-302(i); 302(f) Shepherd, Carroll 213 Shinoda 161 Ship of Fools 155 Shit Commercial 46 Shore, Harvey 208 Shorter, Ken 185; 273 Should a Doctor Tell? 261; 297 Should a Girl Propose? 298 Should Girls Kiss Soldiers? 261 Signs of Life 304; 314; 317, 318; 320(cr) Silence of Dean Maitland, The 51 (cr); 81, 89(cr); 133, 134; 300 Silent Witness, The 165(cr) Silks and Saddles 259 Sills, Milton 76 Silver Lode 339 Simpson, J. L. 33 Sinatra, Frank 379 Sinbad 227, 234 Sinbad’s Golden Voyage 13, 14, 15 Sinderella and The Golden Bra 111 Sinful Dwarf, The 334 Sisters 103; 104-5(st)

Sitney, P. Adams 381 • Skolimowski, Jerzy 17 Skyjacked 109 Sleeper 365-67(r); 367(cr) Slessar, Ken 131 Smith, Arthur(t) 26; 77, 78, 88; 131-35(i); 299 Smith, Beaumont 261 Smith, Harry 381 Smith, Jack 381 Smith, Sir Keith 33 Smith, Sir Ross 33 Smithy 71, 87, 91 (cr); 135; 301 Snow W hite 121 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs 103 So Big 76 Solaris 60-62(r) So Long Letty 76 Soldiers of the Cross, The 216 (st) Solo Flight 351(cr) Some Strangers in the Land 16, 17 Song of Bernadette, The 84 Song of Songs 234 Sons of Matthew, The 71, 73, 87; 135 Souls in Bondage 220

Sound In Cinema — towards a theory of 157-59 Sound in early Australian films 78

Tempo 16

Terayama, Shuji 163 Testament of Orpheus 206 Thar She Blows 131 That’ll Be The Day 171 Themroc 39, 41; 227; 235-36 Therese and Isabelle 111 They Live By Night 237 They’re A Weird Mob 141 202 Thief of Badghdad, The 14, 70 Thieves Like Us 237

Thompson, Jack 8; 10-11 (st); 369 Thornhill, Mike (d) 7; 16; 137, 138, 142-43(i); 306; 367 Thoroughbred 82(st), 83, 84, 89(cr); 297 Those Who Love 261 (cr) Three To Go 16 Three Worlds of Gulliver, The 13 Three Directions in Australian Pop Music 17

Thring, Frank Snr. 71; 129; 219 (st); 229

Through Australian Wilds: Across the Track of Ross Smith 33 Through Central Australia 33 Throw Away Your Books and Go Into the Streets 42(stV

160(st) Tide of Death 51 (cr) Tidikawa & Friends 235; 237

Tingwell, Charles 369 Timor 233 Toeplitz, Jerzy 45; 371 Tortoise and the Hare 13, 14 Touch of Evil 358 Toula 16; 205 Toute Une Vie 288 Tout Va Bien 38 Towering Inferno 334

Tracey, Spencer 83 Track of the Cat 56 Traitors, The 230 Treasure of Sierra Madre, The 263

Trebor, Robert 144 Tres Tristes Tigres 167

Trevellyan, John 102 Triumph of Love, The 298 Trooper Campbell 51 (cr) Trouble In Paradise 137 True Story of Eskimo Nell, The — production report 245­

;

53; 253 (cr); 333-34

True Story of the Kelly Gang, The 217

Truffaut, Francois 264 Trumbo, Dalton 152, 156 Trundy, Natalie 152 Tsungaru Jongara-Bushi 161

Twin Beds 74 Two-Lane Blacktop 341 Tw o Minutes' Silence 261 (cr) Two Thousand Weeks 124; 253 2001: A Space Odyssey 263

u

Tyler, Parker 379 Typhoon Treasure 88

U ncivilised 86

Underground Film: A Critical History 381 Underworld 137 Unldad Poplilar 167, 168 Union Theatres 72, 87 Unprecedented Defence of the Fortress Deutschkreutz,

The 320(cr) Ustinov, Peter 152

V

Valaris, George 205 Valentine, Anthony 66 Valley of Gwangi, The 13, 70

Valll, Joe 129 Valparaiso, Valparaiso 39 Vampire Happening, The 38, 43

Vaughan, Ray 77 Venus in Furs 107(st), 108(st) Victorian Censorship of Films Act 1926 120 VFL 52-3 Vidal, Gore 379 Village — see 75: 25(i); 123-25 Violence and Film — U.S. Surgeon Gen's. Report 112-16 Virginia Wolff 88 Virginian, The 338 Viridiana 280(st)

Visionary Film: The American Avant-garde 381 Visual Program Systems 171 Vocation 299 Volga Boatman, The 77 Vote Plus Gun 169 Voyage D'Amelie, Le 307

w

W addlngton's Pictures 73

Wages of Fear 331 Wake In Fright 88 Walkabout 66; 174(st); 175; 176(st); 177

Walker, Clint 322 Walking Tall 43 Wall, Price 218 Wallace, Edgar 212 Wallace, George 86 Wallis, Anthony 16, 17 Waltzing Matilda 51 (cr); 129; 130 (st; cr) Walsh, Jenee 46 Wanderers, The 227 Wanted Dead or Alive (TV series) 173 War Game, The 323 — and violence 327;28; 330 War Lord, The 358 Warburton, Doreen 16 Ward, Bob (ds) 38; 331; 35 (i) Warhol, Andy 381 Warner, Jack 70 Warshow, Robert 338-9, 40 Wasserman, Lew 171 Waters, Darcy 204 Waterston, Sam 370 Watkins, Peter 330 Watson, Peter 52-3(i) Way To A Man’s Heart, The 220 Weaver, Jacki 369 Webb, Clifton 379 Webber, Hamilton 73 Webber, Herman 211 Wedding, The 228 Weingarten, Isabelle 303 Weir, Peter (d) 16-17(i); at Film Aust. 16, 17 and Three to Go 16; and Homesdale 16, 17, 17 (f), 20-21 (i); 45;148, 275 Welch, Raquel 15 Welcome to Hard Times 340 Werner, Oskar 155 West, Mae 379 Western Electric 132 Westerns 338-41 Westward the Women 339 Wet Dreams 334 W h a t I f I D ie d T o m o r r o w ? 7, 9 W h a t T h e C e n s o r Saw 102 Whatever Happened to Green Valley? 17 What's New Pussycat? 365 What’s Up Doc? 39; 179 Wheels Across the Wilderness 33 When The People Awake 166(st)

Whitbread, Oscar 310 White Death 134 White Heat 263 White, Patrick 46 Whittle, Peter 206 Widerberg, Bo 307 Wild Bunch, The 341 Wild Wind 204 William Morris Agency 171 Williams, Malcolm 64 Williamson, David 7-9, 93(l); 368 and another theory 7; with Burstall 7, 8; scripting; stage plays 7, 8; police 8, 9; themes 9; writing methods 9; Aust. film industry 9, 93; Experimental Film Fund 93; 368 Winchester 73, 132 Wings of Destiny 51 (cr) Wind From the East 38, 43 Woman in a Dressing Gown 202 Woman in the Case, The 165(cr) Woman Suffers, The 51 (cr) Women in Love 332 Wombat, The Last 180, 181 (st) Wong, Victor 212 Wood, Ross 45; 184 World of Dogs, The 244(cr) Wray, Fay 212, 13, 14 Wren, John 35

Y

z

Yakkety Yak 371-2(r); 372(cr) Young Nurses 239 Young, Robbie 250 Young Winston 146

Youngblood, Gene 381

Turton, Claude 134 Tupamaros 39 Twelvetrees, Helen

Z abriskie Point 111 Zardoz 267-69(r)

Twenty Million Miles To Earth 13, 70 27A 64-65

Zigon, Yelene 204, 206 Zorba The Greek 332

Cinema Papers, March-April â&#x20AC;&#x201D; 49

i:

" ’THE NIGHT PORTER’ IS ROMANTIC PORNOGRAPHY... a hectic love affair. Among the film’s various definitions of decadence is a strong preference to do on a floor what most other people would do on a chair, table or bed...

what a kinky turn-on!”

—Vincent Canby, New York Times

THE

MIGHT PORTER

The Joseph E. Levine film being released in Australia by United Artists.

Directed by Liliana Cavani Starring Dirk Bogarde Charlotte Ram pling With Gabriele Ferzetti and Philippe Lerot.

CHINATOWN

Mark Randall

At the end of Roman Polanski’s Chinatown Faye Dunaway is shot in the head while escaping from the police down a dark street in a flashy yellow convertible. A warning shot is fired, then a shot at the car. The car slows to a stop, the horn starts to blare.

Held in a wide-shot that seems to last a long time. It is the best moment in the picture — simple, clean, and powerful. It is complete, but Polanski moves in to mop up.

He directs our attention to Dunaway’s minced back of head, then, not satisfied, he turns her over for a close-up of an exploded eye. A lot of scream­ ing and breast-beating accompany what we see.

None of this is new. It’s all very fashionable to bleed a lot in action movies these days, but like anything fashionable it has become obligatory and boring. Physical violence is fast losing its heart-stooDine value. A slight iolt — what Pauline Kael calls ‘zapping’ the audience — and everyone settles down again to the story.

To combat their loss of ‘zap’ power — and Polanski has used it many times in the past — the director pores lovingly over the human meat left behind. Long after the ‘zap’ we are still being in­ vited to appreciate blood-caked close-ups. We are asked to find entertainment values in it. Enjoy, enjoy! We are encouraged to watch with the am­ bivalent, Voyeuristic attitude of, “Oh, isn’t it aw­ ful — yummy — look, isn’t it horrible — oh, yummy, how gory!”

Humor, or rather, cynicism passing for wit, is often added as a palliative — a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down; something to render our feelings toward what we see even more ambivalent. No matter, just detach and enjoy.

From the director, all it takes is cynicism, artistic myopia, or no faith in the dramatic content of his story.

Polanski’s handling of Dunaway’s death is ar­ tistically indefensible. He destroys his best mo­ ment in Chinatown for a bloody head. Why? It is maddening, but then so is the whole film.

Chinatown has a script by Robert Towne. He was special consultant on Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde, so we assume he knows something about the thirties. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to know enough about films and the exacting genre he has chosen to work in.

The basic story of one man controlling a city’s water supply, turning it off, and buying up land at bargain prices, is both interesting and timely.

Where Towne gets himself into trouble, and ul­ timately sinks his script to the level of the average television whodunit, is in his dogged attempts to be both ‘entertaining’ and ‘meaningful’. His script is so obviously a salute to John Huston’s The Maltese Falcon, but Towne wants it to be more. . He wants to make points — about men and cor­ ruption, men and women — which is fine if you can do it, but he can’t. He tries hard, and it shows.

The script remains a thing of parts.

Chinatown — the film’s metaphorical title for all the evil in the world you cannot beat (Chinatown = Catch 22) — does not crackle like Hammett, Chandler, Furthman or Hecht. It lacks polish, style and wit. The script is alternately banal, bland, turgid and often plainly derivative.

One has an uncomfortable feeling of deja vu when

a few good lines register, and the customary red herrings of the genre frustrate your involvement rather than demand it. Towne is outclassed by his predecessors.

J.J. Gittes (read Sam Spade) played by Jack Nicholson, and the poor little rich girl (read Brigid O’Shaughnessy) played by Faye Dunaway are the Bogart and Mary Astor roles from The Maltese Falcon.

As an actor, Nicholson has some of the tension Bogart could generate on screen, we feel things working deep inside the man, so many things not shown, just echoes. He commands your attention when he is on. We watch him closely in this one, but he walks through it. A great deal of personal magnetism, but still a walkthrough. The script gives him nothing to play till the very end when

Faye Dunaway, the poor little rich girl in Roman Polanski’s treatment of a thirties detective thriller Chinatown.

Dunaway is shot. He is a defeated man, beaten by an ineffable and all-encompassing corruption. “ It’s no use. Nothing you can do. It’s Chinatown,” mutters an associate as he leads Gittes away.

Everything and everyone is crooked, we must lose. The element of choice has been removed, we don’t stand a chance, we give in. Sam Spade says: “I won’t because all of me wants to,” and he preserves his integrity, he makes his choice, he is responsible for himself and others. Likewise, Philip Marlowe when he shoots Terry Lennox at the end of Robert Altman’s film The Long Good­ bye. But J.J. Gittes is told: “It’s Chinatown”, and he walks away. No choice, no integrity, no responsibility. It is the ultimate pessimism of our age and this is the script’s and film’s bleary-eyed, maudlin message.

Faye Dunaway is an actress with a capital ‘A’.

She is always ‘turning it on’. Nicholson’s economy and Dunaway’s actorish, badly controll­ ed shifts in emotion — “Which gear am I playing in now?” — sit uneasily side by side. Nicholson always just is . . . Dunaway acts. It just doesn’t jell.

When Huston finally appears in the film, you know things have really gone wrong; that no one — least of all Polanski — really knows what sort of film they are making. It is Polanski’s ultimate self-indulgent conceit to cast Huston as Dunaway’s father, an embarrassing in-joke, and damaging to the film.

Huston is everybody’s grandfather — a jaun­ diced Walter Brennan with a knowing twinkle in the eye — and no one can believe for a moment that here is a man denying water to hundreds of orange farmers, shaping the destiny of a city with City Hall in one pocket and the police department in the other, and that he had made love to his daughter. Dunaway tells Nicholson that her father is a dangerous man One look at Huston and we begin to doubt Dunaway’s sanity.

The film is set in 1938. Sure enough, there are the suits, the hats, the dresses, the limousines with their white-wall tyres, but it is all so unlived in.

Nicholson is so dapper he looks like a pimp. The cars are so clean. The decor so ‘right’. The reality of everyday objects is made faintly ludicrous by their pristine glamor. The art direction is self­ consciously 1938, but it could be 1968. Polanski’s

Chinatown: J. J. Gittes (Jack Nicholson) defends his profession against an attack by a bank employee.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 51

ESKIMO NELL

direction does not create a mood, does not evoke the period for us (compare it with Bertolucci’s superbly evocative The Conformist). In Chinatown the trappings are there, but not the skill or inclina­ tion to utilise them as anything more than proper­ ties.

Polanski’s direction is functional. He is content most of the time just to keep the thing moving from one incident to the next. There is no feeling for pace or rhythm. The film just seems to plod on. Where the script seems to falter or flag — too many talking heads speaking soggy dialogue — Polanski seizes the opportunity he can to ‘zap’ the audience back to full alertness with violent sound and/or violent visuals.

It is also a great way of giving the impression that the film is really starting to zing along.

Polanski himself (playing a small uncredited sup­ porting role) cuts a spurting slit in Jack Nicholson’s nose with a flick-knife. This guarantees him at least another 10 minutes full concentration from his audience while they wait in vain for something memorable to happen.

Chinatown is no advance on Polanski’s earlier, more inventive, and visually richer work. It isn’t memorable as a detective thriller or as a serious drama. It has elements of both, but it fails to be either. The film is a hybrid, a bastard child with no co-ordination. You remember the violence, you remember the bits that didn’t work (Nicholson telling his associates a dirty joke while they try to tell him Dunaway is standing behind him), and you remember the ruined, phony ‘significant’ ending, but very little else.

When we finally make it to Chinatown in the last five minutes of the film we are a little disap­ pointed. It looks like Little Bourke Street or Dix­ on Street, only twice as wide and not as well lit.

After the countless ominous references to it throughout the film we feel cheated.

Anyway, Dunaway is shot by a crooked cop.

Nicholson walks off into the darkness, Huston — God bless him — walks off with a fat cheque for his next project, and Roman Polanski walks off to accolades and applause from quite a few critics.

Just goes to show how subjective criticism really is. There are no truths — just opinions.

Oh, well, that’s Chinatown.

CHINATOWN. Directed by Roman Polanski. Produced by Robert Evans. Associate Producer/Production Manager, C.O. Erickson. Production Company, Long Road Produc­ tions. Screenplay by Robert Towne. Director of Photography, John A. Alonso. Edited by Sam O’Steen. Sound Recordist, Larry Jost. Music by Jerry Goldsmith. Costumes by Anthea Sylbert. Set Designs by Gabe Resh, Robert Resh. Players, Jack Nicholson (J.J. Gittes), Faye Dunaway (Evelyn Mulwray), John Huston (Noah Cross), Perry Lopez (Escobar), John Hillerman (Yelburton), Darrell Zwerling (Hollis Mulwray), Diane Ladd (Ida Sessions), Roy Jensen (Mulvihill), Roman Polanski (Man with Knife), Dick Bakalyn (Loach), Joe Mantell (Walsh), Nandu Hinds (Sophie).

Technicolor. 131 mins. US 1974.

THE TRUE STORY OF ESKIMO NELL

John Tittensor A womper, as any self-respecting male chauvinist will tell you, is the ace root, the number one shit-hot shag, the one you’d cross the world for, because when you’ve fallen for a womper other women are nothing and your life becomes a holy thing — a pilgrimage at the end of which lies the apocalyptic screw that will make it all worthwhile. Especially if you’ve only got one eye, a perpetual week’s growth, underwear that is rotting on your body and an encroaching case of middle-aged virginity. If, that is to say, you’re Deadeye Dick, the anti-hero of Richard Franklin’s western-outback tragi-comedy, The True Story of Eskimo Nell.

The false story of Eskimo Nell, of course, is enshrined in the ballad named for its voracious heroine, an epic renowned throughout the 52 — Cinema Papers, March-April

English-speaking drinking world for the subtlety of its suggested modes of sexual foreplay (Nell’s capacious vagina can be readied only by a preliminary gunshot) and for the bent Baron Munchausen implications of lines like, “The men grew sick as Deadeye’s prick uncoiled along the bar’’.

Those were the days (whenever they were) when men were men many times over, and a woman’s place was on her back; and when, for such a fear­ some and darkly romantic thing is sex, you could never be sure that lurking somewhere in the future was the womper who, in giving your life a pur­ pose, might destroy you altogether, But all that is mere legend. The truth, it appears, is to be found somewhere in a nineteenth century Australia that has odd overtones of the Wild West; and it will be revealed to us by Deadeye Dick (Max Gillies) himself and Mexico Pete (Serge Lazareff) in the course of their travels from town to town, from brawl to brawl, from bar to bar, from brothel to brothel until, in some remote and sleet-ridden mountain township, they reach the longed-for goal: Eskimo Nell’s Saloon.

It takes them 80 minutes or so to get that far, and what follows is a bit of an anticlimax all round; but for a number of reasons, and it’s gratifying to be able to say it, Eskimo Nell is not the utter waste of time that, say, Alvin Purple was. Although, it should be said, its virtues reside more in what it promises for the future than in what it delivers now.

In itself the story neither promises nor delivers much at all, pointing up once again what is probably the most nakedly obvious single weakness in local commercial cinema: the un­ abashed thinness of the scripting. There is no plot as such: the womper waiting at journey’s end is no more than an excuse for a series of escapades, whose only connection is their chronological order. This is a perfectly legitimate technique, but to succeed it needs, as a substitute for conven­ tional dramatic or comic unity, a spirited and tireless bang-bang-bang impact which this script never looks like attaining. Too often there is a reliance on the time-tested and the obvious; too often is an incident extended far beyond the sustaining power of its material; too often is

flashback used to pad a narrative already hampered by having its resources spread too thinly. What was needed, as script collaborators Franklin and Alan Hopgood should have realized, was more body or a shorter film.

As it stands Eskimo Nell’s inadequacies in this regard have the double effect of creating longish periods of tedium out of episodes that would have responded well to crisper treatment and of robb­ ing the film, as a whole, of the necessary buildup to its final extended sequence in the saloon. It’s rather like watching a man earnestly stepping sideways when his goal lies straight ahead because he doesn’t know how he would cope if he actually reached the goal. (This in fact is precisely Deadeye’s reaction when he finally claps his eye on Nell; but it’s doubtful that the film’s structure is meant to prefigure his dilemma as narrowly as this.)

For years Australian television has got away with inflating five-minute plots into hour-long shows, but this is a gambit with a limited future in the cinema: a 100-minute film that you get off your backside to see is expected to give a hell of a lot more. Quite apart from which there is no reason at all why commercial cinema should not be good cinema; and good cinema owes an obliga­ tion to a craft of which sound scripting is an essen­ tial component.

Integral to the scripting of Eskimo Nell, too, is a brand of more or less juvenile humor which, while never especially illuminating or open to in­ novation, has already been done to death in local films and drama: anality and debased eroticism are no substitute for real wit, least of all when pur­ sued to the virtual exclusion of all else.

It’s no longer inherently funny, if indeed it ever was, to watch people taking a piss or threatening, in the most unambiguous terms, to cut each other’s balls off. Being funny, as distinct from be­ ing vaguely daring in a popular idiom, calls for something more than this. A film like Eskimo Nell can survive all sorts of defects, but bad jokes on top of a weak script make the going that much harder.

Its structural problems notwithstanding this is still, in many ways, an enjoyable piece of work, and one that gives cause for a fair degree of op-

FRANKENSTEIN

timism. On the professional level it is undoubtedly the best local feature of its type yet to appear: the direction has an assurance, and the cutting a smoothness that augur well for their application to more substantial and more deserving material.

While Vince Monton’s color camerawork is a continuing high point, revealing an ability to get the most out of every shot, without ever slipping over into the facile or the cliched. Even the music (by Brian May) is good, which in itself must be some kind of miracle.

Yet, if the film belongs to anyone, it must be to Max Gillies as Deadeye. The role is hardly a dis­ tinguished or original one, with a script that gives as little assistance as the gracelessly laconic per­ formance opposite by Serge Lazareff, so that Deadeye in more ways than one is going it alone.

Gillies’ handling of the part is not faultless, but it is he, of all the gallery of more or less stereotyped characters, that really comes alive: fantasizing, reminiscing, sulking, joyously overplaying, a kind of Long John Silver combined with Gabby Hayes, he shows a verve and a versatility that go a long way towards rescuing Eskimo Nell from the worst of the perils to which it exposes itself.

We need more of Max Gillies, more of Richard Franklin and Vince Monton because we need more good films that the public will pay to see, films that offer something over and above skin and fucks and farting and expanded polystyrene plots. A culturally valid commercial cinema, in other words. Hopefully they’ll be able to do it for us.

FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN and YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN

Sue Adler

.1 wouldn’t go as far as to say that Morrissey has taken Boris Karloff, cast him in a six-inch plastic mould and for the sake of discretion slapped a fig leaf over his nuts and bolts — the same way that purveyors of fine kitschware have vetted Michaelangelo’s David — but there is a parallel.

The David’s more recent multifarious appearance in leprechaun form is, however one may feel about it, an attempt to graft something which reaches a popular modern sensibility onto a classic. In the same way, Frankenstein (James Whale 1931) represents a high point in the cinema, and although Paul Morrissey has taken this all-time great and updated it in a similar way, in doing so he demonstrates rather more art. The result of this transmutation is haut kitsch. A modern sensibility, however, is not enough to con­ stitute kitsch. The magic ingredient is good oldfashioned bad taste — the more awful the better — and Flesh For Frankenstein absolutely abounds in awful taste. Yet Flesh, although its humor is monster (Peter Boyle) out making friends in definitely noir, is a very funny movie — kitsch Frankenstein’s Mel Brooks’ latest comedy Young Frankenstein. with panache I rather think.

We find the Baron Frankenstein (Udo Kier) in The title reads Flesh For Frankenstein, and it is the process of working off that supreme anal fix­ this ‘flesh-getting’ that constitutes a lot of the ac­ ation: “Ze creation of ze perfect race” — or tion. The Baron and his assistant Otto trip about perhaps he’s just being teutonic . . . look at Hitler. the countryside, snipping off perfect specimens Actually Udo’s performance is not without its of people’s bits. One of the very funny but THE TRUE STORY OF ESKIMO NELL. Directed by Hitlerish overtones. Through most of the movie dubious scenes shows them tracking down the Richard Franklin. Produced by Richard Franklin, Ron he shouts as he delivers his dialogue (or as he owner of the perfect nasum—needed to complete Baneth. Production Company, Quest Films Pty. Ltd. makes it up — it is, after all, a Warhol movie) and the male monster—with a large pair of scissors.

Screenplay by Alan Hopgood, Richard Franklin. Photograph­ definitely moves with a pronounced goose step. We are then treated, in colorful detail, to the ‘big ed by Vincent Monton. Edited by Andrew London. Art Direc­ heThe story follows along these lines: Herr Baron snip’. It’s this ‘colorful detail’ (spilling entrails, tor, Josephine Ford. Sound by John Phillips. Costumes by is disgusted by the degeneration of the human dismemberments) which seems to have put a lot of Aphrodite Kondos. Music by Brian May. Players, Max Gilles (Dead Eye Dick), Serge Lazareff (Mexico Pete), Paul Vachon race, and his own private version of Genesis starts people off the movie; but it’s all just too ex­ (The Alaskan Kid), Abigail (Esmeralda), Kris McQuade (Lil), with the creation of a male and a female — aggerated to be taken seriously. After a while the Ellie Maclure (Elly), Grahame Bond (Bogger), Max Fairchild outrageous becomes the norm and a dark sort of (Posthole Jack), Anthony Bazell (Professor Brayshaw), Ernie perfect, blond, aryan embodiments of “ze Serbian ideals” (Serbians of course being directly descend­ humor evolves — one finds one’s self chuckling as Bourne (Barman), Paddy Madden, Victoria Anoux (Eskimo Nell). Color. 104 mins. Australia 1974. ed from the classical Greeks) who “vill mate and the blood spurts. haff babies”.

When asked early in production what the movie would be about, Morrissey said it was going to be one for the family. Well, so it is: the Baron is married to his sister (Monique Van Vooren) and they have two beautiful children who, it would appear, have a lot of their father in them. The Baroness is a nymphomaniac, which explains what Joe Dallesandro is doing in the movie — but narrative-wise he actually plays a role as well.

After being engaged as a member of the Baroness’ household staff, he starts to suspect something fishy when he sees his best friend’s (the one with the nasum) head on someone else’s taller shoulders. Apart from playing ‘resident stud’ and just being in the movie for no reason other than he’s always in Warhol-Morrissey productions, Dallesandro is used as a sort of Everyman figure.

His reaction to all the gore and guts is what I im­ agine ours is supposed to be if we could take it all seriously.

The end of Flesh For Frankenstein looks how the last act of Hamlet would have if everyone had used real swords. Otto tries to ‘enter’ the female zombie as we had seen the Baron do it earlier . . . “To know life, Otto, one must first fuck death in ze gall bladder”. But Otto is too clumsy and bungles it — ripping her entrails out. Well, that really starts the ball rolling. Blood, guts, lungs, everyone’s everything everywhere!

The really interesting thing is that nobody dies in a normal ‘movie-type’ way. They seem to just break up or spill open. The male zombie, mortally anguished at being trapped in a strange body, ends it all by unpicking his stitches and letting it all hang out.

Thinking about it, the comparison with Hamlet is quite strong. Remember how Hamlet keeps talking long after he should be well and truly dead? Well Udo, considering he’s run through Frankenstein (Udo Kier) examines his ‘perfect creation’ (Dalia Di Lazzaro) in Paul Morrissey’s Flesh for Frankenstein. with a barge pole and has what looks suspiciously like his heart impaled on the end of it, a full Cinema Papers, March-April — 53

THE MEAN M ACHINE

two feet away from his body, keeps talking too, and takes a positive age to die.

The final effect, visually, is rather like a Rubens grouping with too many red tones. In fact there is a strong sense of composition and grouping throughout the whole movie. Unlike the hand­ held cinema improvisé o f1earlier WarholMorrissey, this movie is beautifully made (shot at Cinecittà, Rome). Great attention has been paid to decor and artifact, the score — yes there is one — is quite haunting and beautiful.

The old Morrissey stamp is still there though — improvised dialogue, effete characters etc. The beautiful look of the movie does have a sort of ex­ quisite preciosity about it which, though definitely camp, is not unpleasant.

While Morrissey is preoccupied with the more unnatural, bizarre aspects of the Frankenstein legend, Mel Brooks is interested in it as a Hollywood icon. Young Frankenstein was shot in black and white and has been treated so it has that Hollywood ‘sfumato of the thirties5 look. Much attention has been paid to recreating the at­ mosphere of the James Whale original — the laboratory scenes for example.

Brooks, when doing a movie, seems to skirt maniacally around the edges of Hollywood, look­ ing at its legends and, rather like Frankenstein himself, he exhumes apd snatches the images and kudos he likes and with them creates his monsters — his films. The humor of Young Frankenstein, like that of Blazing Saddles, comes from parody and filmic ‘injokes’. The spontaneous craziness of Blazing Saddles has given way, however, to a con­ trolled, cohesive, more thought-out sort of humor.

It is obvious through his meticulous reference to it and his faithful recreation of its mood, that Mel Brooks has a great deal of affection for the thirties masterpiece, but he just can’t resist the temptation to crucify it. The character of Frankenstein, in this case played by Gene Wilder, is Freddy, a noted young American neuro-surgeon who, professionally and socially embarrassed by his in­ famous background, insists on being addressed as ‘Fronkensteen’. It’s interesting to note here that of the three Frankensteins I’ve mentioned, Freddy is the only one to have got through medical school.

Storywise Young Frankenstein is, in a tonguein-cheek way, in the tradition of the Son of Frankenstein genre. Freddy, as the grandson, goes to Transylvania to claim only his inheritance to the Frankenstein estate, but is drawn into carrying on with his grandfather’s work. He creates a monster (Peter Boyle) with an abnormal brain — traditionally Frankenstein’s assistant is always sent to snatch a brain for the monster and, traditionally, he blows it and brings back an ab­ normal one. Instead of stitches; and the customary monster neck hardware, Brooks’ monster is fitted with zippers. The movie is full of these exquisite touches. When the monster seduces Freddy’s simpering primping fiancée (Madeleine Kahn), her Marcel wave frizzes up into a streaked ‘Bride of Frankenstein’ spectacular — à la Elsa Lanchester, and they even smoke cigarettes in the dark afterwards. Yes, madness will out.

There is a scene of sublime insanity where Fred­ dy, in demonstrating his achievement to the Bucharest Academy of Science at a glittering soiree in top hat and tails, goes through a song and dance number with the monster to ‘Puttin’ on the Ritz’. Marty Feldman as the hunchback assistant Igor is supposed to be funny, but apart from the running gag on his hump changing from one side to the other, the only remarkable thing about his performance is that his goitre condition has got much worse.

As in the original, there are angry villagers, led by a police inspector (inspired, I’m sure, by Von Stroheim in La Grande Illusion) with a mechanical wooden hand which he uses as a cigarette lighter, and whose German accent is so comically gutteral that when he makes speeches the typical German folk crowd, uncomprehending and stupefied, roar back in chorus: “What?”

54 — Cinema Papers, March-April

The significant ‘new’ thing that both these respectively). Regrettably — and to some degree Frankensteins of the seventies have in common, incomprehensibly — all were box-office disasters. apart from being funny, is sex. Undeniably there Aldrich sold his studio and temporarily retire^ was a tacit sort of sexuality about Boris Karloff, from the field, badly in need of a project to but in the thirties it just wasn’t done to be graphic resurrect his fallen star.

The irony of the seventies for major American about it or even to explore it. Whether or not the demystification of the sexual mystique in the directors of the Fifties and early sixties is that cinema is always a good thing is another question while many younger filmmakers have been given altogether, but the sexual possibilities have always their heads for the first time in the wake of in­ been there and Mel Brooks has brought them into dependent production and the partial demise of the open. Although there is a lot of fucking in the studio system, the established group have Flesh For Frankenstein, none of it is done by the been, in a large number of instances, unable to monsters — in fact that’s the big joke of the make use of their new found freedoms. Directors movie. Instead of the traditionally mistakenly- like Minnelli, Ray, Vidor, Boetticher and Fuller used abnormal brain (i.e. criminal brain), the have been in the main unproductive since the mid­ Morrissey version of the abnormal brain is one sixties. True, some like Don Siegel managed the with no sexual drive. That, for him, is the transition with aplomb using the new openness of deviation. There are, of course, brothel scenes and the studios to his advantage. Robert Aldrich, too, those depicting necrophilia and sadism. They are appeared to have bridged the gap and with The there not for commercial value or for shock or Legend of Lylah Clare (1968) and Ulzana’s Raid titillation value, but simply because decadence is (1973) presented arguably two of the greatest to Morrissey as Death Themes is to Bergman, movies of the sixties and seventies.

But the box-office is a stern mistress and Catholicism is to Pasolini and Great Composers are to Ken Russell. But Brooks brings out the sex­ Aldrich must have been more than pleased when uality of his monster in a way that is fascinating he managed to team with Albert S. Ruddy and titillating. And once it’s revealed, you almost (producer of The Godfather) for The Mean Machine. Initial results in the US and elsewhere feel naughty for thinking about it.

Doctor Freddy and his assistants are sitting indicate The Mean Machine may well reestablish round discussing how the monster’s components Aldrich’s ‘bankableness’ with investors, but as a must be much larger than normal for the experi­ movie it is disappointing.

The problems are not evident at the straight­ ment to be a success, and Inga, his pretty young assistant, exclaims that (“oh my gosh”) he would forward level of surface narrative. Burt Reynolds have an enormous schwanstucker. That really plays a former American pro-footballer thrown fires something in the imagination, and from the into prison on a short-term sentence for a series of moment the monster is animated he really does acts of typical Aldrich hooliganism. The prison is have a strong sexual presence. The scene where he a complete social universe with a neatly defined seduces Madeleine Kahn, although not sexy in the power structure. The football-crazy warden (Ed­ usual way, really is electric. This, I think, is due to die Albert) encourages his Guard’s football team the fact that the Frankenstein’s monster (Brooks’ to seek ever more acceptable results; and in new monster, unlike the beautiful-but-vapid creatures inmate Reynolds he sees the key to his team’s in Flesh For Frankenstein, has the traditional look success in the upcoming competition series. based on the Boris Karloff prototype), has almost Under threat of a longer prison sentence for a come to be regarded as a sacred institution, in­ trifling misdemeanor (he’s provoked into violable and solidly there. And to have it revealed assaulting a guard) he is persuaded to coach the to one that he’s got a big dong is rather like being Warden’s team and then to field a team of con­ a convent schoolgirl discovering that Mother victs for a pre-season warm up match against the Superior eats babies and drinks her bath water — Guards. but the idea excites you.

The preparations for the match and the match itself make up the second half of the movie.

Here Aldrich is offering us upon reflection his FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN. Directed by Paul archtypal situation, albeit somewhat modified. If Morrissey. Produced by Andrew Braunsberg. A CCThe Dirty Dozen and Too Late The Hero stood Champion and Carlo Ponti-Jean Pierre Rassam production.

Screenplay by Morrissey. Photographed by Luigi Kueveillier. for the proposition that the only type of person Edited by Ted Johnson. Music by Carlo Gizzi. Players: Joe who can effectively operate and succeed in war is Dallesandro (Nicholas), Udo Kier (Frankenstein), Monique the criminal, then The Mean Machine, using the Van Vooren (Katrin), Arno Juerging (Otto), Srdjan Zelenovic (Man Monster), Dalia Di Lazzaro (Girl Monster). Eastmanfootball match as a metaphor for western color. 3D. 95 mins. France 1974. capitalism, says that only criminals using ‘dirty’ YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN. Directed by Mel Brooks. techniques (Reynolds has his players check out Produced by Michael Gruskoff. A Twentieth Century-Fox the guard’s X-rays and medical reports for details production. Screenplay by Gene Wilder, Mel Brooks. Based of easy to break bones, weaknesses etc; and uses on characters created by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. sex and bribery to obtain information) can exist Photographed by Gerald Hirschfeld. Edited by John Howard.

Sound by Richard Portman, Gene Cantamessa. Production successfully therein.

Design, Dale Hennesy. Set Decoration, Bob De Vestel. Music This is Aldrich’s post-Watergate cynicism. Of

by John Morris. Players: Gene Wilder (Dr Frankenstein), course, this core meaning (as in most Aldrich Peter Boyle (Monster), Marty Feldman (Igor), Madeline films) is hidden beneath a superficial surface plea Kahn (Elizabeth), Cloris Leachman (Frau Blucher), Teri Garr (Inga), Kenneth Mars (Inspector Kemp), Richard Hadyn for the rights of the individual. Reynolds may (Herr Falkstein), Liam Dunn (Mr Hilltop), Gene Hackman decide not to throw the match at the last, depriv­ (Blind Man). Black and white. 108 mins. US 1974. ing the Warden of his cherished win, but his abili­ ty to be in the position to make that choice is totally the result of his dirty tricks preparation.

THE MEAN MACHINE The Guards and the Warden’s prison system are the rules machine. Without Reynold’s band of dis­ Antony Ginnane sidents their system would grind to a halt. Yet, these very dissidents use the Warden’s own techni­ The Mean Machine (original American title: ques — only more successfully.

The Longest Yard) is Robert Aldrich’s first major The movie’s first main problem is the casting of studio-backed production since 1968. After the Burt Reynolds. This is the second Aldrich movie phenomenal success of The Dirty Dozen, Aldrich of late to be partially wrecked by inappropriate had become the first American director since casting. (Cliff Robertson, forced on Aldrich by Griffith to own a studio. Associates and Aldrich ABC for Too Late The Hero, was the other ex­ — partly funded at first by the ABC TV network’s ample). Admittedly Aldrich manages to pull a production feature arm, ABC Films — turned out better performance out of this beefcake star than I five intensely personal movies: The Killing of would have thought possible, but Reynold’s pinup Sister George, Too Late The Hero, The Grissom cover boy status points the finger at The Mean Gang, Ulzana’s Raid and Emperor of the North Machine’s underlying fault. (the latter two for Universal and Fox release Critics have rivetted on Aldrich’s skill at in-

IM M ORAL TALES

The Mean Machine: Burt Reynolds receives first aid during a break in the final moments of the football match — a bloody clash between prisoners and guards.

violence and bloodshed. Long before Peckinpah ' began rubbing our noses in gore, Aldrich has been hitting audiences with heavy doses of violence as a deterrent par excellence.

Attack was the foundation for Aldrich’s anti­ war feel. An early sequence has Jack Palance, who has failed in a bazooka attack on a tank, sprawled on the ground screaming while the tread runs over his arm. He then drags himself along the ground racked with pain, trying to fulfil his promise to his dead psychotic Captain Eddie Albert who sent Palance and his men to the front with unfulfilled promises of support. The climac­ tic sequence has few of the platoon left alive pumping bullets into Albert’s body which now lies over Palance’s corpse. The uselessness and insani­ ty of war has only rarely been more excruciatingly visualized than in these scenes.

The classic sequence in Kiss Me Deadly, where Mike Hammer wakes after a vicious working over to hear the screams of his girlfriend being tortured and her naked legs flaying in the background, presents an edge of futility peculiarly original in the normally laconic Hammett-Chandler milieu.

The mania of war to total insanity comes over to the conflict between Cliff Robertson and Michael Caine in Too Late the New and permeates Aldrich’s most famous anti-war movie to date: The Dirty Dozen. This movie, loaded with animalistic behavior and gratuitous vicarious violence, pummels home the nastiness of killing most effectively. Aldrich’s purgative use of violence spans his career.

Perhaps now reestablished on the commercial scene, he will be able to return to the bleak, scarred lifestyle that his characters have until now endured.

THE MEAN MACHINE. Directed by Robert Aldrich.

Produced by Albert S. Ruddy. Production Company, Paramount Pictures. Screenplay by Tracey Keenan Wynn.

From a story by Ruddy. Photographed by Joseph Biroc.

Edited by Michael Luciano. Sound by John Wilkinson.

Production Design, James S. Vance. Music by Frank DeVol. Players: Burt Reynolds (Paul Crewe), Eddie Albert (Warden Hazen), Ed Lauter (Capt Knauer), Michael Conrad (Scarboro), Jim Hampton (Caretaker), Harry Caesar (Granville), John Steadman (Pop), Charles Tyner (Unger), Mike Henry, Joe Kapp (Guards), Pepper Martin (Shop Steward), Ernie Wheelwright (Spooner), Tony Cacciotti (Rotka), Richard Kiel (Samson), Pervis Atkins (Mawabe), Dino Washington (Mason), Anitra Ford (Melissa). Technicolor. 121 mins. US 1974.

C O N T E S IM M O R A U X (IM M O R A L TALES)

Meaghan Morris The most controversial point about Contes Im­ moraux appears to be whether Charlotte Alex­ andra, in the second of the tales, masturbates with zucchinis or cucumbers. After serious consulta­ tion with a friend who knows both films and vegetables, I vote for the cucumber.

These fine distinctions assume an unusual im­ portance when you see a film which, in a most dis­ concerting manner, combines an extraordinary Paul Crewe (Burt Reynolds) wrestles in the mud with a fellow prisoner in a scene from Robert Aldrich’s The Mean visual beauty with a thematic content of sheer Machine. corn, it is jarring to even think of corny movies in jecting personal violence and nastiness onto the By downplaying the violence of the situation, connection with the work of such a determinedly screen. It was that viciousness and gut hurt that hinted at, promised, but never shown, Aldrich’s regal director as W alerian Borowczyk. burned off the screen in Attack, Kiss Me Deadly prisoners and guards both become basically nice Nevertheless, I’m afraid this time artistic perfec­ and simmered beneath the surface in The Big guys and the audience couldn’t care less about the tion has fallen flat on its flawless face.

Knife. This violence of style has reiterated struggle, save at a basic ‘Will Reynolds win?’

The film is a set of four stories, each the kind of Aldrich’s cynicism; given substance to his com­ level. Thus the amazing response in all quarters tale that is the stuff of rumor, myth and folklore. ment, his critique of the ‘win at all costs’ syn­ labelling the movie as a comedy. There has always They are linked only in that the film as a whole drome of American populist philosophy that been a caustic hip existential, flavor about the leads us through the conventional gamut of oral permeates patriotishi, crime, war, sex and death. dialogue and behavior of Aldrich’s characters, but sex, masturbation, lesbianism/sadism (a persis­ Here Aldrich has copped out on nastiness. His never before have his acts of aggression had tent equation, that one) and then group sex com­ usual no holds barred treatment has been sub­ audiences chuckling with hilarity, as do most of bined with incest. There was originally a fifth tale merged in an attempt to prop up the movie’s the maimings during the climactic match. along the lines of Beauty and the Beast, but that superficial capital ‘S’ significance: the rights of Sarris notes Aldrich’s violence even in genres was suppressed by Borowczyk himself. the individual and the dignity of the human spirit that subsist on violence. Not so here. Thus it is The first tale, “La Marée” (The Tide) is — real Richard Brooks or Stanley Kramer harder than usual to follow the distaste with which adapted from a story by the French novelist, material that. Capital letters choke The Mean local Aldrich detractors have put the movie down. André Pieyre de Mandiargues, and is the only Machine.

Aldrich’s concern has always been hypercritical of deviation from Borowczyk’s normal preoccupaCinema Papers, March-April — 55

IM M ORAL TALES

tion with the past. A young man takes his younger — and therefore submissive — cousin to a deserted beach. He tells her that he is going to honor her with some ‘instruction’, which turns out to be that she must suck him off while the tide rises. He has elaborately engineered the situation so that they are caught by the tide, but are on some rocks where they will only be splashed when the tide reaches its peak. While she sucks him off — lengthily — he gives her a lecture on the motions of the tide. He exerts self-control to release his life-giving liquid at the very moment of high tide. He has a watch placed on the rocks to be sure. This is what they do for the rest of the segment, and at the vital moment the young man’s shouts of ecstasy merge, appropriately and predic­ tably, with the crashing of the waves.

“Therese Philosophe” (Philosopher Theresa) takes an 1890 newspaper report of a request for the canonisation of a local girl who was raped by a tramp, and imagines how she spent the time before the dreadful event. She has been in church, is turned on by the seductive voice of God who wants to “enter her”, and fingers the organ pipes.

She is late home, and is locked in a room with only a couple of cucumbers for sustenance. Left alone, she produces a pornographic book and proceeds to masturbate heartily with a cucumber.

She splits it open in her passion, but quickly sets to with another. At the moment of climax, she abandons the cucumber for fervent gazing and clutching of a portrait of a man (no undiluted solitary pleasures for Borowczyk). Refreshed, she wipes the stains of cucumber from the eiderdown and wanders outside, only to be seized by ugly reality in the form of the tramp.

Tale Three is “Erzebet Bathory”, and the Hungarian countess of that name is visiting the villages of her subjects in 1610. She rides around on her horse rounding up young girls to take away with her. When the girls are assembled the countess — played by Paloma Picasso — pulls aside their.dresses one by one to examine their pubes. She promises the distressed villagers that the girls will be looked after, and once a month they will be permitted to touch the pearls on her gown.

Back at the castle, there is much bathing, giggl­ ing and preparation of bodies, supervised by the countess’s page who is probably supposed to look androgynous but doesn’t. The countess enters, naked beneath a gown on which are sewn the promised pearls. The village girls are overcome for a moment; then the countess lies down and the girls not only stroke the pearls but also her, un­ derneath. They start to tear the gown apart, shove the precious pearls in their vaginas and mouths, then turn viciously on each other trying to get more. As it begins to get hectic, the countess leaves and the page draws her sword. Flash to the countess in a foaming bath of blood. The page lets down her hair and reveals her femininity and the two women retire to bed. Then comes the heterosexual salvation; the page-girl calls in the police, the countess is arrested, and the girl falls into the arms of a soldier who seems to have been in the cupboard all along.

The last tale is “Lucrezia Borgia”, and con­ forms to the usual version of the ways of this in­ teresting woman. Husband Sforza is summarily despatched early in the piece, by being snatched from behind a bust of Lucrezia’s mother. Scenes of Lucrezia enjoying herself with both her father, Pope Alexander VI, and her brother, Cardinal Cesare Borgia, alternate with scenes of the monk, Savonarola, making speeches of denunciation, attempting to stir the populace against the decadence of the high clergy. He, too, is carted off; then there is a christening of Lucrezia’s dubious baby.

It is all too easy to be flippant at the expense of this film; but one of the serious problems with Contes Immoraux is that in itself it is not amusing at all, though the tales have obvious comic poten­ tial. There are one or two exceptional moments, particularly a very funny scene in the beginning of 56 — Cinema Papers, March-April

“Lucrezia Borgia” when Sforza, suspicious of the family’s famous habits with poison, refuses some biscuits which the Borgias proceed to eat under his hungry nose. But on the whole, the film collapses under a weight of solemnity which the tales can’t carry; and in spite of the visual perfec­ tion and the glorious music, the pomp and ceremony of Borowczyk’s filming, so successful in Blanche, works to just about destroy the film.

A clear case of this is Borowczyk’s conception of the visual images of sexuality used throughout the film. He has drastically overdone the ob­ viousness of his imagery, beginning with the first tired equation of sexuality and the sea. However beautifully photographed, waves breaking during an erotic scene are still waves breaking once again in another erotic scene.

After the first tale, the film is virtually a stately procession of conventional phallic objects and sexual symbols — organ pipes, crosses, cucumbers et al; the page-girl wields both pen and sword, the countess a riding-crop. From horses to stallions, specifically in “Lucrezia Borgia” where the family laughs over drawings of stallion erec­ tions. Therese wears a white dress, but fondles a scarlet religious sash — she also wears a necklet with a red jewel, as a close-up makes sure we notice. The wicked countess is wearing black when we first see her, but sports a scarlet boot.

The girls in the countess’s bath-house scribble obscenities on the wall; and she, with all the serious grace imaginable, scrubs them off in stereotyped lesbian distaste.

It is mainly this imagery which creates the cor­ ny dimension of the film. Contemporary French artists of all kinds are fond of making collections of clichés deliberately, but if irony is intended in Contes Immoraux, it has not been permitted to peep through properly. Too many close-ups are devoted to these ‘sexual’ objects — most of them quite desexualised now through long usage. The camera dwells too long and lovingly upon them, and they are always carefully placed in a total design laboriously created to complement them.

Contes Immoraux is also a very cold film, and its titling raises some peculiar questions. In an early interview in Cahiers du Cinema (No. 209,

February 1969), Borowczyk talked about his at­ titudes to the medium in relation to his first long, non-animated film Goto Pile d’amour; and neither Blanche nor Contes Immoraux show much evidence of a change in his ideas. He sees no fun­ damental difference between his animated films and films with actors; people, dolls or paper are all material to be worked on and controlled to achieve total precision and coherence in the finish­ ed product. He achieves that all right, but his forte becomes almost exclusively catering for the pure aesthete’s delight in composition in the most abstract sense. But why, then, “immoral tales”?

How can a set of beautiful objects, exquisitely arranged, and beautiful people, harmoniously placed or faultlessly moving on screen, have any ethical content of any kind whatsoever?

Borowczyk’s technique worked brilliantly in Blanche, since the motivation of that film seemed to be partly to create an exercise in composition geared to an aesthetic polemic. Blanche sets out as though to defy all the books ever written this cen­ tury on the death of western tragedy, and com­ poses what might be a classical five-acter (with just a tinge of gothic), complete with fatal flaw to tip off a perfectly traditional tragic denouement.

Borowczyk succeeds because Blanche is a con­ sistently and superbly irrelevant film. It doesn’t really bite at anyone’s immediate social or political concerns, and it certainly isn’t the kind of film that performs itself an obvious social func­ tion or fulfils a need. It exists in a grand disloca­ tion from everything else but the inevitabilities of its own form.

Unfortunately you can’t really bring a sense of tradition and the eternal to explicitly sexual matters and get away with it at the moment. In his interview, Borowczyk expressed a dislike of art focussed around contemporary issues; that is the province of the journalist (like Godard), not the artist, because only in interpreting the past can the artist avoid mistakes. This time Borowczyk has taken on a current issue in his cinema, and using mainly period settings and music and ‘timeless’ tales cannot disguise the fact that it is a current issue; but the attempt at disguise weakens the film. ~

Young virgins swarm around the countess Erzsebet in a scene from Walerian Borowczyk’s Contes Immoraux.

It could be argued that the titling of the film is folktales and the work of Pasolini.) But here again ironic; that its effect of the-irrelevance-of-ethics- we come up against the problem of the lack of to-statues empties the word ‘immoral’ of all humor. Clearly the film is interested in the ritual meaning. But there is a seriousness about it that side of the traditional immorality — from the defies that hopeful suggestion. Part of what I have careful timing undertaken by the young man in called the coldness of the film is created specifical­ “La Marée”, to Lucrezia Borgia’s considered ly by the camera which is immobile for a con­ positioning of her body across a couch shaped like siderable amount of the time, while people walk a crucifix. But any decent sexual ritual worth the around it or perform assigned tasks in front of name has two sides — a traditional scheme of joy it. There are very few tracking shots; otherwise, and sorrow, humor and solemnity, sin and the camera zooms in to examine at length a redemption. What’s a sense of wickedness worth selected object or area of flesh, or there are close- without a sense of how much fun it is? This film is ups connoting ‘examination’ in the film itself, par­ just too earnest and over-awed by its own beauty; ticularly of portraits which are placed staring in filming a set of folk stories as though they were down everywhere, and of eyes (especially Paloma high tragedy, Borowczyk converts his own Picasso’s beautiful brown ones). The overall im­ mastery of ritualistic style in Blanche into just a pression this creates is that there is a specific highly mannered technique. phenomenon called ‘immoral behavior’, of fixed It’s curious that Borowczyk does this, because definition, and this behavior is being clinically in the short that goes with the film, “Une Collec­ surveyed and recorded. This is emphasized by the tion Particulière”, he makes fun out of the official immense seriousness with which all the characters sense of wickedness involved in censorship. The in the film take themselves and their activities; short is especially funny when pornographic pic­ also by the gradual build-up during the film, of the tures flash onto the screen, only to be ‘censored’ relation between religion and sexuality. A confu­ by the equally swift intrusion of an official finger­ sion of the two in “Thérèse Philosophe” becomes tip to obscure the vital parts.

I wondered after seeing the film whether Contes a flagrant contradiction, which is more or less Immoraux is taking a sly dig at the films of condemned in “Lucrezia Borgia”.

Contes Immoraux could have a purely formal Rohmer. Except for the seriousness, which is as meaning; the stories all have the form of the con­ all-pervasive as that of Contes Moraux but ventional ribald tale. (Borowczyk enjoys both without the same basis for it, Borowczyk’s film is

the opposite of those of Rohmer in almost every respect. There is none of the anguished mulling over of morals, none of the difficulty at con­ ceiving, let alone performing, an ‘immoral’ act that marks Ma Nuit Chez Maud or L’amour 1’apres-midi; and instead of taking six long films to examine aspects of human sexual behavior, Borowczyk does four in a film. It’s an interesting idea, if only Contes Immoraux itself had succeed­ ed internally. Besides, Borowczyk certainly seems to share Rohmer’s sense of the temptations of im­ morality, being firmly located in female flesh; and while there is no psychic block about immorality in any of the characters, they certainly have to go to enormous trouble in their physical preparations to get themselves worked up.

In spite of everything, there is a repressed aura about this film that begins in the first tale, when the young man walks ahead of the girl so that he can forget her and will be correspondingly more excited when he sees her again. He also com­ mands her to come to him over the rocks on all fours.

Contes Immoraux has been mainly praised as a film about sex which is not pornographic. This is probably true, but unfortunately it is not really erotic either. There is none of the skin-flick technique of endlessly photographing mouths and genitals dissociated from bodies, or of giving you a quick look, leaving you to imagine the rest acCinema Papers, March-April — 57

11 HARROW HOUSE

cording to fancy. It’s all very tasteful, etc; but after an hour or so of lovely angles, you start to feel just as jaded as if you had watched a dozen identical skin-flicks in the same time — because the whole thing is so unmitigatedly joyless.

I wonder whether it’s possible any more to make a positive film about sexual behavior, which doesn’t humiliate women and doesn’t reduce human sexuality to one or two key organs, but which is more than a classical exercise in form, line and color. If there is such a film Contes Im­ moraux isn’t it; it’s beautiful, but just awfully, aw­ fully dull.

CONTES IMMORAUX (IMMORAL TALES). Directed by Walerian Borowczyk. Produced by Anatole Dauman. Produc­ tion Company, Argos Films. Screenplay by Walerian Borowc­ zyk. With the first of four sketches based on a story by Andre ' Pierre De Mandiargues. Photographed by Bernard Daillen­ court, Guy Durban, Michel Zolat, Noel Very. Editing and art direction by Walerian Borowczyk. Costumes by Piet Bolscher.

Music by Maurice Le Roux. Players: La Marée (The Tide): Lise Danvers (Julie), Fabrice Luchini (Andre); Thérèse Philosophe: Charlotte Alexandra (Therese); Erzsebet Bathory: Paloma Picasso (Erzsebet), Pascale Christophe (Istvan); Lucrezia Borgia: Florence Bellamy (Lucrezia), Jacope Berinizi (Alexander VI), Lorenzo Berinizi (Caesar). Eastmancolor. 105 mins. France 1974.

11 HARROWHOUSE

Mike Harris The vagaries of Australian film distribution resulted in Aram Avakian having two films con­ currently in release — 11 Harrowhouse and Cops and Robbers. Tempting though it might be to make a comparison between the two films, he did after all make them separately for two different masters, and honestly, any one film should be able to stand on its own: it’s really only the critics who inflate a series of jobs into that ghastly collective pretention, “oeuvres”.

11 Harrowhouse gives the impression of being a rather pleasant conceit (in the Jacobean sense), and it engenders in its initial sounds and images, a receptivity that is seductive. Gently wry narrations are rare enough, when at the same time they are witty and pertinent (as they are definitely not in Frankenheimer’s 99 and 44/100 Per Cent Dead), then it seems worthwhile, and perhaps ul­ timately rewarding, to pay attention.

The fii st clue that all is not going to be well with the film comes in an early sequence. Avakian and Charles Grodin (who stars and did the adaptation of the Gerald Browne novel) have set up the fact that Chesser (Grodin) is persona-bavdy-grata at the denominative London address, headquarters of the Consolidated Selling System, which appears on the face of things to have a virtual global monopoly in the sale of diamonds.

There is an economical, but fairly amusing, se­ quence which sets up the pecking order very neatly. Chesser lights a cigarette which is evident­ ly non de rigeur. The security guard (Jack Wat­ son) engages him in a war of wills that Chesser, an American diamond dealer and part-time schlemiel apparently, of course loses to the other’s impassive insistence. Either through a stroke of totally brilliant subtlety (which I doubt), or through incredible fortuitousness (which I suspect), Anthony Mendleson, the credited costume advisor, has Grodin nattily attired in a decent Ivy League, Brooks Brothers’ gear, but with a Brigade of Guards tie which he is patently not entitled to wear. What more awful way could there be to get the backs of the Brits up?

John Gielgud plays Meecham, the ruthless head of the Harrowhouse syndicate. Meecham and his advisors maintain total control of the dia­ mond traffic and make sure that the supply is suf­ ficiently in arrears of the demand to keep up prices. So Grodin is one-upped by some deft Lifesmanship, and retires hurt. A multi-multi­ millionaire, Clyde Massey (Trevor Howard) con­ tacts him and the intrigue we’ve been expecting all 58 — Cinema Papers, March-April

James Mason (Watts) executes an ingenious robbery in Aram Avakian’s 11 Harrowhouse.

along begins. By this time Grodin has met up with Having determined which conduit leads from his mistress, Maren (Candice Bergen). Maren, a the roof to the vault, the men are free to substitute rich widow, drives extremely badly. That she is at for the electrical wiring, a large diameter rubber the wheel of a Ferrari doesn’t mitigate how hose which is introduced down the pipe into the recklessly she handles the car, but evidently the vault at one end. The other is connected to an in­ filmmakers thought that hair-raising thrills and dustrial vacuum cleaner in a van parked in the near-spills were needed at this point to enliven the street. This method of stealing is as ingenuous as exposition. It is clearly stunt driving, and at no it is ingenious: my own slight knowledge of frame was I convinced that Ms Bergen (for whom electrical wiring leads me to believe that wires I harbor delirious fantasies in spite of having met lead from the mains via a fusebox to a wallplug, her and found she lives up to her forename) ac­ not from some convenient junction box located on tually was at the wheel of the car. a roof. But, I guess, that’s their story and they are By this stage the flaws are becoming more fre­ stuck with it. quent and insistent and can no longer be ignored.

Candice Bergen, snappily attired in workman’s All one’s hopes that the film will remain a bit of overalls by Halston, is in the truck. She turns on attractive whimsy are being systematically the motor. Mason then moves around the vault attrited — although ‘systematically’ might with the nozzle end sucking up $20 million in perhaps be too generous a word for what goes on. diamonds. The daring duo get away but when they And the real story hasn’t yet begun. Trevor rendezvous with Trevor Howard, they discover Howard of the fiery visage, looking and acting that he’s going to double-cross them. There is the more than somewhat liverish, hires Grodin to obligatory destruction derby (though here it purchase a diamond worth a million. Grodin and resembles more a steeplechase) and, with the Bergen go to Amsterdam to carry out his bidding. villains bested, your happy ending.

Complications ensue and the end result of a lot of What the film overlooks soon after the start is talk is that Trevor Howard blackmails Grodin the intelligence of its audience. What makes this and Bergen into setting up The Incredible Dia­ more offensive is that for the first few minutes the mond Theft Caper — which is what the picture’s «audience is led to expect adult treatment. all about anyway.

Originally thé film was longer than the 95It is at this stage that we are made better ac­ minute version shown here. What went with the quainted with James Mason. deleted 13 minutes one can’t even guess, but I He plays a terminal cancer patient named doubt it contained anything to make me modify Watts, who is being treated badly by his my views. employers who own “ 11 Harrowhouse” and the It is a very average film both technically and in fortune in diamonds under its floor. Watts is a its dramatic performances. Gielgud disguises any trusted employe. His employers are stingy about distaste for his role by acting it out as his distaste pensions, so his family will be going a bit short if for the Grodin character. Mason is called upon to he doesn’t join in the scheme. Grodin offers him be a dying man, and his performance reflects it. $250,000 and he agrees to help. He accepts the Howard strides about the place and shouts, but he offer and the gem snatch is on. never gives one the impression that he is paying The film then takes another directional veer. attention to what he is saying. It is almost as Bergen and Grodin are transformed into deft and though he is acting irritable because he feels crafty professional thieves, apparently with years 'irritable, not the character. Ms Bergen appears to of commando training and a knowledge of have decided to relax and try to enjoy it, but her electronic security systems, architectural wiring mind seems at times to be wandering to other, and the habits and gastronomic preferences of more pleasant, experiences.

Blatella Germanica, the European domestic There are many things that can erode a film­ cockroach. maker’s original intentions, and if Avakian had If you still have disbelief to suspend, prepare to the kind of stars to deal with who were reputed to suspend it now: Grodin sends a cockroach down be wilful, unprofessional, demanding or the electric conduit to where Mason is waiting troublesome in some way, I could readily unders­ with a piece of chocolate cake. tand how 11 Harrowhouse got out of hand. And

EMMANUELE it — an d you m ig h t as w ell h av e n am e d th e p ro d u c tio n c o m p a n y T ita n ic L im ited .

S till, I h o p e th e ex ercise is a s a lu ta ry o n e fo r A ra m A v ak ia n . I h o p e it h as ta u g h t him n o t to listen to adv ice fro m his w riter.

A rt M u rp h y ’s review in Variety h as th is a m u s­ ing noté: “ It is fo rtu n a te th a t G ro d in h as so m e n o n -p e rfo rm in g cred its b u ilt up in show b iz, fo r it w ould be cruel to th in k th a t an ac tin g c a re e r lay ah ead b ased on th is in fa n tilism .” ' 11 HARROWHOUSE. Directed by Aram Avakian. Produced

by Elliot Kastner. Associate Producer, Denis Holt. Production Company, Harrowhouse Productions. Screenplay by Jeffrey Bloom. Based on the novel by Gerald A. Browne. Adapted by Charles Grodin. Photographed by Arthur Ibbetson. Edited by Anne V. Coates. Set Decoration by Jack Stephens. Sound by Danny Daniel. Special Effects by Roy Whybrow. Music by Michael J. Lewis. Players, Charles Grodin (Chesser), Candice Bergen (Maren), John Gielgud (Meecham), Trevor Howard (Clyde Massey), James Mason (Watts), Peter Vaughan (Coglin), Helen Cherry (Lady Bolding), Jack Watson (Miller), Jack Watling (Fitzmaurice), Cyril Shaps (Mr Wildenstein), Leon Green (Toland), Joe Powell (Hickey). Color. 95 mins.

Original running time 108 mins. Great Britain 1974.

EMMANUELLE

David J. Stratton

Emmanuelle (Silvia Kristel) on an air-trip to Bangkok in a scene from Emmanuelle, directed by Just Jaeckin.

Emmanuelle: Emmanuelle and Bee (Marika Green) sin ce Je ffre y B lo o m d id th e screen p lay fro m G ro d in ’s a d a p ta tio n , it seem s u n lik ely th a t A v a k ia n h a d sc rip t p ro b le m s to h a ra ss h im .

W h o th e n — o th e r th a n th e d ire c to r — m u st ta k e th e b la m e? , , .......

I t ’s m y gu ess th a t th e film w en t funny b ecau se o f G ro d in . I t ’s o n ly A v a k ia n ’s th ird film an d h e ’s s ta r-s tru c k . W h o else h as h e h a d to w o rk w ith

b efore? S h e p p e rd S tru d w ick ?

S o g ra d u a lly , G ro d in th e in n o v ativ e a c to r, G ro d in th e fo rm e r d ire c to r, G ro d in th e a u th o r an d G ro d in th e p ain -in -th e-ass c o m b in e to u su rp th e helm an d th e film loses an y d ire c t c o u rse it m ig h t h ave b een on. A d d to th is th e irresistib le im p ressio n th a t by th e tim e ev ery b o d y g o t to g e th e r to m a k e th e p ic tu re they w ere fed up w ith

Emmanuelle isn ’t so m u ch a film as a very tren d y an d ra th e r ex p en siv e-lo o k in g set o f im ag es th a t lo o k as if th e y ’ve stra y e d fro m Viva, d ire c te d by a fo rm e r fash io n p h o to g ra p h e r (w ith th e u n ­ likely n a m e o f J u st Ja e c k in ) a n d s ta rrin g a lim p id , b ab y -faced h ero in e called S ylvia K ristel w ho is a p p a re n tly a fo rm e r M iss T V o f E u ro p e .

O n ce u p o n a tim e, F ra n c e h a d a re p u ta tio n fo r m a k in g sexy m ovies. A lo n g c a m e R o g e r V ad im in th e m id -5 0 ’s an d in tro d u c e d th e w orld to B rig itte B a rd o t, an d th e im p ressio n w as inten sified . T h en so m eh o w F ra n c e lo st its re p u ta tio n first to S w eden an d D e n m a rk , th en to Ita ly an d fin ally even to B ritain an d th e U S . F re n c h cen so rs w ould n ever allow Deep Throat o r High Rise.

Emmanuelle h as been a b o x -office success o f m o n s tro u s p ro p o r tio n s in F ra n c e , p ro b a b ly b ecau se it is sufficiently ‘a rtis tic ’ to fool a lo t o f p eo p le in to th in k in g it’s so m eth in g it isn ’t. J u s t as T im B u rstall w ith Alvin Purple m a n a g e d to p e r­ su ad e v ast n u m b ers o f m u m s, d ad s, au n ts, uncles — even g ra n d d a d s a n d g ra n d m a s — th a t th e film w as funny an d n a u g h ty , so Ja e c k in h as p ro v id ed such p re tty p h o to g ra p h y (by R ic h a rd S u zu k i) a n d ex o tic lo c atio n s (T h a ila n d ), th a t au d ie n c es a re ab le to ju stify to th em selv es th a t th e y ’re n o t really go in g to see a sex film . T h o se ch eerful so uls w ho need no such ju stific a tio n w ill go any w ay ; g et th e o th e rs an d y o u ’ll m a k e a fo rtu n e .

I f one is to believe 2 0th C e n tu ry F o x ’s h a n d o u t, th e p ro je ct s ta rte d o u t ra th e r d ifferen tly . Ja e c k in a p p a re n tly set o u t to m a k e a g en u in e 100 p er ce n t ‘a rt h o u se’ film , b u t o n ce he g o t to th e F a r E a st an d ex p erien ced a t first h an d how e ro tic life can be in B a n g k o k , th e film b e c a m e so m ew h at m o re u n in h ib ited . I f y o u ’ll sw allow th a t y o u ’ll sw allow an y th in g .

T h e film o pens in P a ris. E m m a n u e lle w aits to jo in h er new h u sb an d Je a n (D an iel S a rk y ), w ho is in th e F ren ch d ip lo m a tic service an d h as been p o sted to B an g k o k . O n ce th e cred its a re o u t o f th e w ay, th e film cu ts a b ru p tly to h er a rriv a l in T h a ila n d . A cco rd in g to th e film , d ip lo m a tic life in th e T h a i c a p ita l co n sists m ain ly o f screw ing a ro u n d , so th e lisso m e n ew co m er is w elco m ed by m ales an d fem ales alike. B efo re w e g et m u ch fu rth e r thiffe’s a q u a in t flash b a ck in w hich w e’re reg aled w ith E m m a n u e lle ’s in -flig h t activ ities en ro o t. S o o n th e ta rn ish e d in n o cen t is in tro d u c e d to th e m a d social w hirl, an d q u ick ly fo rm s a stro n g a tta c h m e n t to an a rc h a e o lo g is t n a m e d B ee (M a rik a G reen ). Bee ev en tu ally sp u rn s h e r, an d she re tu rn s to Je a n w ho in th e m e a n tim e h a s been d ally in g ra th e r fo rcefully w ith th e ag g ressiv e A ria n e (Je a n n e C o lletin ) w ho h a d a lre a d y sed u ced E m m an u elle a fte r a n im b le g a m e o f sq u a sh .

Cinema Papers, March-April — 59

Above: Rapist-murderer Biscayne (Robert Quilter) is a prize quarry for American bounty hunter Cal Kincaid. After losing his stolen horse in a creek crossing, Biscayne heads for a waterfall, unaware that a friend has turned him in to the bounty hunter and a trooper.

Above: Caught in a storm on a lonely road, Beverly Millington (Carla Hoogeveen) and her stepmother Andrea Millington (Diana Dangerfield) are forced to cross a creek and seek refuge in a coachhouse run by a sinister old couple.

In n o f the D am ned Below: Tony Bonner as an ill-fated trooper in Inn of the Damned. Unable to stop a bounty hunter from shooting a handcuffed prisoner, Trooper Moore spends the night at a nearby coachhouse, and is soon missing.

Above: Stranded at an overnight inn by a storm, and without their buggy and driver, Andrea Millington (Diana Dangerfield) and her stepdaughter Beverly (Carla Hoogeveen) are compelled to spend the night away from home. Lazar Straulle (Joseph Furst) and his wife Caroline (Dame Judith Anderson) have “special” plans for the Millingtons.

Below: Cal Kincaid (Alex Cord) and goodtime girl Peaches (Linda Brown) are interrupted by the arrival of a police party seeking the body of a criminal shot dead by Kincaid. The police troopers break into Kincaid’s hotel room.

60 — Cinema Papers, March-April

D ire c to r..............................T erry B o u rk e P r o d u c e r s .........................T erry B o u rk e ......................................................... R o d H ay S c rip t .................................T erry B ou rk e D irecto r o f P h o to g ra p h y . . .B rian P ro b y n , B S C E d i t o r ..........................................R o d H ay M usic ......................................B ob Y o ung P ro d u ctio n M a n a g e r . . P a t C lay to n P ro d u ctio n D esign .. G ary H an sen Cast: D am e Ju d ith A n d erson , A lex C o rd , M ich ael C raig , Jo sep h F u rst, T o ny B onner, Jo h n M eillon, R o b e rt Q u ilter, C a rla H oogeveen, D ian a D an g erfield, Jo sie M a ck ay , C olin D rak e, L ouis W ish art, Jo h n M o rris, G ra h a m C o rry , P hil A valon, L ionel L ong.

STORY: In 1896, an A m e ric a n b o u n ty h u n te r sets o u t to inv estigate th e m y sterio u s d isap p earan ces o f trav ellers on a lonely stretch o f G ip p slan d co ast. A n eccen tric old cou p le o p e ra tin g a C o b b & C o o ver­ n ig h t h o u se p ro v id e th e b iz a rre events th a t follow .

SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY D irecto r ....................................................K en H an n am E xecutive P r o d u c e r ............................. G il B realey A sso ciate P ro d u c e r/ P ro d u ctio n M a n a g e r ..........................M a tt C a rro ll S c rip t ...................................................... Jo h n D ingw all D irecto r o f P h o to g r a p h y ............... G eo ff B u rto n S upervising E d ito r .........................R o d A d am so n P ro d u ctio n M a n a g e r/ 1st A ssistan t ....................................M alcolm S m ith Cast: Ja c k T h o m p so n , M ax C ullen, R o b ert B runing, J e rry T h o m as, P e te r C u m m in s, Jo h n E w art, S ean Scully, R eg L ye, G raem e S m ith , L au rie R a n k in , L isa P eers, P hilip R oss.

STORY: O u tb a c k d ra m a d e p ic tin g ev en ts leading up to th e 1956 sh earers’ strik e.

Above: Foley (Jack Thompson) centre, enjoying a brief period of relaxation between shearing jobs, in a game of “Unders and Overs”.

Above right: Arthur Black (Peter Cummins) front, looks confident when he and Foley (Jack Thomp­ son) prepare to add another sheep to their ‘tally’ in the race for honors as top shearer in the shed.

Above left: Moments of comic relief are few and far between in a shearer’s life ... Tom West (Robert Bruning) prepares to give ‘Basher’ (Jerry Thomas) a ‘short back and sides’ with the sheep shears.

Left: Shearing contractor Tim King (Max Cullen) waits for a young rousabout to open one of the gates leading to the sheading shed.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 61

THE FRONT PAGE H o w ev er, Je a n is o ff to V ietn am an d he leaves his lonely w ife in th e safe k eep ing o f th e v en erab le M a rio (A lain C u n y ) w ho tells h er th a t “ it’s th e erec tio n n o t th e o rg asm th a t c o u n ts” an d ta k e s h e r o u t fo r a ty p ical S a tu rd a y n ig h t’s e n te rta in ­ m e n t w hich p roves to be b o th h u m iliatin g and fulfilling. H e re th e film ends ra th e r ab ru p tly , a lm o st as th o u g h th e d ire c to r h ad said, “ a la D ick L este r, h old on w e’d b e tte r n o t let th em h ave to o m u ch first tim e a ro u n d ; le t’s save so m eth in g for a seq u el.”

I c a n ’t say I fo u n d th e film b o rin g , n o t fo r one m o m en t. O th e rs h av e found it so. M ay b e they w eren ’t tu rn e d on by M s K riste l’s w inso m e c h arm s. I t ’s certain ly a silly film — n o t one w o rth w astin g m uch tim e an d e ffo rt on. It really is like flicking th ro u g h th e pages o f so m e glossy so ft­ co re m ag azin e. T h e h ero in e seem s to tu rn on every o n e she m eets, m a le an d fem ale, an d she in tu rn seem s p erfectly h ap p y to e n te r in to an y k in d o f sexual co m b in a tio n . B rig itte B a rd o t w ould n ever have d re a m e d o f th a t!

T h e m o m e n t in th e film th a t reach ed m y libido m o st stro n g ly c am e early on w hen a b ab y -faced y o u n g la d y c a lle d M a r ie - A n g e ( C h r is tin e B oisson) pulls o u t a p h o to o f P a u l N ew m a n and th e n m a s tu rb a te s — in p u b lic , to o . H o p e N ew m a n gets to see th e p ictu re. H o w fa n ta stic it m u st be to ra te th a t k in d o f im m o rta lity . B eing m a stu rb a te d to (o r at) in a F ren ch sex p ictu re.

EMMANUELLE. Directed by Just Jaeckin. Produced by Yves Roosset-Rouard. Production Company, Trinacra Films/Orphee Productions. Screenplay by Jean-Louis Richard. From the novel by Emmanuelle Arsan. Photograph­ ed by Richaed Suzuki, Marie Saunier. Edited by Claudine Bouche. Sound by Andre Hervee. Art Director, Baptiste Poirot. Music by Pierre Bachelot. Players, Sylvia Kristel (Em­ manuelle), Alain Cuny (Mario), Marika Green (Bee), Daniel Sarky (Jean), Jeanne Colletin. (Ariane), Christine Boisson (Marie-Ange), Samantha (Receptionist), Gaby Brian, Gregory. Eastmancolor. 92 mins. France 1974.

TH E FRONT PA G E

Virginia Duigan O n e sh ou ld say a t th e o u tse t th a t an y o n e w ho h as ever served tim e as a jo u rn a lis t or w an d ered in to th e d e ran g ed , g rim e-e n c ru sted w orld o f a d a i­ ly n ew spaper, will find th is m ovie irresistible. Ben H e c h t an d C h arles M a c A rth u r’s p lay The Front Page is one o f th e few a tte m p ts ever m a d e to c a p tu re th is u n iq u ely b lo o d sh o t atm o sp h e re , and Billy W ild er h as tra n sfe rre d th e ir in sp ired version to th e screen w ith a ta c t an d finesse c o m p a ra b le to M ich ae l B la k e m o re ’s sta g e p ro d u c tio n — seen in A u stra lia d u rin g th e rece n t to u r o f B rita in ’s N a tio n a l T h e a tre .

F inesse is, strictly sp eak in g , m islead in g . F ro m th e open in g titles, set ag a in st a frenzied co llage o f n ew spapers b eltin g o ff th e ro llers, th e m ovie ex­ plo d es w ith b ru te p hysical force, m a n ip u la tin g its cap tiv e au d ien ce w ith all th e in k -stain ed guile o f th e m en it p u rp o rts to satirize.

B ut m y thesis, su itab ly seductive an d insidious, will be th a t th e m ovie is n o t so m uch a sa tire as a b rillia n tly d isto rtin g m irro r, fastid io u sly em ­ bellished, on an enclosed an d incestu o u s w orld w hich to th e u n in itia te d (rep re se n ted h ere by th e w et-b eh in d -th e-ears new boy) d epicts all th e u n ­ tra m m e lle d ch ao s o f hell. T h e F ro n t P a g e , for all its ex ag g eratio n and flam b o y an ce, u ltim ately w ickedly en sh rin es th e tru th .

W ell, such will be an y e x -jo u rn a list’s view , and jo u rn a lists are alw ays ones to jealo u sy g u ard th e ir re p u ta tio n . A s H e c h t an d M a c A rth u r a p p re c ia te d , it is a cu rio u s fact th a t th e sta tu s o f a n ew sp a p e rm an in an y co u n try , th o u g h low , is in­ v a r ia b ly e n d o w e d w ith a c e r ta in f ris s o n .

R e p o rte rs, in th e pu blic eye, are fain tly risque, d isre p u ta b le c h a ra c te rs, h a rd -d rin k in g , venal, p ro fa n e — o r in th e w ords o f M olly M allo y , th e b ig -h ea rte d w h o re in T h e F ro n t P a g e , ‘a lot o f c ru m m y ho bo es full o f d a n d ru ff an d g in .’ It is an 62 — Cinema Papers, March-April

The boys in the criminal court pressroom have a final drink with Hildy Johnson (Jack Lemmon) after he has announced his retirement from the newspaper game in Billy Wilder’s The Front Page. to x icatio n o f a re p o rte r’s life. A n y o n e w ho h as in ­ im a g e th a t ev ery se lf-re s p e c tin g jo u r n a lis t h ab ited th e n ew sro om a tta c h e d to a m a jo r sto ry cherishes, n u rtu re s an d en co u rag es b razen ly . know s th a t th e g enial, jo k e y co m p an io n sh ip A fter all, w ith o u t it an d its deep ta p -ro o ts, the m a sk s a very real an d p o te n t riv alry. T o g et o n to p ressm an w ould be ju s t a n o th e r hack . so m eth in g th e o th e r fellow m isses . . . th e h ead y T h e causes o f th is p u rp le re p u ta tio n are set out sm ell o f a scoop; th e new angle; th e u n sc ru p u lo u s in th e m ovie w ith a rau n ch y , co p y b o o k elegance. k navish tric k s o f th e Ju d a s sittin g n ex t to you.

N ew sg ath erin g by its very n a tu re is g ru b by , c o m ­ p etitive, irrev eren t o f people an d places. It is also T h u s H ild y Jo h n so n , m a n a g in g e d ito r W a lte r an o ccasio nally c u t-th ro a t a ffa ir. T h e slow b u t B u rn s’ lo n g tim e ace re p o rte r, is a m an to be stead y decline o f th e p rin ted w ord as a so urce o f g u ard ed , an d if he seem s like g ettin g aw ay (to h ard new s m ean s th a t W ild e r’s F ro n t P a g e is, to becom e an ad m a n in his fu tu re fa th e r-in -la w ’s som e ex ten t, a reco n stru ctio n o f a w orld th a t has, bluechip agency in P h ilad elp h ia, fo r crissak e) then u n h ap p ily , faded from its fo rm er g ran d eu r. all m a n n e r o f sco u nd relly sk uld u g gery is in o rd e r T elevision an d ra d io h ave cruelly u su rp ed the — p rovided it is d o n e w ith style. A n d if n o th in g n ew sp a p e r’s p reserve. H is m ovies en ab le us to see else, B u rn s’ fairy g o d m o th e r en d ow ed him w ith a it how it w as an d still should be — p au n ch y , p le th o ra o f th a t a t b irth . ru th less an d crafty .

A s the rascally B urns, W a lte r M a tth a u finds B ut in th e C h icag o o f 1928, w ith its p ro life ra ­ h im self a t th e end o f th e shrew d est piece o f c astin g tion o f daily p ap ers, th e n ew spaper business w as in he has had th e go od fo rtu n e to co m e a cro ss for its elem ent. It w as sp ectacu la rly devious, sec­ som e tim e. H is tow erin g b u lk , his m a lig n a n tly ta ria n and p re d a to ry . T h is is th e b lack ly com ic funereal an d in tim id a tin g p o m p o sity , his sm all, scen ario o f H ech t an d M a c A rth u r, an d it is one sn eak y shifts in ex pression . . . all a re b reath le ssly w hich W ild er has resp ected splendidly an d in ­ a cc u ra te. H is m a n iaca l lust fo r an exclusive is te rp re te d w ith a ta c tic ia n ’s ingenuity. m a tc h ed only by J o h n so n ’s fan aticism , th e k in d o f O n e h as only to look a t tw o m ain sets in th e single-m inded d ev o tio n to d u ty in th e face o f d is­ m ovie th e m agically d iso rd ered press ro o m at tra u g h t fian cee’s pleas o f w hich only th e tru ly b ig ­ th e C h icag o C rim in a l C o u rt, an d th e m ain new s tim e re p o rte r is cap ab le. desk a t W a lte r B u rn s’ Chicago Examiner — to T o suggest th a t these m en a re u n n a tu ra l, realise th a t re p o rte rs p u t up w ith som e o f th e rap acio u s or b la ta n tly u n tru stw o rth y is to m iss w o rst w o rk in g co n d itio n s in th e w orld. A n d to th e p o in t m ulishly. In th e n ew spaper h alf-lig h t th e realize th a t it d o esn ’t m a tte r, becau se they never g re a t o p e ra to rs are b o rn , an d rare ly m a d e . L ik e n otice. T o p u t a jo u rn a lis t in a creativ e a d m a n ’s W estern h ero es, they a re a race a p a rt; fo r w hom office, w ith its d eep-pile ca rp e t, shiny p o t p lants, ta lk o f m o ra ls is a p atro n isin g irrelev an cy . A s artfu lly co n triv ed chic so p h isticatio n w ould be such, Ja c k L e m m o n ’s H ild y Jo h n so n b eco m es heresy. every jo u rn a lis t’s w istful d re a m — a sw ell guy, N ecessarily , th e biggest item s o f fu rn itu re in a one o f th e boys — an d w hen it co m es to th e n itty new sro om a re d esk s, ty p ew riters, filing cab in ets g ritty , a sw aggering, sw indling b a sta rd . an d ru b b ish bins. T h e su p p o rtin g p ro p s are eq u a l­ T h e tru e villains o f th e piece a re n e ith e r B u rn s ly in d isp e n sib le : s m o k e , screw ed u p p a p e r, n o r Jo h n so n , and c e rtain ly n o t th e u n fo rtu n a te phon es, old p o k e r sco res, em p ty coffee cups full of w aifs W illiam s an d M allo y . T h ey are, n a tu ra lly , c ig a re tte stu b s, g lasses w ith solidified w hisky the S h e riff o f C h icag o (V incent G a rd e n ia , w ith a dregs. . m arv ello u sly c o n to rte d , ey eb all-p o p p in g visage) A g ain, in an y press ro o m — especially th is one a n d his M a y o r (H a ro ld G o u ld , su a v e a n d at th e C rim in a l C o u rt w here th e m e ssen g er­ M ach iav ellian ), w ho a re as collectively b itte r an d ca rrio n a re g a th e re d to re p o rt on th e im m in en t ex­ tw isted as th e ir fo lk lo re arch ety p es. H e c h t an d ecu tio n o f c o p -m u rd e re r E a rl W illia m s .— th e re is M a c A rth u r w ere c ertain ly g e ttin g .a t c o rru p tio n , a d eceptively lan gu id , w isecrack in g a tm o sp h ere. an d th e ir trib e o f artlessly ing en u o u s re p o rte rs B elow th e laco n ic su rface th e subsoil crac k les w ith p ro v id e b o th a focus fo r th e actio n an d a slip p ery in trig u e. T h is m o v ie arch itects th a t slovenly, sm o k e screen fo r th e real ta rg e ts. S c reen w riters sh am b lin g allu re . It also c a p tu re s th e c ram p ed in ­ I. A . L. D iam o n d an d B illy W ild er h av e h a d th e

ANDREI RUBLEV w it to see th is, an d th e ir a d d itio n s to th e o rigin al u n o b tru siv e ly p la ce th e a m b ig u ity w hile sensibly re ta in in g th e c la u stro p h o b ia o f th e p lay, w h ere th e a c tio n ta k e s p la ce e n tire ly in th e p ress ro o m .

T h e screen p lay is stu d d ed w ith gem s — fast, fre n e tic an d visu ally inv en tive. T h e m e rg e r o f play a n d m o v ie h a s b e e n a c h ie v e d w ith s u c h sm o o th n e ss th a t it is a lm o st im p o ssib le to guess w h ere o n e s ta rts an d th e o th e r leaves off. H e c h t a n d M a c A rth u r’s o u tra g e o u s use o f co incid en ce (th e in n o c e n t E a rl W illia m s’ can n o n b a ll en try in to th e p ress ro o m w hen Jo h n so n , a b o u t to jo in his fian cee, is th e sole o ccu p an t) h as been m a tc h e d w ith th e o ccasio n a lly w ildly ex ag g erated e x te m ­ p o re seq u en ce (E a rl’s w o u nd ed p sy c h ia trist slides o u t o f th e b a c k o f an a m b u la n c e an d h u rtles alo n g th e s tre e t on a stre tc h e r, d o d g in g a p h a la n x o f p o lice cars, fo r ex am p le) b u t th e excesses, as a ru le, a re fo rg iveab ly in c h a ra c te r.

B u t if all th is is inclin ed to m a k e on e m a u d lin , n o sta lg ic fo r a p a st w h ere eth ics a re in no d an g er o f triu m p h in g , th e re is so lace a t h an d . T o d a y ’s big sto ries m a y n o t q u ite c o m p a re w ith th e flo rid ex­ tra v a g a n z a o f a h an g in g , b u t fo r th e en circlin g n ew sh o u n d s th e re is th e sam e scene o f b lo o d , th e sa m e sleig h t o f h an d . A ll is n o t lost. A n d in its g l o r i f i c a t i o n o f s u c h e s s e n ti a l l y h u m a n fa scin atio n s, The Front Page m ay finally be view ­ ed as a tra n v e stite ro m a n c e , a fla g ra n tly ap p o site p a e a n o f p ra ise in th e guise o f a devilishly sly dig a t th e forces o f evil. ~ THE FRONT PAGE. Directed by Billy Wilder. Produced by Paul Monash. Executive Producer, Jennings Lang. A Univer­ sal Pictures production. Screenplay by Billy Wilder, I. A. L. Diamond. From the play by Ben Hecht, Charles MacArthur.

Photographed by Jordan S. Cronenweth. Edited by Ralph E. Winters. Sound by Robert Martin. Art Director, Henry Bumstead. Set decoration, James W. Payne. Music Super­ vision, Billy May. Players: Jack Lemmon (Hildy Johnson), Walter Matthau (Walter Burns), Carol Burnett (Mollie Malloy), Susan Sarandon (Peggy Grant), Vincent Gardenia (Sheriff), David Wayne (Bensinger), Allen Garfield (Kruger), Austin Pendelton (Earl Williams), Charles Durning (Murphy), Herbert Edelman (Schwartz), Martin Gabel (Dr Eggelhofer), John Furlong (City Editor Duffy), Cliff Osmond (Jacobi), Dick O’Neill (McHugh), Jon Korkes (Keppler), Lou Frizzel (Endicott), Doro Merande (Jennie). Technicolor. 105 mins. US 1974.

ANDREI RUBLEV

John O’Hara O n e o f la st y e a r’s o u tsta n d in g co m m ercial releases, Andrei Rublev, lasted ju s t on e w eek in M e lb o u rn e , an d acc o rd in g to its d istrib u to rs, w as a to ta l b o x -office d isa ste r. E ven so, it’s 10 years la te co m in g to A u stra lia . M a d e by A n d rei T a rk o v sk y in 1966, it w as shelved by th e Soviet g o v e rn m e n t fo r sev eral y ears becau se it w as su p ­ posedly ‘u n h isto ric a l’. W h en it w as released by C o lu m b ia in th e U S , n early a q u a rte r o f th e m ovie w as cu t, alth o u g h even a t th is length, it ru n s for 142 m in u tes.

A n d rei R u b lev is th e g re a te st o f th e S o v iet icon p a in te rs, alth o u g h very little is k now n a b o u t him .

H e lived in th e early fifteen th cen tu ry u n d e r b a r­ b a ric co n d itio n s o f p lagu e, fam in e an d T a rta r in ­ v asion. T h e m ovie, o f his life an d tim es, is m a d e in eig h t ep iso d es, w hich fall betw een th e y ears 1400 an d 1423, w ith th e fo u r c e n tra l sto ries tak in g p lace in on e y ear. I t ’s n o t a d o c u m e n ta ry , a b io g rap h y o r a trib u te to social realism , b u t co n ­ c e n tra te s on m o m e n ts in th e life o f th e a rtist in o rd e r to u n d e rsta n d his a rt. T a rk o v sk y illu stra tes, a t th e m o st p ro fo u n d an d m o v in g levels, th e kind o f b itte r p erso n al ex p erien ce, th e su fferin g th a t’s n ecessary to faith , th e in n er life o f th e a rtist th a t issues in th e m o st finely achieved p ain tin g .

I t ’s d iffic u lt to a c c o u n t fo r th e overw helm ing a u th o rity o f th e m ovie, its p o w er to evo k e co m ­ p assio n an d p ity an d to o rd e r th e se feelings in to a sense o f d estin y , u n less th e m ovie is re la te d to the icons them selv es.

T a rk o v sk y h as c re a te d a w o rk o f a rt on screen th a t rep ro d u ces th e rh y th m s an d co m p o sitio n of

th e icons. H is m ovie reflects th e tra n s p a re n t T h is so rt o f rh y th m in th e m o v ie’s c o m p o sitio n sim p licity o f th e icon p a in te rs ’ w orld: th e sacred w o rk s in tw o w ays: it lends a fo rm a l stre n g th an d figures* th e h o rses, b ird s, ro ck s an d m o u n tain s; g rav ity to th e n a rra tiv e , as th o u g h y o u ’re seeing th e ch alice, b re a d an d crucifix. It b rin g s to life th ro u g h th e eyes o f th e p a in te r w h a t h a p p e n s to an d d ra m a tiz e s, th ro u g h one fab le a fte r a n o th e r, th e m en an d w o m en a ro u n d him , as well as his th e in n er ex p erien ce o f sufferin g, faith an d jo y co u n try ; it also lead s to an u n d e rsta n d in g o f th e th a t gives sig n ifican ce to th e se figures. A n d it’s sp iritu al energies th a t en rich th e a rt. c le a r w hy th e S o v iet g o v e rn m en t fo r so lon g b a n n ­ R u b lev co n fro n ts m u rd e r, rap e, d e stru c tio n — ed th e m ovie. It ex p lain s, w ith frig h tfu l c la rity , th e he even kills a m an . Y et he n e ith e r goes m a d n o r essen tially religio u s n a tu re o f th e O ld R u ssia n a rt. tu rn s to d esp air.

T a rk o v sk y show s us th e su fferin g an d p erso n al in ste a d he ta k e s a vow o f silence an d re tre a ts to an g u ish th a t gives stre n g th an d a u th o rity to th o se a m o n astery in a sm all village. T h en , in th e m a rv ello u s faces in th e icons — m a n y o f th e m il­ m o v ie’s final seq u en ce h e m eets a y o un g lad , th e lu stra tio n s o f scenes fro m th e N ew T e sta m e n t. son o f a b ell-c aster w hose fa th e r h ad died in th e T h e film is sh o t in an epic style th a t im m e d ia te ­ plague. T h e son discloses th a t his fa th e r p assed on ly b ring s to m in d E isen stein, a lth o u g h th e re are th e secret o f b ell-m ak in g b efo re he died an d is sig n ifican t d ifferen ces as w ell. C h a ra c te rs a re sh o t c a rrie d o ff to ca st a bell fo r th e D u k e. T h e boy a g a in st em p ty space, th e w ide p lain s, endlessly search es alo n e fo r th e rig h t so rt o f clay an d tru sts flow ing rivers o r sta rk w hite ch u rch w alls. T h e to a secret in stin c t th a t he w ill cast th e bell. b la ck an d w hite p h o to g ra p h y stresses th e sim ple, R u b lev w atch es th e p re p a ra tio n s and finally th e ev ery d ay m a te ria ls lik e tim b e r, ro ck , snow , p ain ts bell tu rn s o u t a m a sterp iece. T h e b oy collapses an d b ru sh e s — even apples. Y o u ’re n o t so m u ch an d reveals, sobbing, th a t his fath er h ad in fact aw are o f th e se thin g s as objects, b u t in a m o re never told him th e secret. R u b lev ’s ow n faith is d elib era tely a rtistic w ay, T ark o v sk y cap tu res resto red an d they estab lish a p act: h e will p a in t th e ir te x tu re , as th o u g h c o n c e n tra tin g a richness icons an d th e boy w ill cast bells. o f ex p erien ce in to th e m o st sim p le m a te ria ls.

T h e ep iso d e is inten sely m oving. T his is ex ­ P e a sa n ts m u n ch ro tte n app les (the only food they p erienced in th e nerV ous en ergy o f th e boy an d th e have); m o n k s chop dow n w ood an d sta ck vast epic q u ality in re c o n stru c tin g th e process o f bell w alls o f tim b er; an a rtist slow ly ex tin g u ish es a castin g . A n d to m a k e it co m p lete th e re is th e flam e by w rap p in g his h an d ro u n d a to rc h — all b rillia n t p h o to g ra p h y , w ith its stro n g ly -g rain ed these m o m e n ta ry sh o ts c re a te a co m p lex im p re s­ c o n tra sts betw een th e e a rth an d th e day; th e b la z ­ sion o f a sim ple, yet p ro fo u n d urgency, o f lives liv­ ing fires an d m o lten silver. ed close to th e bone.

F ro m this sequence th e m ovie passes in to a full T h e c o n tra sts in lig h tin g rein fo rce this sense o f c o lo r d isp lay o f R u b lev ’s icons. T h e c a m e ra a sp are, yet d ra m a tic , existence. M uch o f the m oves slow ly acro ss a ran g e o f figures, b rillian tly m ovie is sh o t in grey h a lf ton es, a g ain st d riftin g co lored and p erfectly co m p o sed . T h e a u th o rity sm o k e o r falling snow o r rain . B ut th e re are an d stren g th they rep resen t is irresistib le, an d you m o m en ts o f b rillia n t clarity , o f su nlig ht dazzling begin to feel th a t you u n d e rsta n d so m eth in g o f th e acro ss snow or lig h tin g up th e in te rio r o f a ex p erien ce th a t un derlies this g rav ity an d pity. c a th e d ra l. T h ese c o n tra sts echo th e sta rtlin g T h e style an d sw eep o f th e film crea tes an im ­ lum ino u s q u ality o f th e icons them selves, an d es­ pressio n o f th e vastness o f th e c o u n try itself, its tab lish a visual an d p ic to rial ten sio n . T h e cam e ra long an d b lo o d y h isto ry o f o p p ressio n and su f­ re tu rn s often to long close-ups o f deeply ex­ fering. B ut T ark o v sk y h a sn ’t sim ply rep ro d u ced a pressive faces, and th ese pauses b reak up th e su rface o f social h isto ry . H e has co n c e n tra te d on a restless sequence o f violent an d b a rb a ro u s events. re lig io u s an d d e lib e ra te ly a rtis tic fo rm , a S im ilarly m a n y sequences give w ay to long sh ots p ro fo u n d resp o n se to th e stress o f fam in e, in v a­ o f w ater flow ing or rain sw eeping over th e sion an d disbelief. co u n try sid e. T his is q u ite u n lik e th e sh arp rh y th m s o f E isen stein ’s editin g , an d th e effect is to ANDREI RUBLEV. Directed by Andrei Tarkovsky. Produc­ dissolve each ep iso d e o f R u b lev ’s life into a m o re tion Company, Mosfilm. Screenplay by Andrei Mikhalkova b s tra c t an d co m p lete reco n stru ctio n . T hese Konchalovsky, Andrei Tarkovsky. Photographed by Vadim p h o to g ra p h ic an d ed itin g rh y th m s, to g e th e r w ith Yusov. Editor, not available. Sound by I. Zelentsova. Music

by Vyacheslav Ovchinnikov. Assistant Director, Yevgeni su dd en richly to n ed b lack an d w h ite co lors, help Players, Anatoly Solonitsyn (Andrei Rublev), to unify a p p a re n tly ra n d o m an d often ch a o tic ex­ Tcherniaiev.

Ivan Lapikov (Kirill), Nikolai Grinko (Daniel the Black), perience.

Nikolai Sergeyev (Theophanes the Greek), Irma Raush (DeafSlow ly, th ro u g h o u t th e film , T ark o v sk y d raw s and-Dumb Girl), Nikolai Burlyayev (Boriska), Rolan Bykov (Buffoon), Yuri Nikulin (Patrikey), Mikhail Kononov to g e th e r d ifferen t influences an d in cid en ts in (Fomka), Yuri Nazarov (Grand Duke). Part in color. 146 w hich R u b lev ’s ow n religious faith w as forged. mins. Original running time 185 mins. USSR 1971.

H is rival is th e icon p a in te r, T -heophanes th e G reek , w hose w o rk em p h asizes th e ju stic e o f G od, an o v erb earin g , relen tless, even cruel figure.

R u b lev , th o u g h , com es to c en tre his a rt on m an an d to stress q u alities o f love an d forgiveness. H is SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE stru g g le is to b reak dow n th e rigid tra d itio n a l Ross Lansell p ieties an d a rtistic co n v en tio n s th a t sta n d betw een his p ain tin g an d his exp erien ce o f S oviet h isto ry an d society.

Ibsen w ro te A Doll’s House in 1879; a c o m ­ S o th e m ovie c o n stan tly recu rs to scenes th a t p a tr io t I n g m a r B e rg m a n ’s Scenes from a a re highly d ra m a tic o r even trag ic , an d yet very Marriage (1973) is a v a ria tio n a lm o st 100 y ears fo rm al. W hen th e T a rta rs , fo r in stan ce, raid th e la te r on th e o rig in al tria ls an d trib u la tio n s o f tow n o f V lad im ir, th e peo p le flee to th e chu rch .

N o ra H elm er, th e w o m en ’s lib b er b efo re h er tim e.

T h is tim e a ro u n d how ever, a fte r M s E m m alin e T h e T a rta rs sw ing a b a tte rin g ra m ag a in st th e d o o r, w hile inside sw arm s a th ro n g o f d istra u g h t P a n k h u r s t, M s G e r m a in e G r e e r a n d th e m en, w om en an d ch ild ren . T h e c a m e ra slow ly ‘M o n stro u s R e g im e n t’, o u r la tte r-d a y h e ro in e p an s acro ss th e crow d, p ic tu rin g th e m in a ttitu d e s M a ria n n e (th e m arv ello u s Liv U llm a n , if only u n ­ o f su p p licatio n an d te rro r. T h e m assed h o rro r of d er B e rg m an ’s an d Ja n T ro e ll’s d irectio n an d no th e scene m a k e s fo rm al, fo r a m o m en t, th e k in d of o th ers) has m a d e so m e p a rtia l p ro g ress a t least in: g ro u p in g th a t m ig h t rem in d you o f B rueghel. T h e h er lib era tio n fro m h er late tw en tieth cen tu ry d o o rs then b u rst open an d th e c a m e ra picks u p a t T o rra ld H elm er, one Jo h a n (E rla n d Jo se p h so n , a g ro u n d level th e ch arg in g horses as th e T a rta rs Sw edish stage a c t o r ) . . . b u t w ith so m e sig n ifican t reserv atio n s. sw eep in to th e c a th e d ra l. A b ru p tly th e carefu lly co m p o sed scene is b ro k en dow n an d several in ­ In h er p resen t re in c a rn a tio n G o e th e ’s ‘E te rn a l d iv id u al th re a d s in th e epic a re ta k e n u p ag ain .

F e m in in e’ h as b eco m e a 3 5 -y ear-o ld d iv o rce R u b lev kills a T a rta r a tte m p tin g to ra p e a law yer in th e m a k in g an d to ru b in th e iro n y , in w o m an ; a p e a sa n t is vilely to rtu re d a fte r th e in ­ th e w ords o f h er 4 2 -y ear-o ld ‘p sy c h o -te c h n ic ia n ’ J a u sb a n d , a p re tty o b scu re p erso n all ro u n d . v ad ers m e lt dow n a ,c ru c ifix in to b o iling lead.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 63

SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE

Liv Ullman and Erland Josephson in Ingmar Bergman’s Scenes from a Marriage.

E vents in d icate, if n o t v in d icate, h er ‘In n o cen ce ‘real w ed lock ’ w ith h er by now ex -h u sband o f a an d P a n ic ’, o r m o re to th e p o in t, h er ‘A rt o f ra th e r p ecu liar so rt. T h ey have experienced so S w eeping u n d e r th e C a rp e t’ (tw o o f B e rg m an ’s m uch to g eth er th a t it b ecom es obvious they can early title c a rd s) — in one o f several key close-ups n eith er live w ith each o th e r n o r w ith o u t each o th er o f M a ria n n e , h er expressiv e eyes artfu lly enlarg ed . . . only being ab le to get to g e th e r in hotels or a by sp ectacles, sh e is sh o ck ed to h er core w hen h er clan d estin e w eekend a t a frien d ’s h id eaw ay — ‘In p h ilan d erin g screen h u sb an d show s his tru e colors th e M id d le o f th e N ig h t in a D a rk H o u se by disclo sin g th a t sh e’s b o red him stiff, especially S o m ew h ere in th e W o rld ’ as B e rg m an ’s title-card sexually, for th e p a st fo u r y ears. So m uch so th a t pu ts it. h e’s ru n n in g o ff w ith a y o u n g er w o m an to P a ris.

In th e m e an tim e th e re has been no m agical, T h is co n n u b ial a b a n d o n m e n t leads to som e m u tu a l tra n s fig u ra tio n o f so u ls — ju s t a s e rio u s s to c k -ta k in g o f M a r ia n n e ’s h ith e rto realizatio n , an d m o re im p o rta n tly , an accep tan ce carefu lly fo stered naivety w hich she eventually o f th eir m u tu al lim itatio n s an d sh ortco m in g s. rises above, th o u g h n o t q u ite tran scen d s, to L ike seeing y o u r lover, n o t th ro u g h th e initial em erg e fro m m id d le-class chrysalis-coffin, to ro se-co lo red spectacles any m o re, b u t w arts an d b eco m e, in M s U llm a n n ’s d escrip tio n , B e rg m an ’s all, and still going on w ith th e relatio n sh ip . ‘new w o m a n ’ — “ a w o m an w ho is really free and T o leran ce ra th e r th a n co m p ro m ise tho u g h . N o can live w ith o u t th e help an d su p p o rt o f a m a n ” . g reat heights w ere ever really sto rm ed in S cenes B ut like h er fo re m o th e r N o ra , she y earn s n o t to from a M a rria g e , b u t ra th e r th e m in u tiae o f every­ do w ith o u t m en, save fo r p ro creativ e p u rp oses in d ay life, ‘fo r b e tte r, fo r w o rse’, slow ly, stead ily th e m a n n e r o f th e fab u lo u s A m a zo n s, b u t as N o ra an d so m etim es (literally ) painfully a cc u m u late o rigin ally sp elt o u t, fo r ‘real w ed lo ck ’. S he so rt o f into a m id d le-ag ed D arb y an d Jo a n ty p e o f affair. a tta in s th is p sycho lo g ical sta te 10 y ears la te r at T h eir eventual m u tu al a cc o m m o d atio n , b oth c u rta in fa ll b u t, in a n o th e r o f B e rg m a n ’s m en tal an d sexual, m ay be b land an d p ro saic, b u t n u m ero u s p resen t iro nies, o u t o f w edlock. In d eed ' even this ‘d e m i-h em i-se m i-p arad ise’ o f a so rt is, T h e U ltim a te Iro n y o f M a rria g e w o u ld ’ve been a acco rd in g to B erg m an , u n a tta in a b le w ithin th e m o re a p p ro p ria te title, th o u g h in retro sp e c t one m a rria g e in stitu tio n b u t needs th e freedom , th e air su sp ects th a t a t b ase th e m uch m a rrie d and o f an e x tra -m a rita l relatio n sh ip — a t least in this divo rced B erg m an d o e sn ’t c a re for th e m a rria g e p a rtic u la r instan ce. in stitu tio n a t all.

M a rria g e versus tru e love, passion versus socie­ Jo h a n still re m a in s th e ad o lescen t th a t he ty (to em ploy D enis de R o u g e m o n t’s w ell-know n p erh ap s alw ays w as b u t M a ria n n e has b ecom e, in ­ p o larity ) in an ev en tually ra th e r b o rin g m iddleste ad o f his la p -b itch , n o t som e m y th o lo g ically class settin g w here th e p ro b lem seem s to be one o f d im en sio n ed ‘G re a t M o th e r’ b u t sim ply so m eone co m p assio n ra th e r th an passio n . T h e situ a tio n is no lon g er p re d e te rm in e d o r inh ib ited by m iddlep artia lly red eem ed by B e rg m an ’s relentless, seem ingly rem o rseless a tte n tio n to detail. class m o res.

In th e in terv en in g cen tu ry since N o ra sh ut th a t T h e d ra m a tic stru c tu re is p erfu n cto ry — th e fam o u s d o o r a t th e end o f A ct III an d so stru ck h o ary boy m eets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl o u t fo r w h at she d escrib ed as “ th e m o st w onderful ag ain , situ atio n overlad en w ith B e rg m an ’s p ro saic th in g o f a ll” , so m e p ro g ress has been m ade: in p a rtic u la rity o f q u asi-b eh av io ristic o b serv atio n . fact o u r 1973 h ero in e h as h er husband sh ut th e T h is, co m b in ed w ith th e tw o p rin c ip al c h a ra c te rs ’ d o o r as h e goes o ff a fte r th e o th e r w om an. flat d ialo g u e, o r ra th e r, p ro saic sem i-in tro sp ectiv e M a ria n n e is co m p elled to go in for so m e ‘co n ­ m usings, as well as th e ir p seu do -p h ilo so p hical science e x a m in in g ’ an d ‘c o n scio u sn ess-raisin g ’ via c ro ss-ex am in atio n s o f each o th e r is a cu rio u s p sy c h iatry . By p la y ’s en d on w h at w o u ld ’ve been stru c tu re to say th e least — m o re ak in to clinical th e ir 20th w edding an n iv ersa ry , sh e’s ab le to find case h isto ries o r d o c u m e n ta rie s ra th e r th an 64 — Cinema Papers, March-April

.

B e rg m a n ’s h e a v y d ra m a s o f th e p a s t. I t ’s B erg m an th e A risto te lia n ta x o n o m ist ra th e r th a n th e a u th o r o f th e Poetics. B ut it w o rk s, p rovided th a t th e au d ience is p a tie n t an d p re p a re d to do so m e o f th e a n aly tic w ork them selves in stead o f re ly in g th is tim e o n B e r g m a n ’s e r s tw h ile d ra m a tu rg y .

It could be arg u ed th a t Scenes from a Marriage is so p h isticated so ap o p era. Its ac tu a l television o rigins a re in d ee d sig n ifican t. B erg m an origin ally conceived th e p ro je c t as a television series, in six 5 0 -m in u te episodes. T h ese h av e been edited dow n — so m e 45 p er cen t o f th e o rig in al m a te ria l being cut o u t fo r th e o v erseas ‘a rt h o u se’ m a rk e t.

T h is acc o u n ts fo r th e ram b lin g , episodic n a tu re , o f Scenes from a Marriage: its c la u stra l, b u t n o t . q u ite c la u stro p h o b ic , c o n c e n tra tio n on close-ups; th e subtle, u n d e r-p la y in g o f th e acto rs; its flat, u n - ; su b tle o v erlighting; th e slig h tly o u t o f focus g rain in ess o f th e 16m m blo w -u p into 35m m . T h e discursive, very v erb al n a tu re o f th e en tire p ro ject tra n sfo rm s it in to an ex ten ded essay ra th e r th a n a c o m p ac t d ra m a .

I t’s no Doll’s House in o th e r w o rd s, n o r fo r th a t m a tte r a m a sterp iece. T h e tw o lead in g c h a ra c te rs are ju s t n o t cast in th e h ero ic m o u ld , in sp ite of th e ir c o m p a ra tiv e v erb al fluency. T h ey a re ju s t tw o ra th e r o rd in a ry , a lm o st m ed io cre ch a ra c te rs d isco u rsing alm o st ad libitum as television allow s, indeed en co u rag es, in o rd e r to try an d fill in the void. \ \L Scenes from a Marriage b asically is an actin g to u r de force fo r M s U llm an n as B e rg m a n ’s A n n a K aren in a (ra th e r th a n N o ra H elm er) as S tig B jo rk m an* h as c h arac terize d h er. I t ’s an in ­ vestig atio n o f (h er) fem in in e p sycho lo g y as she m e ta m o rp h o ses fro m a 35 -y ear-o ld d u tifu l w ife, m o th e r an d ca re e r w o m an into — m u ch to h er sc re e n h u s b a n d ’s o b v io u s d is p le a s u re , th e n ch ag rin an d w ounded m a le ch au v in ist p rid e — a 45 -y ear-o ld w o m an o f in d ep en d en t p sychological reso u rces, ab le even tually to sta n d on h er ow n feet. ': ' M r Jo sep h so n m o re th a n h olds his ow n actingwise, p a rtic u la rly in th e second p a rt as he, to o , m e ta m o rp h o ses — or, ra th e r, as his “ m a c h ism o ” im ag e and self-esteem crac k an d co llapse b ack into th e ad o lescen t self-pity th a t w as im p licit at th e ou tset.

It could be arg u ed th a t th e ‘com ing o u t’ c h a ra c te r th a t M s U llm an n c rea ted ow es ju s t as m uch to h er ow n experiences o f m iddle-class re p re ssio n 0 as to B e rg m an ?s m eth o d ical, clinical scrip t an d restrain ed , sp arse d irectio n .

Y et, behind th e a n a to m y lesson th e re ’s a new lo w e r-k e y e d , m o re sp e c ific a lly ‘h u m a n is tic o rie n te d ’ elem ent in his w ork; b u t b ereft o f the m etap h y sical or th eolo g ical scaffolding o f b efore, it seem s m o re p h ilo sop h ical b u t less energized, less highly w ro u g h t an d less d ra m a tic .

W e still d o n ’t really know , o f course, w h at w ent on in Jo h a n an d M a ria n n e ’s m inds, th o u g h we have a fair idea o f th e ir stren g th s an d w eaknesses a fte r alm o st th ree h o u rs o f w h at am o u n ts to g ro u p th e ra p y w ith th e m , w ith th e audience n ecessarily as th e w o uld-be th e ra p ist. A d m itted ly som e o f th e au d ience b au lk s at th e ‘p le th o ra ’ of b eh av io ristic d etails w aitin g to be in te rp re te d , and w alks o u t on B erg m an . B ut m o st rem ain . M id d leclass m aso ch ists, a p p a re n tly acu tely e m b a rra sse d by all these hom e tru th s.

*Sight and Sound S u m m e r ° Time, 4 D ecem b er, 1972.

1973.

SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE. Directed by Ingmar Bergman. Executive Producer, Lars-Owe Carlberg. A Cinematograph AB production. Screenplay by Ingmar Bergman. Photographed by Sven Nykvist. Edited by Siv Lundgren. Sound by Owe Svensson. Set Decoration, Bjorn Thulin. Costumes by Inger Pehrsson. Players, Liv Ullman (Marianne), Erland Josephson (Johan), Bibi Andersson (Katarina), Jan Malmsjo (Peter), Gunnel Lindblom (Eva), Bertil Norstrom (Arne), Wenche Foss (The Mother), Barbo Hiort Afomas (Mrs Jacobi), Anita Wall (Journalist). Easttnancolor. 168 mins. Sweden 1974.

\bur senses will never be the same The Australian Film Developm ent Corporation is proud to be associated with THE GREAT M A C A R TH Y and THE REMOVALISTS and wishes them every success

Above: Jack! Weaver and Peter Cum­ mins in The Removalists.

Right: Barry Humphries in The Great Macarthy

o o o

DEVELOP YOUR TOTAL IN -H O U S E FACILITIES • Complete 16mm & 35m m Eastman Color

• Fllm-to Video Tape Transfers

• Licenced Technicolor Super 8mm. Loading Station

• Complete Sound Mixing Facilities

• Opticals. Liquid Gate Printing, Titling & Animation

• 16m.m. & 35m.m. C.R.I. — Color Proof Printing

• A & B Roll Hazëltine Color Analysers

• Ektachrome 16m.m.’ Color Reversal

ATLAB TELEVISION CENTR.E, EPPING 2121, N.S.W AUSTRALIA.

■

TEL. 85-0224 TELEX A A 20250

35 MM

PRODUCTION SURVEY

35 mm PRODUCTION SURVEY CUBIC

35mm PREPRODUCTION ANGEL GEAR Director ................................ ....... Esben Storm Production c o m p a n y......... .. . .Quinkan Films Executive Producer ........... ....... John Andrew Producer .............................. ....... Lyn Bayonas Production Manager ......... . . . Haydn Keenan Assistant D ire c to r............... ....... Michael Lake S c r ip t................................... . . . Lewis Bayonas Director of Photography .................. ........... Mike Edols 2nd Unit photography....... ....... John Rhodes Camera O p e ra to r............... Malcolm Richards Lighting ................................ .. Brian Bansgrove Art Director.......................... .. .Monty Fiegeuth E d ito r................................... . Anthony Buckley Continuity .......................... .. .............Lyn Gaile Make-up .............................. ........... Liz Mltchie Sound Recordist................. . Laurie Fitzgerald Mix ....................................... ....... Peter Fenton Boom O p e ra to r.................. . . . : . . Max Heuser Technical A d viso r............... . Kenworth Trucks C ast: John Ewat, John W aters, Ju stin e Saunders.

Story of a truck driver and a hitch-hiker on a long cross-country haul.

Running time: Two hours (approximately).

Budget: $300,000.

Being shot in Panavision.

Starting date: 25 April.

BACK STREET GENERAL D ire c to r...............................................Alan Dickes P ro d u cer.......................................... Peter Prager Associate P ro d u c e r............................Phil Avalon S c r ip t.................................................. Alan Dickes Director of Photography...............Gary Hansen A feature film script in its final stages. No further details.

CADDIE Director ........................ '..................Don Cromby P roducer................................. Anthony Buckley Script ..................................................Joan Long Director of Photography ..............................Peter James Based on the true story of a young woman and her two young children during the 1920's and the Depression.

Feature film on a $386,000 budget.

Preproduction stage.

D ire cto r....................

Production company Story ..........................

Color process .........

E d ito r........................

M u s ic ........................

Music D ire ctor.........

A nim ators.................

.. David Denneen .. . Film Graphics .. David Denneen .............Eastman Peter Blacksland . . . . V. Udovenko . . . . Paul Ratcliffe .. Val Udovenko, Nick Faulkner, David Denneen An animated film. A cubic from “ Transversal" goes to see "the world — visiting “ Angleviile", “ Letters" and "Numbers” .

Length: 30 minutes.

Budget: $22,000.

Preproduction.

HELGA’S WEB Director ................................... Terry Ohisson Production company ... .Kingcroft Productions P roducer...................................Casey Robinson Production Manager ........................John Shaw S c rip t........................................ Casey Robinson Director of Photography ............................Keith Lambert Editor ....................................................Bill Stacey Production Designer ................ Bill Hutchinson Set decoration..........................Graham Walker Camera Operator ..............................Guy Furner Grip .......................................... Graeme Mardell Sound R ecordist...............David McConnachie Make-up ..........................................Peggy Carter Cast: Jack Thompson, Judy Morris, Noei Ferrier.

Based on John Cleary's book Helga’s Web, about a Sydney cop who uncovers a massive political scandal.

Length: About 100 minutes.

Budget: $275,000.

Preproduction.

LISTEN TO THE LION Director ................................................... Bob Hill Producers.....................................Damian Parer, Bob Hill A surreal sci-fi study of a derelict's last two days on earth and the day after. Set among a group of Sydney m etho-heads and using the Van Morrison song as a background.

ST.JOHN’S CHARIOT

(W orking Title) D ire c to r.........................................Gordon Much Production Company .............Nova-Narma Productions CHILLA AND BERT Executive Producer .............Peter Conyngham (Tentative Working Title) P roducer.......................................Gordon Much Director............................................................ NotKnown Production Manager ...............Delana McLarty Distributor.................................................... SevenKeysProduction Production company................................. SevenKeys Co-ordinator ........................Delana McLarty Executive Producer ...................... Andrew Gatty Associate Director ...................... David Huggett Producer....................................................... SteveKlbler S c r ip t.............................................Gordon Much Script.............................................................. FredCullen Photography..................................Gordon Much Story................................................................ FredCullen Camera Operators ......................Oscar Scherl, Eddy Van Der Madden, Story of two Interesting characters from opposite David Wakely, ends of the globe and their relationship.

Jim Money Length: Feature Lighting .........................................Oscar Scherl Budget: $250,000-$1,000,000.

Color Process .......................................Eastman Final stage of script development.

Stills .................... ■....................................... Wally No further details.

Art Director...................... Nigel Blackburn-Elliot Special Photographic E ffe cts...................... Eddy Van Der Madden M u s ic ..................................................Bo Diddley, Jeff St. John E d ito r............................ Eddy Van Der Madden Chief G r ip ................................. Manfred Yergen Sound R ecordist................................. Mai Reed Mix .................................................................APA N arrator.......................................... Marcus Hale A n im a to rs.................... Eddy Van Der Madden, Jim Money Staffing ..................................... Hordern Pavilion Lighting Equipment ........................Ellis D. Fogg Runners.......................................... Roger Foley, John Boyer, Nigel Blackburn-Elliot, Cass Usope

Cast: Jeff St. John, Bo Diddley, Cookie Vee. Jeff St. John’s magic chair is the vehicle for a musical fantasy featuring Jeff St. 'John, Bo Diddley and Cookie Vee. Running Time: 30-40 minutes.

Budget: $15,000.

Editing stages.

A full-length feature based on the 0/10 Network’s long running television serial.

Shooting January/February.

END PLAY

Producer/Director........... ......... Tim Burstall ...............Hexagon Production company . . . .

Associate Producer ....... ......... Alan Finney Production Manager/First Assistant D irector....... ....... Ross Dimsey 35mm IN PRODUCTION Director of Photography ............... . . . Robin Copping Camera O p e ra to r........... ......... Dan Burstall Screenplay ...................... ......... Tim Burstall BO DREAM Story ................................. . .Russell Bradden Art Director...................... .. . Bill Hutchinson (Working Title) E d ito r................................ . . . . David Bilcock Director ........................................ Gordon Much Focus P u lle r.................... ......... Ivan Hexter Production company Nova-Narma Productions Clapper/Loader...............

Executive Producer .............Peter Conyngham .. .Gordon Phillips G a ffer............................... . . . . Lindsay Foote Producer........................................ Gordon Much Key Grip .......................... . . . Joel Witherden Production Manager .................Delana McLarty Assistant Grip .................

Assistant D ire ctor........................David Huggett ....... Jeff Robbins Sound Recordist.............

S c rip t............................................Gordon Much ............. Des Bone Boom O p e ra to r...............

2nd Unit Director ......................... David Huggett . . . . Graham Irwin Camera O p e ra to rs............ Flannagan Bros., Continuity ........................

Alison Loftus-Hills Stills ............................... .

David Wakely, ......... Susy Wood Set Dresser ....................

Oscar Scherl, ......... Tony Rooke Eddy Van Der Madden Wardrobe M a s te r........... ....... Kevin Regan Lighting ..................................... Oscar Scherl, Publicity............................. . . . . Sylvi van Wyk Gordon Much Make-up ........................... . . . . Lois Hofenfels Color process ........................................Eastman Cast: George Mallaby (Robert Gifford); John StillsPhotographer................................ Wally Waters (Mark Gifford); Ken Goodlet (Superinten­ Art Director...................... Nigel Blackburn-Elliot dent Cheadle); Robert Hewett (Sergeant Robin­ Special photographic .. Eddy Van Der Madden son); Kevin Miles (Charles Bricknall); Charles effects ........................................ Gordon Much T ing w e ll (Dr. F a irb u rn ); B e linda G ib lin M u s ic ................................................................. BoDiddley (Margaret Gifford); Walter Pym (Stanley Lipton); E d ito r............................ Eddy Van Der Madden Mai Brynning (Police Photographer); Barry M u s ic ................................................................. BoDiddley McQueen (Newscaster); Reg Gorman (News Script Assistant......................................... DelanaMuch Photographer).

Chief G r ip ................................. Manfred Yergen Mystery-thriller based on the Russel Bradden Sound R ecordist................................. Mai Read novel beginning with the murder of a young Mix ..................................................................APA hitch-hiker on Melbourne's Maroondah Highway.

Cast: Bo Diddley, Cookie Vee, Jeff St. John, Budget: $244,000.

Kahvas Jute Band, Alan Murrawalla-Barker Editing stage.

(Black Alan), HRH Queen Elizabeth.

Opening of the Opera House and the variety of THE MAN FROM HONG KONG entertainment and events celebrating it, as seen through the eyes of Bo Diddley. A musical fan­ (Working Title) tasy.

Director ...................... . Brian Trenchard-Smith Length: 3,040 metres Distributor.................. ....................

BEF Running Time: 90 minutes Production companies .. The Mdvie Company: Budget: $100,000-$120,000.

Paragon (Hong Kong) Executive Producers . ........... Raymond Chow, John Hasem THE BOX Producers .................. .............David Hannay, Director .............................................. Paul Eddy Andre Morgan Production company ... .Crawford Productions Production Manager . ...............David Hannay P roducer........................................................... IanJones Production Production Supervisor.................................GeoffPollock Co-ordinator ......... .................... Pom Oliver Production Manager ......................... David Lee Assistant Director . . . . ................... Hal McElroy Production Assistant ....... Ingrid Hecheneerger S c rip t.......................... .Brian Trenchard-Smith Secretary to Producer.................. Veda Curray Director of Screenplay ................................. Tom Heggardy Art Director.......................................................LesBurns Photography ......... ................ Russell Boyd Color process ........... ......................... Eastman Location Manager........................Ray Patterson Cinemascope Casting Director .................... Lorella Crawford E d ito rs ........................ .................... Alan Lake, Unit M anager............................. Graeme Murray Ron Williams Director of Second Assistant . . . . .............. David Copping Photography ........................Wayne Williams M u s ic .......................... ..................Noel Quinlan Campera O perator...................................... DavidEggby Sound R ecordist....... ...................... Cliff Curll Camera A ssistant..............................Greg Ryan Mixer .......................... ................ Peter Fenton Clapper/Leader..........................Ross Berryman Stunt Co-ordinator .. . ........... Peter Armstrong G affer.........................................................StewartSorby Make-up .................... ................Rena Noftanis Key Grip .................................. Joel Witherden Cast: Jimmy Wang Yu; Hugh Keys-Byrne, Ros Electrician.....................................Gary Pluckett Speams, Rebecca Gilling, Frank Thrlng, George Sound R ecordist........................................... GaryWilkins Lazenby.

Boom O perator..........................Mark Wasivtak Continuity ............................................ Jo Weeks, The story of a Hong Kong cop coming to Barbara Burleigh Australia to extradite a prisoner.

E d ito r......................................................Phil Reid Budget: $450,000.

Music E d ito r............................Garry Hardaman Editing stages.

Special effe cts............................................. GarryWalker Make-up .......................................... Terry Worth, Sally Gordon Hairdresser................................................RandellWorth Wardrobe .................................... Karinda Davies Cast: George Mallaby, Fred Betts, Ken James, Judy Nunn, Ken Snodgrass, Geraldine Turner, Cornelia Francis, Marilyn Vernan, Leonie Bradley, Barrie Barkla, Belinda Giblin, Paul Above: Jack Thompson as Foley in Ken Karo, Louis Ramsay, Tracy Mann, Luigi Villani, Robin Ramsay, Keith Lee and Graham Kennedy.

Hannam's- Sunday Too Far Away.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 67

35MNI

PRODUCTION

SURVEY

35 mm PRODUCTION SURVE Y PICNIC AT HANGING D ire c to r..........................

Executive Producer . ...

Producers ......................

Production Secretary .. .

Post Production • M anager....................

Executive Producer for South A ustralia.........

Production Accountant .

SAFC A ccountant.........

Executive Producer's Secretary . . .............

1st Assistant Director ..

2nd Assistant D irector..

- 3rd Assistant Director ..

Director of Photography Camera O p e ra to r.........

Focus P u lle r..................

Stills Photographer.......

Clapper/Loader.............

Art Director....................

Assistant to Art D ire ctor......................

Consultant to the D ire ctor......................

Wardrobe Consultant...

Wardrobe Supervisor ..

Wardrobe Assistant . . . .

Best B o y ........................

Electrics..........................

Prop M aste r..................

Standby p ro p s ...............

E d ito r.............................

Assistant E d ito r......... ..

Dubbing Editor .............

Continuity ....... ..............

Make-up/Hairdressing ..

Make-up ........................

Unit Publicist ................

Chief G r ip ......................

Assistant Grip ...............

Sound Recordist...........

D riv e r.............................

Construction M anager..

Construction..................

Horse wranglers ...........

HOCK

........... Peter Weir .............Pat Lovell ....... Jim McElroy, Hal McElroy ...........Pom Oliver ...... Jim McElroy ....... John Graves . . . John McIntosh . . . .Phillip Smythe ........... Jill Wishart . . .. Mark Egerton ........... Kim Dalton ....... Ian Jamieson ....... Russell Boyd ........... John Seale . David Williamson . . . . David Kynoch .. . David Foreman .. . David Copping . .. .Chris Webster

....... Martin Sharp ......... Wendy Weir ... Judy Dorsman ....... Mandy Smith ... ■. Trevor Toune .. . Geoff Simpson .. Graham Walker . .. .Monte Fleguth ......... Max Lemon . . . . Andre Fleurin ........... Sherry Bell .. . Gilda Baracchi ........... Jose Perez .............Liz Michie ......... Peter Welsh .. Geordie Dryden ......... Phil Warner ......... Don Conely Steve Champman ...............Bill Howe . . . . Herbert Pinter . . . . Tom Downer, Gordon Rayner Cast: Rachael Roberts (Mrs Appleyard); Dominic Guard (Michaei Fitzhubert); Vivean Gray (Greta McGraw); Helen Morse (Di De Portiers); Kirsty Child, Anne Lambert, Karen Robson, Jane Vallis, Christine Schuler, Margaret Nelson, Ingrid Mason, Jenny Lovell, Janet Murray, Bridgite Phillips, Jackie Weaver, A. Llewellyn Jones, Frank Gunnell, Martin Vaughan, Jack Fegan, Set at Woodend (Victoria) in 1900 — Story of the mysterious disappearance of three schoolgirls from the exclusive Appieyard College during a picnic to the nearby Hanging Rock.

Length: Feature Budget: $300,000.

PLUGS Director ....................

Production company Executive Producers Producer ..................

Associate Producers Production Manager Assistant Director ...

S c rip t........................

Art Director..............

Assistant Art D ire ctor................

Director of Photography .......

Camera Operator <..

Camera Assistant ..

Color process .......

G affer......................

Grip ........................

................ Terry Bourke ............................Romac .....................Bob Roget, Peter McNamara ........... Ninki Maslansky ...............Terry Bourke, Rod Hay .................... Pat Clayton .................... Gerry Letts .................. Terry Bourke .................... Barry Adler .....................Kerrie Hood

....... Brian Probyn BSC .............. Frank Mammon .....................John Clarke Eastman (Atlab Sydney) .................... Derek Jones ................ Ralph Gosper, Tony Reade .......................... Rod Hay E d ito r...................... ...........Howard Bracken, Assistant Editors ...

■ Pauline Lind .......................Bob Young Music ...................... .,. . . ...............

Phil Judd Sound Recordist ... ...............Jack Friedman Boom Operator . . . .

Electrician............... ..................... Brian Gross Wardrobe ............... .........Carmen Mendoza, Darrelyn Gunsberg ...................... Peter West, Stunts......................

Frank Lennon Continuity ............... . Margaret Rose-Dunphy Stills ........................ .................. Chic Stringer Cast: Peter Thompson, Cheryl Rixon, Norman Yemm, Reg Gorman, Phil Cleary, Edgar Met­ calfe, Aiian Cassell, Joseph Fürst, David Vallon, Helen O’Grady, Pat Skevington, Vynka LeeSteere, Max Bartlett, Michael Kent, Raymond Long, Pat Clayton, Margaret Ford, Josie Mackay, Bon McGuire, Sid Plummer, Robbie McGregor, Gina Davis and Jill Argate.

Feature- length sex-comedy set in Perth, relating misadventures of a bumbling private eye in his efforts to close down the Pussycat Escort Agen­ cy. The local police cause havoc with their inepl pursuit of Plugg and the agency's beautiful girls.

Budget: $100,000.

Final editing stages.

Release planned for June.

A S¡PORTINO PROPOSITION Director ....................

Distributor................

................... Don Chaffey ....................Walt Disney Productions ......... APA Leisuretime .................... Ron’ Miller ....... Jerome Courtland .............. Peter Appleton ................ Mark Egerton Rosemary Anne Sisson

Production company Executive Producer .

Producer ..................

Production Manager Assistant Director ...

S c rip t........................

Director of Photography ....... .................. Jack Cardiff S tills .......................... ................John Brothers ........................Eastman Color process .........

E d ito r........................ .............. Mike Campbell Art Director............... .................. Bob Hilditch ........... Wendy Dickson Costumes ................ .................. John Heath Sound Recordist , . . . ....... Monique DawkinsMake-up ..................

Cast: Eva Griffith, Robert Betties, John Meillon, Michael Craig.

A Sporting Proposition is set in the Australian bush in the late 1920’s and is an adventure story about a boy and his Welsh pony. Based on James Aldrich's book.

Budget: $1,000,000 plus.

Editing stages.

P R O M IS E D W O M A N

35mm ÂWÂHTIMG RELEASE

Director ..............................................Tom Cowan Production c o m p a n y............ B.C. Productions P roducers...............................Richard Brennan, Tom Cowan Production Manager .................... Errol Sullivan OF THE DAMNED Assistant Director ...........Graham Shirley Script ... ........... : .......... •...............Tom Cowan Director .................................... .Terry Bourke Director of Distributor.......................................... Roadshow Photography ................................ Tom Cowan Production company . . . . Terryrdd Productions Production Designer ........... Gillian Armstrong P roducers....................................... Terry Bourke, Continuity ........................................Mandy Boyd, Rod Hay Cathie Shirley Production Manager ........................Pat Clayton M u s ic Production Secretary . .. Anne-Marie Tremayne Production Secretary................................ MandyBoyd Production Accountant . . . . Jonothan Toussaint E d ito r............................................................ DavidStiven Producers US ' .

Sound R ecordist....................Laurie Fitzgerald representative ..........................Fred Ishimoto Cast: Yelena Zigon, Takis Emmanuel, Nikos Production design .........................Gary Hansen Gerissimou, Kate Fitzpatrick, Darcy Waters.

Assistant Art D ire ctor..................................................... BarryAdler Story of a Greek migrant who comes to Associate Producers ....................Peter Medich, Australia to face the harsh realities of an arrang­ Roy Medich ed marriage.

Assistant D ire ctor........................Mark Egerton Budget: $70,000.

S c rip t............................................................ TerryBourke Length: 100 minutes.

Director of photography......................Brian Probyn BSC THE REMOVALISTS Camera operators .........................Peter James, Richard Wallace D ire c to r.......................................................... TomJeffrey E d ito r..................................................... Rod Hay P roducer........................................ Margaret Fink Color process .. Eastman (Colorfilm, Sydney) S c rip t....................................... David Williamson Sound Recordists...........................................TimLloyd, Associate Producer ............... Richard Brennan Bob Hayes Production Manager ...................... Sue Milliken Boom O perator.............................. Dave Cooper; Assistant D ire cto r............................. Mike Lake P ro p s ........................................ Rocco Sorrenti, Lighting Cam eram an.................... Graham Lind Reg Gorman Camera Operator .

PeterJames G affer............................................................. MickMorris Sound Recordist....................;. Ken Hammond Special effe cts.................................................LesConley G affer..................................................Tony Tegg M u s ic ...............................................................BobYoung Grip ........................................... Graeme Mardell Horses, carriages ......................... Graham Ware P ro p s ...................................... Gillian Armstrong Stills ................................................ Chic Stringer Wardrobe .......................................Ron Williams Hairstyiing............................... Patricia Cunliffe Make-up ............................................ Liz Mitchie Sound mixers ............................. Peter Fenton, E d ito r.........................................Anthony Buckley Ron Purvis, Cast: Peter Cummins, John Hargreaves, Jacki Phil Judd Weaver, Kate Fitzpatrick, Chris Heywood, Martin Unit Runner ..........................Roy Harries-Jones Harris.

Continuity ................................. Lynn McEncroe Story of a furniture removalists' contact with a Wardrobe .................................. Joan Grimmond suburban police station.

Stunt C o-ordinator...................................... PeterArmstrong Budget: $240,000. Make-up ................................... Derek de Niece Cast' Dame Judith Anderson, Alex Cord, THE GREAT MACARTHY Michaei Craig, Joseph Fürst, Tony Bonner, John Meillon. Robert Quiiter, Carla Hoogeveen, Diana Dangerfield, Josie Mackay, Coiin Drake, Louis Director/Producer........................... David Baker Wishart, John Morris, Graham Corry, Phil S c rip t........................................... John Romeril, Avalon, Lionel Long.

David Baker (from the original novel by Barry Oakley) 1896. American bounty hunter sets out to in­ Executive Producer vestigate the .mysterious disappearances of Production Manager ......... Richard Brennan travellers on a lonely stretch of Gippsland coast.

Associate Producers .'......... Richard Brennan, An eccentric old couple operating a Cobb & Co., , Alan Benjamin overnight house provide the bizarre events that Assistant D ire ctor........................... Hal McElroy follow.

Wardrobe ..............................Aphrodite Kondos Length: 118 minutes.

Designer .....................................David Copping Budget: $420,000.

Make-up ............................................ Liz Mitchie Release: By Roadshow on a national basis in Continuity .......................................... Lyn Gailey July.

Director of _ Co-production between Terryrod Productions, Photography ................ . Bruce McNaughton Australian Film Development Corporation, TWVCamera Operator .................. Peter James Channel 7 (Perth) and Medich Holdings (Liver­ E d ito r........... ..................................... John Scott pool, NSW).

Sound R ecordist................................Ron Green Unit M anager............................Mike Martorana Cast: John J a rra tt (M cC a rth y), S andra McGregor, Judy Morris, Kate Fitzpatrick, Denis M ille r,'C h ris Heywood, Colin Drake, Barry Humphries, Coiin Croft, Peter Annenson, Bruce Spence, Jack Dyer, Max Gillies, Peter Cummins.

The career of a brilliant Australian Rules fuilforward — from his country recruitment to his final league game. Based on the Barry Oakley novel.

Budget: $260,000.

INN

....................................... Vassili Daramas

Above: Tim Burstali, Belinda Giblin and John Waters discuss a scene during the shooting of End Play.

68 — Cinema Papers, March-April

SUNDAY TOO FAR AWAY

,

BETWEEN WARS

PETERSEN

Director/Producer........................ Mike Thornhill D ire c to r............................................................ KenHannam Director .......................................... Tim Burstall Associate Producer/ Production c o m p a n y .................................. SouthAustralia Production co m p a n y.................Hexagon Films Production M a n a g e r................... Hal McElroy Film Development Corporation Director of Director of Photography .......................... Robin Copping P ro d u ce r............................................................ GilBrealey Assistant P roducer........................................ MattCarroll Photography ...............................Russell Boyd E d ito r.............................................David Bilcock Unit M anager.............................. Ross Matthews Director of M u s ic .................................................. Peter Best Production Secretary.....................................PomOliver Photography ............................... Geoff Burton Sound .........................................Ken Hammond Assistant D ire cto r.....................................MichaelLake Assistant D ire c to r................................... Malcolm Smith Cast: Jack Thompson (Tony Petersen), Jack!

S c r ip t..................................... Frank Moorhouse, S c r ip t.............................................................. JohnDingwall Weaver (Suzie Petersen), Wendy Hughes Mike Thornhill Camera O p e ra to r.................................... GrahamScaife (Patricia Kent), Arthur Dignam (Charles Kent), Continuity ..................................... Adrienne Reid Cast: Jack Thompson, Max Cullen, Robert Christine Amor (Annie), Helen Morse (Jane), Sound R ecordist........................ Ken Hammond Bruning, Jerry Thomas, Peter Cummins, John John Ewart (Peter), Sandy McGregor (Marge), Boom O p e ra to r..............................David Cooper Ewart, Sean Scully. .

David Phillips (Heinz), Belinda Giblin (Moira).

E d ito r................................................ Max Lemon Events leading up to the 1956 Shearers’ Strike.

An electrician goes to University and gets per­ Sound Re-recordist ........................Peter Fenton sonally involved with a Professor and his wife.

Cast: Corin Redgrave, Arthur Dignam, Judy Morris, Patricia Leehy, Gunter Meisner, Brian James.

THE TRUE STORY OF 35mm IN RELEASE The life story of a doctor between World War I ESKIMO NELL and World War II. Director/Co-producer/ C o-w riter................. . .Richard Franklin ALVIN RIDES AGAIN Co-producer........... .. . . . Ronald Baneth C o -w rite r.................... . . . .Alan Hopgood C o-directors..................................................DavidBilcock, Director of Robin Copping Photography ......... .. Vincent Montor P ro d u cer........................................... Tim Burstall Assistant cameraman . . Wolfgang Kress Associate Producer .........................Alan Finney Grip ............................ ......... Noel Mudie E d ito r........................ Edward McQueen-Mason G a ffer.......................... . . . . Robert Young Director of .

Sound Recordist....... ....... John Phillips Photography .......................... Robin Copping Production Manager . ......... Sue Farrelly M u s ic ........................ ........................Brian Cadd Unit M anager............. ........... Ray Bissell Art D irector..................................Bill Hutchinson 1st Assistant Director ....... Darry Sheen Production Manager/ Costumes ..................

Aphrodite Kondos Assistant D ire ctor......................................RossDimsey E d ito r.......................... .. Andrew London Camera O p e ra to r.........................................PeterBilcock Music .......................... ........... Brian May Sound R ecordist............................... Des Boan Cast: Serge, Lazareff, Max Gilles, Abigail, Cast: Graeme Blundell, Alan Finney, Frank Graham Bond, Ellie McLure, Elke Neidhart, Bob Thring, Chantai Contouri, Jon Finlayson, Noel Horsfall.

Ferrier, Briony Behets, Abigail, Vanessa Leigh.

Based on the original poem by Robert Service, A gangster-adventure story set around a casino about Dead-Eye Dick and Mexico Pete’s search robbery. Graeme Blundell returns to play the tri­ for the infamous womper Eskimo Nell. ple roles of Alvin Purple, “ Balls” McGhee, and Budget: $240,000.

Alvin impersonating “ Balls" McGee. Budget: $250,000.

In view of the rapid growth of Australian production the co­ ordinator of this column would he g re a tly assisted by in ­ dividual producers and direc­ tors sending their production details and stills to: Production Survey Cinema Papers, 143 Therry Street, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000.

BAZZA HOLDS HIS OWN Producer/Director.

Associate Producer Director of ' Photography . . . .

S c r ip t.....................

. Bruce Beresford ......... Jane Scott

. . . Don McAlpine Barry Humphries, Bruce Beresford Production design .. John Stoddard ......... Peter Best M u s ic ..................... . . . Will Anderson E d ito r..................... ........... Des Bond Sound ...................

Cast: Barry Crocker, Barry Humphries, Donald Pleasance, Ed Devereaux, John Le Mesurier, Michael Newman, Little Nell, Nancy Blain, Prime Minister Whitiam and wife.

Barry McKenzie’s adventures in Europe, Paris and behind the Iron Curtain. An original script based on the comic strip character.

Above Left: A cheesecake pose from Cheryl Rixon, who plays the lead role of Kelli Kelly In Plugg, the latest feature from Terry Bourke.

Above Right: Mexican Peter and Dead Eye Dick cover their tracks in a scene from Richard Franklin’s The True Story of

,

v

Eskimo Nell.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 69

16 MM PRODUCTION SURVEY

16 mm PRODUCTION SURVEY Length: 50 minutes.

Budget: $24,000.

Editing stages.

Sound ..................................... Michael Cremean S c r ip t....................................... Sally Blake (from John Ruane her short story) Tim Smart Photography........................ Brian Probyn, BSC Color process ........................ : .............. Eastman Negative cutting ...........................Andrew Jones Electrician................................Brian Bainsgrove Graphics ....................................Gordon Fitchett THE FIRM MAN Wardrobe ..................................... Rose Jackson M usic...............................................Simon Jones ANTONIO GAUDI — TO A DANCING W riter/Producer/ Art D irector..........................................Sally Blake John Shaw D ire cto r....................................... John Duigan GOD M u s ic ......................................................... CharlesPileso Caat: Michael Carman, Sally Conabere, Debbie Lighting cameraman ....... .........Sasha Trikojus Continuity ........................................... Fred Blake D ire c to r....................................... Théo Mathews Burke, Annie Ryall.

Camera assistants ..................... Terry Jacklin, Make-up .............................................Sally Blake Photography....................................... Phillip Bull Length: 50 minutes.

Martin Bartfield Sound Recordist................................Carlo Tachi S c r ip t............................................. David Rapsey, Budget: $5,000.

Sound recordist .......................... Lloyd Carrick Théo Mathews Cast: Arthur Dignam, (remainder not cast).

Final editing stage.

Sound Assistant ............................ Wayne Smith Color process ....................................... Eastman Film chronicles the after-life of the main Costumes ....................................... Anna French E d ito r.............................................David Rapsey ON THE TRACK OF UNKNOWN character Jog. A born loser, he goes through the E d ito r........................................... Tony Patterson Documentary on a Spanish architect Antonio process of changing his self-created hell Into a ANIMALS Cast: Peter Cummins, Eileen Chapman, Peter Gaudi (1854-T926): his works and philosophies. personal paradise. He becomes a dead winner, Directors..................................... Gordon Glenn, Carmody, Chris McQuade, Max Gillies, Bruce delighting in tormenting his former self.

Length: 31 minutes. . Keith Robertson Spence.

Budget: $5,000.

Length: 45 minutes.

Documentary investigating sightings, a drop­ A middle-aged businessman joins a mysterious Release print stage. , Budget: $25,000. ping, footprints and a photograph which cannot super businessorganization known as "The Shooting March 30. be attributed to known native fauna.

Firm” . The firm is in fact a political organization APPLAUSE PLEASE Budget: $5,000. engendering certain changes in its members.

KELLY Length: 50 minutes.

All film work ...........................................Ivan Gaal Length: 100 minutes.

Release print stage.

Sound t r a c k ..................................David Hughes D ire c to r............................................ Rod Nicholls Awaiting release.

M u s ic .............................................. Frank Zappa, D istributor.................................... Vincent Library Franciscus Henkie Production co m p a n y ..................Acey Plus Unit ONCE FLOATING Color process ....................................... Eastman Associate Producer ..........................Dirla Mellor Directors...............................Mark D'arcy-lrvine, Producer/Director..........................................MikeEdolsProduction Manager ...................... Aldo Fedato Cast: Max Gillies, Bob Thornycroft, Joe Bolza.

Assistant D ire cto r........................... Sean Power Assistant D ire cto r.......................... Leo McLaren Garry Archibald Length: 20 minutes.

S c r ip t................................................Rod Nicholls E d ito r...............................................Esben Storm Producers............................ Mark D’arcy-lrvine, A co-operative effort by the director and cast to Photography................................................... MikeEdolsPhotography.....................................Gillian Sellar Garry Archibald create a satire on our daily commercial ‘televi­ E d ito r................................................Rod Nicholls Animation assistants .......................... Mas Sani, Color process ....................................... Eastman sion diet’ and its viewers. Mime and movements Commentary.....................................................BobMazaProduction Designer .................Vina Brailsford Garry Archibald, are the main characteristics of this comedy.

Assistant ...................................

John McFadyen Sound .............................................Max Heusser Mark D’arcy-lrvine Inking and painting Special e ffe cts ............................. James O’Brian Editing stages.

M u s ic .............................................People of the Sound Editor ................................... Murray Hird supervision....................................Judy Lengal Mowanjum Tribe Sound R ecordist...................... Roger Manogue Editin9 ........................................... Peter Blaxland Made with the assistance of the Australian Coun­ CEREMONY Sound Re-recordist ....................

Gail Tauscher Color process .................................. Eastman cil for the 'Arts, Floating examines the clash D ire c to r............................................David Greig Technical A d vise r....................... William Moore Vo|ces ..................................... Roger Newcomb between white and black cultures in the Northern Production assistant ............. Deborah Ranson Stunt co-ordinator .................... James O’Brian Animated cartoon satirising the world and its Territory.

Photography.............................Wolfgang Kress, Cast: Kay Lindsberg, Robert Kimber, Geoffrey constant plight of destroying itself by nuclear Length: 75 minutes.

David Greig weapons.

Pullan, Bruce Rosen.

Release print stage.

E d ito r................................................ David Greig A political fantasy, set in 1976. Six months after Length: Seven minutes.

P aintings........................................... Paul Mason Budget: $2,300. the US has gone fascist, American radical Kelly Sound ...............................................Daryl Evans HIGH AS A KITE Bryant comes to Australia, the press and police Cast: David Leahy, Beverly Sluiter.

(Working Title) coverage on her proving yet again that We Shalf ROBINSON A film of ritual and of confrontation between an Not Overcome.

Director ...................................................Ian Finlay Directors........................................Peter Tammer, artist and a woman.

Distributor .............................................Max Dutch Length: 23 minutes.

Garry Patterson Length: 25 minutes.

Production Budget: $2,500.

Photography.................................................. PeterTammer Budget: $3,000. com pany...................Max Dutch Productions In release.

Editor............................................................. PeterTammer P roducer...............................................Ian Finlay Sound Recordist ...................Garry Patterson Photography..................................... Warren Self CHILDREN OF THE MOON LARGER THAN LIFE Documentary on 74-year-old Reg Robinson, who Color process .......................................

Eastman Producer/Director................................Bob Weis has built 16mm cameras, printers and projectors Directors .........................................DenseyClyne Sound recordist ..................................Mai Read Assistant D ire c to r..........................Wayne Smith for the last 50 years. Among other achievements Jim Frazier Cast: Bill Moyes, Stephen Moyes.

Lighting cameraman .......................... Bob Kolar he directed a film in 1926 entitled The Shattered Production co m p a n y....... Mantis Wildlife Films Sound ........................................... Lloyd Carrick Documentary on two kite flyers.

Illusion, and recently has built a super 16mm Executive Producer ...................... Densey Clyne camera with Vincent Monton.

Producers.......................................

Densey Clyne Cast: John Dulgan and Alan Money.

Budget $28,000.

Jim Frazier .Length: 50 minutes.

Editing stages.

Short feature. A young man retreating from city S c r ip t...............................................Densey Clyne Preproduction. , life meets a Magus and undergoes substantial Photography..................................................... Jim Frazier emotional and spiritual change.

ROLLING HOME Color process ..........................

- Ektachrome HOW WILLINGLY Release print stage.

Directors ........................................... Paul Witzig, M u s ic ......................................... Dorek Strachan YOU SING E d ito r.......................................... Frank Heimans David Lourie Productioncompany......................... Island Films N arrator........................................... Densey Clyne DON’T TALK TO ME A film by Garry Patterson.

Producer.................... ........................Paul Witzig T itles..................................Yoram Gross Studios ABOUT THE BLUES, BABY Production assistant .................Jim Robertson Script.................................................. Judy Bray, Seven episodes about the life of insects and Story consultant ...................Charles Tabacznik Director ......................................... Jean Buckley Paul Witzig spiders of Australia.

Photography..................................Peter Tammer P ro d u cer.........................................Jean Buckley Story.................................................... Concept by Continuity ................................ Maureen Andrew Length: 50 minutes per episode.

S c r ip t...............................................Jean Buckley Craig McGregor Video .................................................Ruben Mow Budget: $20,000 per episode.

Production Manager .................... Ken Qpinnell Photography.......................... Michael Simmons, M u s ic ........................................Robert Patterson Photography........................ '.. David Sanderson Robbie Newman Performed by . . . . : ........................ ‘Inner Circle’ Sound .......................... .................. Carlo Tardis Color process ................................... Ektachrome MAY FLY Location services .......................... Box and Dice Written and performed by Garry Patterson, Isaac Editor...............................................David Lourie D ire c to r....................................................... KevinAnderson Camera assistant .......................... Martha Kaye Gerson, Jim Robinson, Jerry Powerly, Morris Music .David Stewart, Melissa Stewart John Production Assistant ...................Tony Stevens Original m u s ic ................................Janet Collins Gradman, Braham Glass, Allan Levy, Rosy Bushelle, Mason Williams, Bob ‘Wolf’ Ahwon and Photography..................................................KevinAnderson Smith, Pamela Munro, Jeff Turnbull; with Peter Rusty Miller Cast: Janet Collins, Colin James, Graham Pitts.

Continuity ................................... Dianne Giulieri Haffenden, Jim Rush, Peter Weiniger, Pat Sound .......................... Mixed by Les McKenzie A young housewife leaves her husband and Sound R ecordist........................ Darryl Gladwin Wooley, Spence Williams, Mandy and Joey and Dan Dillon (APA) children after a violent fight and is raped by a Cast: Walter Dobrowolski, James Robertson, Munro.

Surfing b y ..................................... Reno Abellira hitch-hiker.

Maureen Sadler.

Length: 30 minutes. “ it is a long, semi-autobiographical comedy of Cast: Joan and Reno Abellira, Judy Bray, David Twenty-four hours In the life of a crime writer, in sorts; more like a personal, illustrated, comic­ Lourie, Robbie NeWman, Mindy Plater, Michael which he confronts the characters in his latest strip novel than a production-line film.

It is not a Simmons, Ian Watson, Paul and Marianne Wit­ THE ELUSIVE GEISHA novel. consumer product.” (Garry Patterson). zig. " Producer/Director........................................ FrankHelmans Editing stages.

Budget: $14,500.

A surf movie in which wave-riding only con­ Production c o m p a n y ..........Cinetel Productions Final editing stages. stitutes 10 per cent of the picture.

Associate producer ...................... John de Boer MELANIE AND ME “There were 10 of us that year who left the city far S c r ip t............................................................. FrankHeimans behind and headed west . . . we had heard JOG’S TROT D ire c to r........................................... Chris Fitchett S to ry ............................................................ JosetteHeimans stories of aboriginal tribes, of huge mountain Assistant D ire ctors........................ Julie Steiner Photography..............................Michael Franklin D ire c to r............................... John Papadopoulos Andrew Cruickshank E d ito r......................................... Frank Heimans Production co m p a n y............. Pendragon Films Lighting Cam eram an...................... Ellery Ryan P ro d u cer....................................... Harvey Shore Still photography.........................Peter Edwards Film portraying thé geishas of Japan — their art, Associate Producer ......... John Papadopoulos Above: Don’t Talk to Me About the Blues, Script continuity ..............................Cass Peters function and future (for the 0/10 Network).

16mm PRODUCTION SURVEY

Baby, directed by Jean Buckley.

70 — Cinema Papers, March-April

ranges, of vast deserts and plains, of perfect surf on hidden beaches. Our journey was a quest into the beyond; a search for new people, new places and new experiences .. (Paul Witzig and Judy Bray).

Length: 95 minutes.

Budget: $72,000.

In release.

SCHOOL’S OUT Director . . .

Production

. . . . Alex Rappel Ross Campbell, AVEC Film Unit S c r ip t....... __ Alex Rappel Camera . . . ........... Ivan Gall Lighting . . . . . . Peter Dodds Process . . . ........... Eastman Sound . . . . .. David Hughes E d ito r....... . . . Peter Dodds Gaffer/Grip .. John Sullivan Documentary about students and teachers trying to break through the conditioning of traditional education at three radical alternative schools in Melbourne — Brinsly Road, Collingwood and Swinburne Community Schools.

Length: 40 minutes.

S c rip t.............................................Scott Murray, Simon Scott Photography................................. Gordon Glenn E d ito rs .......................................... Scott Murray, Sylvie Le Clezio Sound R ecordist.......................... Lloyd Carrick Sound R e-recordist.................... Bob Gardiner Study of a young man’s persistence in a one-way love relationship and his subsequent realization of the existence of choice.

Budget: $20,000.

Length: 80 minutes.

Shooting April/May

FILM AND TELEVI SI ON BOARD GRANTS: GENERAL PRODUCTION FUND AND SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT. LILIAS CASTLE (NSW) — Supplementary grant for music for television pilot of children's program $500 AYTEN KUYULULU (NSW) — To direct and produce The Golden Cage; 90 minute feature film about two Turkish migrants. $20,500

SIMON TOWNSEND (NSW) — Supplementary THE TERRITORIANS grant to complete television pilot for children’s D ire cto r................................. David Waddington current affairs program $1,000 Distributor..............................Global Television Production IAN BARRY (NSW) — To direct and produce company . . . . D. S. Waddington Productions narrative feature Sparks $20,400 Producer...................................................... DavidWaddington TELEM A RK P R O D U C TIO N S (G ORDO N Associate Producer ...............Byron Zanuck GRIMSDALE) (NSW) — To direct and produce Production Manager ...................... Jan Kenney Child’s Play, pilot episode for television series S c rip t..................................... Charles Wickham, written by children $13,720 James Bodwitch _ Stuart Parks BALLARAT PRODUCTIONS (NSW) — To S to ry..............................................................DavidWaddington produce Rate of Exchange, pilot episode of Photography................................................. DavidWaddington proposed television series Frood $20,159 2nd unit photography .............

Mike Atkinson SOLO FLIGHT JOHN BIRD (VIC) — To direct and produce This Stills photography.....................Bernard Glasser Other Eden; documentary based on McCubbenD ire c to r..................................................... Ian Mills M u s ic .................................................Bill Bennsing Bonython expedition $17,255 Production Manager .......................Pat Robbins E d ito r........................................................ RhondaMacGregor Photography..............................................GordonGlenn Continuity .....................................Susette White DON C A T C H LO V E (N S W ) — Dev el op S c r ip t.........................................................Ian Mills Script Assistant............................... Jan Kenney screenplay for television play Coming of Sound Recordists.................. .... Lloyd Carrick, Sound Recordist.......................... Barry Hamilton Age $1,200 Ian Armet, Mixer ................................................... Jon Lesley Alan Walton Narrator..........................................................JuneSalterMURRAY CLARK (NSW) — Develop screenplay for one episode and story lines for subsequent E d ito r................................................... Kevin Stott T itles................................... Dunatta Graphics episodes for television drama series Drift, with Continuity ....................................... Fiona Mackie Nine episodeson the people of the Northern assistance of script editor $600 Cast: Fiona Russell, Don Barker, John Ley. Territory and their lifestyles. Each episode ex­ amines a different character, e g. a cattleman, DARYL FREESTONE (NSW) — Develop The longing of a woman to escape th9 rigid buffalo hunter, nurse etc. screenplay for 90 minute television pilot The framework of her everyday world and the Game Trade $2,000 limitations placed on her freedom by human Length: 50 minutes per episode. society and human relations.

Budget: $12,000 per episode.

MARALYN J. JONES (NSW) — Develop treat­ Length: 90 minutes. ment for screenplay for film documentary drama Release print stage.

Semi-detached $800 THE UNDERSTUDY Producer/Director...........................................EricLuighal SEAN HOGBEN (NSW) — Develop screenplay STIRRING Production company . . . . Sandbar Productions for feature film on m iddle-class school Producer's Assistant .................... Chris Morgan Direction and research........................Jane Oehr leaver $1,000 Production Manager .....................Errol Sullivan .Rrpduction company Australian Department of RON HARRISON (NSW) — Develop screenplay Assistant D ire cto r..........................Errol Sullivan Education and Film Australia for episode of television series Dinkum 2nd Assistant D irector...................Diana Kearns P ro d u cer....................................... Timothy Read M ic a w b e r and three su b se qu e n t s to ry ­ S c rip t......... ........................................Eric Luighal Photography...............Mike Edois (and others) lines $1,200 Photography............................... Galle Tattersall E d ito r.........................................Warwick Hercus Camera oper£tor .................Malcolm Richards CHRIS McGILL/TIM READ (NSW) — Develop Step by step examination of an experimental Lighting ................................... Brian Bainsgrove screenplay and prepare m u sic/lyrics for method of teaching in a classroom which reveals Color process .......................................Eastman children’s feature film Hector Hero Cat $2,900 student and teacher attitudes to an issue (cor­ Continuity .........................................Lynn Gailey poral punishment) and to themselves as well as PETER SEDLAK (NSW) — Develop screenplay Sound Recordist..............................Carlo Tachi showing the development of a unity within the for feature film Life of Maestro Gyongyosi. with Cast: Jeanne Drynan, Don Barkham, Frank students where there was none before. assistance of script editor $2,000 McTearnan, Robin Bowering, Graham Pitt, Ivar Length: 60 minutes.

Kants.

PETER WEIR (NSW) — Develop first draft Release print stage. scre e n p la y fo r fe a tu re film Raft of the “ A film within a film and what transpires when ac­ Gods $1,800 tors don’t relate to a situation as the director STRINGER believed they would.” (Eric Luighal).

RENATE YATES (NSW) — Develop treatment Director . .. .. .Robert Schmidt Length: 90 minutes (approximately). and first draft screenplay for 50 minute television .. Robert Schmidt Producer . . . .

Budget: $24,000. play based on short story Mrs. Eastern, with .. Robert Schmidt, Story .............

In pre-production. assistance of script editor $850 Chris Cuddington .............. Eastman Color process COLIN JOHNSON (VIC) — Develop screenplay WILDLIFE . Robert Schmidt, Animators . . . for feature film from novel Wildcat Falling, with Gairden Cook D ire c to r.................... . Peter Kingston assistance of script editor $1,600 Production Company . Wild Life Films Animated film about two surfers in a world DONALD MCLENNAN (V IC ) — Prepare of Australia stopped by pollution. shooting script from first draft screenplay for Producer .................. . . . .John Singer Length: 23 minutes. feature film Changes, with assistance of script Production Manager . . . .John Singer Budget: $8\000. supervisor $1,200 Assistant Director . . . . . . . Colin Beard Editing stages.

S c rip t........................ . .Russel Deeble SUE FORD (VIC) — To research series of films Story .......................... .. .Bobby Bright on women artists $1,000 Photography.............

SUMMER SHADOWS . . . . Colin Beard Color ........................ ........... Eastman D ire c to r...........................................Scott Murray E d ito r....... ...............

Marsha Bennett Production c o m p a n y..................... Acme Films . . . . Colin Beard P roducer......................................... Simon Scott . Art Director...............

M u s ic ........................ .. . Bobby Bright Music D ire ctor......... .. .Bobby Bright Sound E d ito r...........

Marsha Bennett . . . Doug Davies Sound Recordist . . . .

Above Left: Ceremony: a film of rituRI and confrontation.

Above Right: Julie Dawson in Who Killed Jenny Langby.

LESLIE HUELIN/MICHAEL PATE (VIC) — Develop scripts for minimum of six 50-minute television episodes based on Huelln’s book Keep Moving $3,000 E. C. HAM/A. K. FOWLER (OLD) — Research and document source material and prepare treatment for film documentary on licensed slaughter of koalas in Queensland in the 1920s $1,800 RICHARD RUDD (OLD) — Research and develop script for dramatized documentary film on Lizard Island (Qld) pioneer, Mrs. Watson$200 W ILLIAM EDGAR (WA) — Research and develop historical television series Moondyne, with assistance of script editor $1,500 NICHOLAS LIDDELOW ( WA) — Develop screenplay for one episode of television series Dan the Dogger and synopses for subsequent episodes, with assistance of script editor $850

F IL M A N D T E L E V IS IO N BOARD GRANTS: EXPERIMENTAL FILM AND TELEVISION FUND.

NEW SOUTH WALES Kenneth Ambrose, $2,996; Paul Bugden, $1,185; Pat Fiske, $5,290; Andrez Chodkiewicz, $800; Lawrence Field, $749; Diana Fuller, $4,643; Diana Kearns, $4,649; Gillian Leahy, $2,763; Janice Mason, $766; Meg Stewart, $5,123; Lee Hobbs, $922; Jennifer Thornley, $2,000; Daniela Torsch, $3,353; Sonia Hoffman, $2,843; E. Werlemann, $2,905; Nigel Louez, $1,020; Garham Dyson, $1,550.

VICTORIA A. L. Badrock, $524; Martin Bartfleld, $1,922; Marie Battista, $1,036; Felix Bosari, $1,290; Max­ im Burligh, $715; James Clayden, $1,870; Rodney Corry, $1,600; Anthony Decker, $2,160; Peter Downton, $4,634; Ian Forsyth, $2,131; Ronald Hamilton, $1,255; David King, $671; Ross Lander, $1,969; Arthur McDevitt, $1,180; Trevor McKerchar, $1,505; Brett Southwick, $1,283; C h ris to p h e r S ta p le to n , $1,048; Kenneth Shepherd, $2,232; Peter Yuill, $1,000; Mike Hud­ son, $828; James Wilson, $400.

QUEENSLAND Bruce Dickson, $1,200; Jan Murray, $2,071; Arthur B. Palmer, $700; Sister Marie Ryan, $369; Gavin Patterson, $480; Don Scheikowski, $480.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA Lynette Bugden, $2,742; Fred Cass, $1,422; Mark Pinchbeck, $100; Donald Shepherd, $1,082; Darryl Budner, $281; Geoff Bruer, $4,865.

WESTERN AUSTRALIA Geoffrey Bennett, $2,254.

General Interest documentary on birds of the Northern part of Australia.

Running Time: 1 hour Budget: $20,000 Editing stages.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 71

COMMERCIALS PRODUCTION SURVEY

Commercials PRODUCTION SURVEY The following Slat has been complied after consultation with agency represen­ ta tiv e s , p ro d u c e rs , d ire c to rs and technicians, and represents a selection of ads currently being screened in cinemas and on national television. The commer­ cials selected for publication in this sec­ tion demonstrate merit in one or more of the areas listed.

KENT T IT L E .............................................................. Kent PRODUCT......... , ........................ Kent Cigarettes AGENCY ............... „.Joh n Clemenger Pty. Ltd. PRODUCTION HOUSE ......... Grahame Jennings Productions PRODUCER .............................. Arthur Sturgess DIRECTOR ................. ....................... Jim Money WRITER ................................John Clemenger CAMERA ................................Chris Ashbrook EDITOR ............................ ».............Mark Waters

KING GEE OVERALLS T IT L E ......................................King Gee Overalls PRODUCT.............................. King Gee Overalls AGENCY ...................Murray Evans Advertising Pty. Ltd. PRODUCTION HOUSE . . . . Grahame Jennings Productions PRODUCER .....................................Dorothy Mills DIRECTOR .......................................... Jim Money W RITER............................................Clinton Smith CAM ERA........................................... Chris Money EDITO R............................................Mervyn Lloyd

EGG BOARD

No film without

SPRAYFRESH DEODORANT TITLE ..................................................

Visitors PRODUCT...................... Sprayfresh Deodorant AGENCY ...................Pritchard Wood Quadrant PRODUCTION HOUSE . . . . Seeka Productions PRODUCER .................................. Derek Hannan DIRECTOR ...............................................Ian Hart WRITER...........................................Derek Hannan

CAMEL CIGARETTES TITLE ............................................................Camel PRODUCT.................................................... CamelCigarettes AGENCY ................................. Young & Rublcam PRODUCTION HOUSE ......... East Coast Films DIRECTOR ......................................... Mike Miller CAM ERA..........................................................PaulSwain EDITOR ......................................East Coast Films TALENT............................................Essie de Deo, Yvonne Studdart, Pip Coleman

SOLO T IT L E ............................................................... Solo PRODUCT........................................................SoloLemonade AGENCY ............. : . . .. Masius Wynne-Williams & D’Arcy MacManus PRODUCTION HOUSE ....... Piccadilly Pictures DIRECTOR ........................

Johnny Walker WRITER.......................................Noel Delbridge CAM ER A.........................................................JohnHaddy

MUM DEODORANT T IT L E ...............Mum Campaign (2 similar ads) PRODUCT.......................................................MumDeodorant AGENCY ................................. Young & Rubicam PRODUCTION HOUSE .. .Window Productions DIRECTOR ....................................Ray Lawrence C AM ER A........................................ Glen Thomas ED ITO R ................................................W. Read TALENT.................Sue Smithers, Helen Morse

YORAM GROSS STUDIO

30 CHANOOS ST, ST LEONARDS, SYDNEY, NSW. 2065.

PHONE: 43 6100

T IT L E .................................... Egg Board "Store” PRODUCT..................................................... Eggs COCA COLA PRODUCTION HOUSE __ Grahame Jennings Productions T IT L E .......................................................... Waves PRODUCT........................................... C.oca Cola PRODUCER ........................ Sa' • Uarruthers AGENCY ............................ Hansen, Rubensohn, DIRECTOR .........................................Jim Money McCann, Erickson Pty. Ltd. W RITER..................................Sandra Carruthers CAM ER A........................................................ PeterJones PRODUCTION HOUSE . Telemark Productions EDITO R ............... . . Mervyn Lloyd PRODUCER ....................................Peter Prager DIRECTOR ....................................Larry Larsted

Congratulations to the South Australian Film Corporation on the forthcoming release of its first feature film —

UNCLE SAM TITLE ....... ....... Monopoly PRODUCT . . . , .. British Airways T IT L E ....................... Uncle Sam Antl-Perspirant AGENCY ........... . impton Advertising Deodorant PRODUCTION PRODUCT............... Uncle Sam Antl-Perspirant HOUSE .......

Ross Wood Productions Deodorant A G E N C Y.......................... Hansen, Rubensohn, DIRECTOR ........................................ Tony Read McCann, Erickson Pty. Ltd. WRITER..................................... -.John Flannigan C AM ER A................................................... Graham Lind PRODUCTION HOUSE ......... Windon-Wierdon EDITOR ..................................i .. Colin Griggs PRODUCER ........................................Paul Beale TALEN T..................................John Le Mesurier, DIRECTOR ........................................Ron Windon Barbara Stevens WRITER............................................... Paul Beale

Sunday Too fat Away

BRIT?* ' AIRWAYS

GROSBY SHOES TITLE . ..................... ‘‘John Wayne” (tentatively) PRODUCT.............................. ;......Grosby Shoes AGENCY ................... Fountain Huie Pty. Ltd. PRODUCTION HOUSE ............... . Ross Wood Productions DIRECTOR .......................... : Richard McCarthy WRITER..............................................Jackie Hule C AM ER A.....................................Ross Wood Snr. EDITOR ....................................... Ross Wood Jnr. TALENT..............................................John Wayne

KELLOGGS T IT L E .......................................................Morning PRODUCT.........................Kelloggs Corn Flakes AGENCY ........... J. Walter Thompson Pty. Ltd. PRODUCTION HOUSE .................Royce Smeal Productions PRODUCER .............J. W. Thompson Pty. Ltd. DIRECTOR .......................... Christopher French W RITER.................................... Graham Griffiths CAM ER A........................................................ PeterJames EDITO R.......................................................... PeterBowlay

SINGAPORE AIRLINES T IT L E ..................................................... Singapore PRODUCT............................ Singapore Airlines AGENCY ...................................Batey Advertising PRODUCTION HOUSE ...................Ross Wood Productions DIRECTOR ................................ .........Tony Read W RITER........................................... Norman Kerr CAM ER A.....................................Ross Wood Snr. EDITOR / ............................................Colin Griggs MUSIC . . ............................................................ PatAulton

„

starring Jack Thompson Max Cullen Robert Bruning Jerry Thomas and Peter Cummins

Executive Producer: Gil Brealey Directed by Ken Hannam

Victorian Film Laboratories 72 — Cinema Papers, March-April

BRIAN PROBYN: Cameraman

BRIAN PROBYN

Brian Probyn is an English cameraman with an impressive list of credits which include Poor Cow, Downhill Racer and Innocent Bystanders.

Probyn has been in Australia recently shooting two features for Terryrod Productions, a local comDanv headed by director Terry Bourke and editor Rod Hay. Inn of the Damned was Probyn’s first project, taking him into the Australian outback to shoot a western style-horror-actionadventure which is scheduled for release in July.

After an interlude, in which Probyn shot Monte Heilman’s latest movie Shatter, for producer Michael Carreras in Hong Kong, Probyn returned to Western Australia to shoot Plugg, his second feature for Terry Bourke.

Cinema Papers correspondent Eric Reade took the opportuni­ ty to talk with Probyn and drove to Perth for some of the shooting. The following interview was conducted in the closing stages of production.

How did you find the Australian crew you worked with on “Plugg”?

I was most impressed with the crew and the backup. It came as a big surprise, because I was led to believe in England that there were only a couple of operators and a few focus pullers in the whole country — and if you didn’t get these people, you were in trouble. I had never heard of the ones I worked with, but they proved to be first class. The only department in which they are not completely conversant is lighting for feature films, although most of them had considerable experience in mak­ ing commercials. The technique of lighting for color in features will probably take two to three years to be fully understood — then they will be able to hold their own anywhere.

However, there are a number of documentary cameramen who are ready and able to take on that task right now.

Do you have a basic approach to lighting a feature?

In broad terms, I like to approach lighting as an artist rather than a technician. I was a mural painter before I found the screen as another wall to work on. I am concerned more with the mood of the film, as I feel that the lighting should be governed by the content and should flow accordingly. I don’t believe in an automatic ratio of fill to key light and so much backlight. That’s alright in an emergency, but general­ ly one should approach everything

a c c o rd in g to th e d ic ta te s o f th e sto ry an d th e scenes in th a t sto ry . W h ich , o f co u rse, m e an s th a t each film is tre a te d d ifferen tly .

L e ft: D ir e c to r of Photography Brian Probyn checks a light heading with a Spectra meter during the shooting of the main title se­ quence for Plugg.

A s a lig h tin g c a m e ra m a n , m y real ch allen g e is to go in to b la ck space, lik e a stu d io o r h a n g a r, and w ith a few pieces o f c a rd b o a rd an d h essian , re -c re a te a m a n sio n o r B a b y lo n ian tem p le. E x te rio rs a re a n o th e r sto ry .

W h ereas, a rtific ia lly I h av e c o m p lete c o n tro l in th e stu d io , o u tsid e, th a t c o n tro l is lessened, as h a lf th e scene is a lre a d y p ro v id ed . I m erely re in ­ fo rce w h at N a tu re h as su pp lied .

T a k e Inn of the Damned as an ex­ am p le. H e re I w o rk ed on a p lan o f g e ttin g th e e x te rio rs ra th e r so ft an d g reen . I d id n ’t w an t th e u sual c o n ­ cep t o f th e A u s tra lia n o u tb a c k . In th e early d ay s, se ttle rs w ere c o n c e rn ­ ed m o re w ith th e co a st an d n o t w ith p u sh in g in w ard s into in h o sp ita b le co u n try . C o n seq u en tly th e green s h ad to be lush , an d in o rd e r n o t to m a k e th e m to o g reen o r v io len t, a n u m b e r o f ideas w ere used to k eep co n tro l over th e co lo rin g — fog filters, o ver ex p o su re o r a sto p dow n in p rin tin g .

B ut w hen it co m es to lig h tin g itself, ag ain it is th e m o o d th a t co u n ts. In Inn o f th e D am n ed , I w as a g a in s t th e p u re ly te c h n ic a l a p p ro a c h o f w h ite lig h t — b ecau se it is co lo r in itse lf — an d ev ery th in g has to be 3400° K elvin. E v ery o n e k n ow s th a t th e re is a v a ria tio n o f light from m o rn in g to n ig h t. A n d w here y ou h av e a p erio d film lik e Inn of the Damned, it w ould be fa ta l to h ave w h ite lig h t — all p eo p le h ad in th o se d ay s w ere can d les an d oil lam p s.

I p refer to w o rk as a p a in te r w ith w a rm a n d c o o l — w ith s lig h tly q u a rte r blues in th e sh ad o w s — an d o ra n g e lig h t. O n an e x te rio r, I like a q u a rte r blu e on th e lig h t c o m in g in.

By th is m ean s you can tu rn an o r­ d in a r y se t in to s o m e th in g th r e e d im en sio n al.

T h en on e really feels th a t it’s d a y lig h t o u tsid e, o r th a t it’s oil lig h tin g w ithin. C o n v ersely one can clim b to th e to p o f a b u ild in g , set up

Cinema Papers, March-April — 73

BRIAN PROBYN: Cameraman

Brian Probyn (far left) checks the path of a cloud during an early shoot on Plugg. lig h ts, an d if it’s all a t 3400° K elvin, it en d s u p lik e an a rtific ia l stu d io .

I w o rk on th in g s in th e ro u n d , and w o rk th e m , n o t in te rm s o f b lack an d w hite, b u t by cool o r w arm co lors. I f y o u r key lig h t fro m th e firep lace is w a rm , th en y o u r sh ad ow s a re blue. If th e re ’s a cool lig h t fro m th e w indow , o th e r co lo rs in th e ro o m a re w arm . I like to co m b in e th e m w ith diffused lig h tin g as I am a g re a t believer in t h e m o d e r n c o n c e p t io n o f i l ­ lu m in a tio n .

I am n o t k n o c k in g th e o ld er film ­ m a k e rs, b ecau se th e sto ck th a t they w ere u sing w as so slow th a t you had to sh o o t w ith th e aid o f g re a t p o w er­ ful h o riz o n ta l b eam s to g et an ex ­ p o su re. T h a t in tu rn m e a n t shadow s, an d finally, lig h tin g o u t th o se sam e sh ad ow s. T h e tech n iq u es they used m u st h ave been fa n ta stic to achieve th e resu lts they d id . T o d a y it’s a sim p le r p ro cess — even th o u g h it’s still im p o rta n t to h av e th e rig h t ty p e o f lig h tin g , d ire c te d fro m th e rig h t a re a . I p refer to w o rk w ith so fter lig h t w hich d o es n o t in tru d e an d p ro v id es a m o re realistic effect.

74 — Cinema Papers, March-April

How do you feel about the way Ben Hecht used a minimum of sets in his films, featuring indistinct backgrounds and a constant use of the close-ups and two-shots?

I t d ep en d s on th e ty p e o f film . If its su c c e ss d e p e n d s on th e b ig c o u n try , m o u n ta in s, g re a t p lain s o r h u g e sets — one m u st use an e x p a n ­ sive a p p ro a c h . B u t in a -h u m a n d ra m a , w hich in a w ay can be m o re ex citin g , th e c a m e ra m a n m ig h t as w e ll g e t th e m a in c h a r a c t e r s to g eth er. In television fo r ex am p le, it is d efin itely an a d v a n ta g e to play th in g s tig h t. M y th e o ry is th a t on a set, only a m in im u m n u m b e r of d ressin g s sh o u ld be fe a tu re d , b ecau se th e screen co u ld g et to o c ra m m e d . In th e b a c k g ro u n d , I am inclin ed to ag ree th a t if th e re is a g o o d lig h tin g m a n h e can c re a te a m o o d th a t is sensed in th e film itself.

What role should cinematography play in a film — should it be remembered as in “The Third Man” or “Lady from Shanghai“?

I t ’s a q u e s tio n o f ta s te a n d ju d g m e n t. It d ep en d s a lot on th e sto ry an d th e ac to rs. I f th e la tte r a re n ’t very ex p erien ced , em ph asis m u st be placed on c a m e ra w o rk — big ex terio rs can be used o r lighting tric k s em plo y ed . B ut if they a re go od ac to rs, an d it’s a d ra m a tic sto ry , you m ay n o t have to go to th e expense of em plo y in g these devices. B asically, it’s a p h ilo so p h ical q u estio n . I t ’s th e c o n te n t th a t c o u n ts , th e v isu a l a p p ro a c h is so m ew h at seco n d ary .

T h e d ire c to r c rea tes th e p la te a u fro m w hich th e a c to rs ta k e off. I f they a re g o od , you can have a first class scene . . . b u t you c a n ’t c re a te such a scene solely w ith visuals.

P h o to g r a p h y c e rta in ly d o e s n ’t c re a te a film th a t’s w holly b eau tifu l to view.

T a k e fo r in s ta n c e The Great Gatsby w hich d id n o t succeed in p eo p le’s m in d s b ecau se th e re w as n o t en o u gh h u m a n relatio n sh ip : th e re w as in th e novel, b u t it did n o t co m e o ver in th e film .

H o w ev er b eau tifu l th e in te rio rs, c o stu m in g an d eleg an t R o lls-R o y ces,

they a re no real su b stitu tes. G o o d lig h tin g w o n ’t help th e lack o f g o o d d ra m a . . . th e real co re is th e acto rs.

I f you can c re a te a m o o d y scene, a c ­ to rs a re n o t in d ifferen t. T h ey a re h u m an an d d o re a c t to th e ir en v iro n ­ m e n t — th e y a re very sensitive to it.

S o , if you can c re a te th e rig h t en ­ v iro n m en t — an d d o n ’t use to o m a n y lights to avoid m a k in g it to o h o t fo r th e p erfo rm ers — one w ill succeed.

I t ’s no g o od p re p a rin g a m a ste rp ie c e th a t no o n e c a n a c t in , s im p ly b ecau se you a re frying y o u r a c to rs to achieve an effect.

N o w to The Third, Man. Y o u re m e m b e r it fo r a n u m b e r o f reaso n s — th e actin g , th e ten sio n o f th e fe rn s w heel scene, th e ch ase in th e sew ers an d th e m u sical th e m e. A ll th e se in ­ g red ien ts, carefu lly b len d ed to g e th e r, m a d e an ex cellen t film . I t ’s n o g o o d h av in g first class c a m e ra w o rk alo n e , o r g o o d a c tin g a n d p o o r c a m e ra w o rk , o r a m a rv e llo u s m u sical th e m e , b u t a h o p eless film .

Y o u m a y m a k e m o n ey o n reco rd in g s o f th e m u sic, b u t y o u w o n ’t m a k e a g re a t film . E v ery th in g h as to ta k e its

BRIAN PROBYN: Cameraman

place, and be in its right perspective.

There is a tendency these days for directors — and cameramen — to work a lot in close-up.

I d o n ’t lik e to p ush in as clo se as p ossible. I feel e v ery th in g sh o u ld be h a n d le d w ith re s tra in t. B ut if th e re is a stro n g re a so n d ra m a tic a lly — say w hen so m eo n e is b eing sh o t an d th e d ire c to r w ishes to see th e h o rro r in th e a c to r’s eyes — th en a tig h t closeu p is n ecessary .

In telev ision on e can go in m u ch 'c lo s e r th a n f o r film s . B u t i t ’s irrita tin g to be to o clo se in film s for to o long. I lik e to p lace p eo p le in th e se ttin g , so how ev er close you go, even on a w ide screen , th e re ’s alw ay s a left an d a rig h t — th e re a re thin g s in th e ro o m , o r even so m eth in g in th e b a c k g ro u n d , to p u t th e au d ie n c e in a specific situ a tio n .

The opening shot in “Inn of the Damned”, of the Cobb & Co. coach — with horses at full gallop and Reg Gorman hanging on grimly — was an impressive piece of photography.

Where exactly did you set your cameras?

I f you really an aly se it, m o re th a n on e sh o t w en t in to th e scene. T h e re w e re s u b je c tiv e s h o ts w ith th e c a m e ra on th e sh aft, show ing th e h o rs e s ’ leg s; th e re w ere c u ts o f w heels sp in n in g , b ack ed w ith clever use o f m u sic. In fact th e success of th e seq u en ce d ep en d ed n o t so m uch on lig h tin g an d ex p o su re, as th e selectio n o f c a m e ra p o sitio n s. H e re it is essen tial to w o rk closely w ith th e d ire c to r, a n d T e rry w as very g o od a t ch o o sin g ex citin g p o sitio n s so th a t th e re w ere p len ty o f cu ts to p ro v id e th e rig h t ty p e o f a c tio n . W hen th e co ach w as on a s tra ig h t ru n , a w ide h o riz o n w as used an d ben d s cam e in to th e ir ow n in p ro v id in g exciting visual effects.

Many Australian photographers use an Arriflex 35 BL but have many problems with its sound. What is your opinion of the Am? W e a re u sing a 35 B L on Plugg

b ecau se p erfec t so u n d is n o t th e m o st im p o rta n t th in g . T h e film is on a tig h t b u d g et an d allow s fo r only fo u r w eek s’ sh o o tin g . H o w ev er, Plugg is a visual p ic tu re an d far g re a te r scope is p ro v id ed by a h an d -h eld c a m e ra . T h e big th in g a b o u t a 35 B L is th a t you can h an d -h o ld it in sync. Y ou can easily sit in c a rs, w h ereas to use a heavy sync c a m e ra , an e n o rm o u s rig is re q u ire d plus a larg e n u m b e r o f p eo p le — an d th a t’s an expen se we c a n ’t affo rd on th is film . I feel th a t th e B L is m o s t s u ite d fo r A u stra lia n co n d itio n s. If th e film w as en tire ly in th e stu d io I w o u ld n ’t ch o o se th a t c a m e ra b ecau se you have to d o lly , an d h ere co m p lete silence is an a d v a n ta g e .

-

FILMOGRAPHY BRIAN PROBYN AS DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY

Jemima and Johnny (Lionel Ngakane) UK 1962 Poor Cow (Kenneth Loach) UK 1966 A Long Day’s Dying (Peter Collinson) Uk 1967 Downhill Racer (Michael Ritchie) US and Europe 1967 The Revolutionary (Paul Williams) UK 1968 Conquista (Michael Syson) UK 1971 Badlands (Terrence Malick) US 1971 The Jerusalem File (John Flynn) Israel 1971 Straight On Till Morning (Peter Collinson) UK 1972 Innocent Bystanders (Peter Collinson) Spain 1972 Mutiny on the Buses (Harry Booth) UK 1972 Frankenstein; Monster From Hell (Terence Fisher) UK 1973 Dracula is Dead and Well and Living (Alan Gibson) UK 1973 Dracula is Dead and Well and Living in London (Alan Gibson) UK 1973 Man at the Top (Mike Vardy) UK 1973 Inn of the Damned (Terry Bourke) Australia 1974 Shatter (Monte Heilman) Hong Kong 1974 Plugg (Terry Bourke) Australia 1974

Top: Alex Cord in a scene from Inn of the Damned. To capture the mood of the period in this picture Probyn worked with warm tones avoiding the harsh quality of “white” light.

Centre: Shooting a travelling shot for Plugg presented Brian Probyn with a few problems, and forced soundman Phil Judd to ride in the boot (left). Gaffer Derek Jones had to lean out of the moving car to position his light (right). The cameraman and director rode inside.

Left: This Arabian dance sequence — shot by operator Frank Hammond with the help of grip Ralph Gosper — is one of the main title se­ quences. The 25 lb Arri BL allowed most of the titles to be shot hand-held.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 75

ROSS WOOD: Cameraman/Producer R o ss W o o d sta rte d as an office boy w ith M o v ieto n e N ew s in 1933. D u rin g th e w eekends he w as allow ed to c a rry eq u ip m en t on lo c atio n , an d a m o n g th o se he w o rk ed w ith w ere Bill T re rise an d W ally S ully, w ho in th e tw en ties h ad sh o t so m e fairly im p o rta n t featu res. It w as T re rise w ho h elped th e 19y ear-o ld W o o d set u p his first sh o t as c a m e ra m a n . B etw een 1936 an d 1939 W o o d a tte n d e d a rt school fo u r n ig h ts a w eek a t th e E a st S y d n ey T ech n ic al C ollege. W ith few illu sio n s a b o u t his ab ility as an a rtist, he claim s th e ex­ p erien ce gave him an essen tial g ro u n d in g in to n a l b a lan ce, co m p o sitio n an d design.

WOOD Interviewed by Graham Shirley

T h e c a m e ra flo ats subjectively th ro u g h a to w erin g k in g d o m o f cups and silver tea-serv ice; th e c a m e ra as a b illiard -b all w hizzes subjectively acro ss a ta b le ; an d a t th e d eceptively real co n clusio n to an airlin e c o m m ercial, it so ars b en eath a m o d el je t an d in to a su nset c rea ted by th e a rtfu l d o d g in g o f co n ­ d en ser lenses. T h e eerie, ra th e r involving q u ality o f th is w o rk stem s fro m th e ex p ertise o f v eteran c a m e ra m a n R o ss W o o d . A s lig h tin g c a m e ra m a n o f th e m o re d istinctiv ely A u stra lia n featu res o f th e fifties, as th e w inner o f m a n y a w ard s w ith a sso c ia te G ra h a m L ind fo r his w o rk at R o ss W o o d P ro d u ctio n s L td , an d as c o -d ire c to r o f th a t co m p an y an d m o re recently an in v esto r in th e fe a tu re film Stone, W o o d rem ain s an intrig u in g b lend o f m a ster-tec h n ician a n d executive.

A n au sp icio u s en try in to his c o m p a n y ’s second d ecad e cam e w ith th e a n ­ n u al p re se n ta tio n by th e T elevision S o ciety o f A u stra lia last D ecem b er 8, o f th e telev ision co m m e rc ia l P e ng u in A w ard s. R o ss W o o d P ro d u c tio n s scooped th e p ool in th a t c ateg o ry , an d m u ch o f it w as th a n k s to th e skill p assed on by W o o d to G ra h a m L ind.

T h e tw o m ilesto n es o f R o ss W o o d ’s early w o rk a re th e featu res he sh o t for C ecil H o lm es in th e 1950s. T h e first w as Captain Thunderbolt (1951), d re ss­ ed in to an ex ercise o f c o n sid era b le style fro m a b asic ‘ra d io ’ scrip t by C resw ick Je n k in so n . A s if seeking to peel th e p a ste b o a rd fro m th e ir p lay ers an d give every line a new em ph asis, H o lm es an d W o o d set th e ir c a m e ra p ro w lin g . O v erall, th e feeling o f th e film is sta rk n e ss — th e m o o d y dusk sh o ts, th e b a re tre e s a m o n g th e b o u ld ers o f th e hillside — an d th e in terio rs a re m o stly low -lit, an d sh o t fro m low angles. W ith its th re e episo d es and v ary in g sh ad es o f n a tu ra lism , Three In O ne (1956) is less h u rried th a n Cap­ tain Thunderbolt an d seem s less o u t to im p ress. U n d o u b te d ly th e b est seg­ m e n t is A Load of Wood, re m a rk a b le for th e n ig h t sh o o tin g achieved w ith a m in im u m o f e q u ip m en t. H av in g estab lish ed th e ir d e p ressio n -stru ck tow n by d ay , H o lm es an d W o o d o p t fo r such n ig h t d etail as lo o m in g b arb -w ire an d iso lated w e a th e rb o a rd w alls. O n e o f th e c h a ra c te rs is sta rtle d to see a tru c k creep in g o u t o f th e evening m ist like a w hite-eyed m o n ster. L a te r as th e tim b e r thieves freew heel do w nh ill in a stalled tru c k , th e fo rest a ro u n d them ta k e s on h o rre n d o u s p ro p o rtio n s. O n ly b ack in tow n w ith its w elcom ing lights an d g ra te fu l w idow s, is th e u n ease dispelled.

Shooting Bitter Springs (1950) near Quorn S.A. Camera crew includes: Ralph Smart (seated), Ross Wood, Chips Rafferty, Hans Wetzel, Mike Furlong, Jack Ricks, Michael Pate (as policeman). in th e early 1940s, W o o d m oved to C in eso u n d w here he sp en t several y ears as a w ar co rresp o n d e n t. In 1946 he jo in e d V ideo S tu d io s, a sm all co n ­ cern founded by th e a tre sh o w m an Bill M alo n ey to p ro d u ce television c o m ­ m e rcials an d sh o rt su b jects: A m o n g th e d o c u m e n ta rie s, W o o d sh o t his first co lo r film , Blue Water And Big Fish, on 16m m K o d ach ro m e. H e w as d ire c to r o f p h o to g ra p h y on V ideo ’s sole v en tu re into fe a tu re film p ro d u c tio n Strong Is The S eed (1949), an d o p e ra to r to G eo rg e H e a th on Bitter Springs (1950). I f a rt school h elped fo ste r th e b asics o f a go od visual sense, th en G eo rg e H e a th ad d ed co n sid erab ly m o re w ith his know led g e o f filters an d ligh tin g . S in ce th a t tim e W o o d h as b eco m e an ex p ert in th is field, an d so m e o f th e m o re re alistic effects h ave co m e fro m th e w ay h e ’s en h an ced his im ag e. A g reen-yellow filter b ro u g h t d o m in an ce to th e tu m b lin g sk yscapes o f Captain Thunderbolt, w hile fo r m o st e x te rio r scenes to d a y he so ftens th e u ltra -sh a rp effect o f c o ated lenses w ith a piece o f nylon net.

Long John Silver (1954). From left to right: Manuel Del Campo, Carl Kayser, Ross Wood.

The Movietone News team, Sydney, c.1935. Ross Wood standing on truck to right of camera.

76 — Cinema Papers, March-April

A fte r Captain Thunderbolt c am e w o rk as o p e ra to r fo r W in to n H o c h on M a rk R o b so n ’s Return To Paradise, film ed in S a m o a in 1952. T h e n c a m e King Of The Coral Sea, an d Jo h n H e y e r’s a w ard -w in n in g Back Of Beyond

ROSS WOOD; Cameraman/Produeer

*

Aw*

ffjy

Shooting Long John Silver (1954). From left to right: Kit Taylor, Bill Constable (background), Robert Newton, Ken Langs,. Keith Gow, Bobby Wright, Ross Wood, Byron Haskin (in chair).

(1954). O n his re tu rn ‘f rom Beyond, W o o d signed on as an o p e ra to r for B yron H a s k in ’s Long John Silver. H ask in p lan n ed to sh o o t a C in em aS co p e version, a sta n d a rd ra tio version, and 26 h a lf-h o u r episodes. C a rl G u th rie w as im ­ p o rte d as d ire c to r o f p h o to g ra p h y , b u t h ad to re tu rn to the U .S . a fte r tw o m o n th s fo r a n o th e r en g ag em en t. W o o d now in h erited G u th rie ’s p o sitio n , and w ith it th e p ro b lem s o f C in em aS co p e. N ev erth eless, m an y lim itatio n s w ere o v erco m e by H a s k in 's d ed ic atio n an d his b a c k g ro u n d in special effects. A m in ia tu re ceiling an d an e a rth q u a k e ad d ed in tere st to one o f th e episodes, w hile high on th e dunes b eh in d th e P agew oo d S tu d io , cam e ra s and c h a ra c te rs w ere tilted on a h a lf-b u ilt ship to give th e illusion o f sloping decks. F ades and dissolves w ere sh o t on lo c atio n in th e c a m e ra , b u t b ecam e even m o re difficult w hen th e sh ip ’s m o d els w ere ta k e n a t 72 fram es p er second. T h e p ro ject took tw o y ears an d w ith its c o m p letio n , W o o d m oved o n to Three in O ne.

Ava Gardner and Gregory Peck in Stanley Kramer’s On the Beach (1959), shot entirely in Australia.

Ross Wood:

Some of the cast and the crew of Three in One (1956). Includes: Bill Constable (behind boom), Cecil Holmes (in chair) and Ross Wood (at right of camera).

O n Smiley (1956) an d its sequel Smiley Gets A Gun (1957), W o o d o p e ra te d fo r A n th o n y K im m in s an d T ed S caife. By th e tim e S tan ley K ra m e r arriv ed to sh o o t On The Beach (1959), W o o d ’s extensive ex p erien ce m a d e him a n a tu ra l cho ice as o p e ra to r fo r th e film ’s d ire c to r o f p h o to g ra p h y G u isep p e R u to n n o .

T h e first few m o n th s on th e film w ere, as W o o d p u t it, “ b loody h a rd w o rk ” , b u t q u ite co n sisten t w as his a d m ira tio n fo r S tan ley K ra m e r. “ H e w as” , W o o d recalls, “ a d o g m a tic so rt o f m an w ho did his h o m ew o rk an d n ever to o k ‘n o ’ fo r an answ er. B ut he w as alw ays lo o k in g for a d ifferen t a p p ro a c h .”

W ith th e o n set o f th e early sixties, th e p ro d u c tio n o f ind ig en o us featu res dw indled to a lm o st n o th in g . In sp ite o f th e m o re recen t o p p o rtu n itie s, one d isco v ers w ith a sense o f g re a t loss th a t as lig h tin g c a m e ra m a n , R o ss W ood has n o t sh o t a c o m p lete fe a tu re since 1956. P e rh ap s th e em erg en ce o f R oss W o o d P ro d u c tio n s L im ited is p a rt o f th e reaso n . In this interview , R oss W o o d ta lk s a b o u t th e fo rm a tio n o f th e c o m p an y , its o p e ra tio n an d his plans fo r th e fu ture.

W hile I w as still at P agew oo d , I had th e o ffer o f good m oney to ta k e m e acro ss to A rtra n ­ sa. I d id n ’t k n o c k it b a c k . A t A rtra n s a I w orked on Whiplash, did second unit for The Flying Doctor T V series. T h en I jo in ed V isato n e T elevision and w as m ain ly sh o o tin g co m m ercials. T h e in d u stry w as a bit sh ak y at th a t tim e, b u t th e re w ere a g ro u p o f us v irtu ally ru n n in g th e c o m p a n y . A fte r six m o n th s we sta rte d tp show a p ro fit. W e w ent up to m a n a g e m en t an d ask ed if we co uld p e rm a n e n tly jo in th e co m p an y as a un it, but they d id n ’t feel we could h an d le it. I h ad th e feeling th a t they w ere try in g to sell ou t. I thin k th e p aren t co m p an y w as in p ro p erty in v estm ent and they d id n ’t w an t to have an y m o re to do w ith the film business. So I freelanced for th ree m o n th s. In O c to b e r 1965 I g ath e re d the V isa to n e team to g eth er to form R oss W ood P ro d u ctio n s. I t’s been q u ite d ifficult a t tim es, b u t from th e r e i t ’s c a r r ie d on q u ite successfully. S o m etim es it’s alm o st co m e to the p oint o f stra ig h te n in g nails.

Have you primarily done commer­ cials?

Y es, m o st o f th e time-. W e’ve d o ne a few d o c u m e n ta rie s, b u t d o c u m e n ­ ta rie s h ave h it a b it o f a p lan e out there. T h e re ’s eith er th e p ro m o tio n a l film o r th e g o v e rn m en t d o c u m e n ­ ta ry , an d the only tim e an y o n e com es, to us w ith a p ro m o tio n a l film is if

th e y ’ve got a big bu dg et. W e c a n ’t a f­ ford to w ork on th e sm aller ones.

E v ery d o c u m e n ta ry ta k e s th re e m o n th s to sh o o t, an d it’s six m o n th s b efore you get it o ff the g ro u n d .

Y o u ’ve got to w ait th a t long for y o u r m oney. Y ou can sh o o t an ad v ertisin g film in one o r tw o d ays an d have it to air w ithin tw o w eeks.

What sort of documentary budget makes it viable?

It varies, o f co u rse, an d dep en d s to a large ex ten t on lo catio n s an d how fary o u ’ve g o t to trav el. I f you w ere sh o o tin g at a facto ry in S yd n ey , it could cost you $20,000 fo r betw een 15 an d 20 m in u te s’ d u ra tio n .

And for the commercials?

F o r a series o f seven co m m ercials, som e o f th em can go’ as high as $40,000. C e rta in o th ers are m a d e below $1000, b u t y o u ’ve g o t a good tu rn o v e r if you do tw o or th re e a w eek a t betw een $4000 an d $6000 each. W e'v e got tec h n ic ia n s’ w ages to pay, w e pay E q u ity ra te s fo r ta le n t, an d w e eith e r build o u r ow n sets or pay lo c atio n h ire. Y o u w o n ’t use so m eb o d y ’s ho use fo r below $200 a day.

W e supply all th e tech n ical s ta ff — ca m e ra m e n , so un d reco rd ist, ed ito r — and alth o u g h o u r d ire c to rs w ork on a freelan ce basis, we like to have th ree o f them w o rk in g h ere a t an y one tim e. T h e y ’re n o t obliged to stay here. T hey can use th e p lace as th e ir Cinema Papers, March-Apri! — 77

ROSS WOOD: Cameraman/Producer

Do you think there’s a tendency to compromise on Australian produc­ tions?

N o , I d o n ’t th in k we co m p ro m ise very m uch. W e ten d to co m p ro m ise by using lig h ter e q u ip m en t, an d this m a k e s us m o re flexible. W e can use th e c a m e ra m o re d y n am ically .

What light-weight equipment are you using here?

W e’re using C ine-60 cam e ra s, w hich alth o u g h th e y ’re a b it noisy, are ideally suited to th e zoom and can be su p p o rted from o u r G im b al cran e.

T h e cran e, w hich we m a d e here, is really a h an d cran e. I t’s su p p o rted from ab ove an d you can slide over th e top o f a ta b le w ith o u t en c o u n te r­ ing th e d ifficulties o f a dolly. I did a sh ot the o th er day w hich sta rte d right dow n on a ta b le and w ent tig h tly up to a k id ’s face as he picked up a piece o f b read . A s he to o k a bite, we froze

T h en I m a d e a flip lens w hich G ra h a m used on Stone. W e used th e d isto rtio n lens as w ell. I did som e sh o o tin g fo r Stone in th e D o m ain , an d used th e d isto rtio n lens in co n ­ ju n ctio n w ith a c o lo r in fra -re d film we im p o rted from th e U S . By using a 12 filter, w hich is yellow an d a w eird one to s ta rt w ith, we tu rn e d th e g rass red an d th e skies a rich er blue.

G ra h a m used th e flip lens in a sm o k ­ ing scene, so th a t evey tim e they to o k a d rag th e en tire scene w ould s ta rt stretch in g . N o b o d y c o m m en ted on these co m b in a tio n s, b u t on e critic said: “ O th e r th a n a few tren d y effects, th e c a m e ra w o rk w as ex­ cellen t.”

You also won two awards for the snorkel lens. What’s the principle of that?

I t’s like a perisco pe, b u t b o th th e sn orkel an d th e c a m e ra a re hu ng u p ­ side dow n from th e G im b al. T h e

Ross Wood and Cecil Holmes behind the camera for Three in One (1956). h o m e an d ju s t w alk in an d o u t. In the long ru n w e’d lik e to w ork w ith as m an y d ire c to rs as possible. O n the tech n ical side w e’re a b it cam eram inded. T h e re ’s G ra h a m L ind, Jo h n L ow ry an d m yself, an d I sh o o t co m ­ m ercials if a clien t w an ts m e to.

As a cameraman, how much visual control do you have over the commer­ cials you shoot?

T h a t dep en d s on th e d irecto r. S o m e d irecto rs like to ta k e full c o n tro l, but q u ite often I ’ll suggest we sh o o t a few a d d itio n a l angles. In th e case o f a re­ cen t w atch c o m m ercial, I suggested we sh o o t a tra n sitio n from th e w atch face to a polo ball. O n th e day o f th e polo g am e th e d ire c to r c o u ld n ’t be th ere, so I d irected th a t sequence m yself. N o rm a lly , w hile sh oo ting , I discuss th e style w ith the d irecto r.

T h is includes th e m o v em en t, co m ­ p o sitio n an d b asic co n tin u ity .

T h e old idea o f a ‘sto ry -b o a rd ’ has nearly d isap p eared . W h ere you used to stick rigidly to w h at th e agency a r­ tist h ad d raw n , is now m o re often left to th e in itiativ e o f th e d irecto r, p ro d u c e r a n d c a m e ra m a n . Y o u could alw ays acc u ra te ly cost y o u r p ro d u c tio n fro m a ‘s to ry b o a rd ’, but w ithin th e last 10 y ears this has chan g ed .

Why do you think it’s changed?

P o ssib ly eco n o m ics. A lso th e tru st th a t b uilds w hen p eo p le have been w o rk in g to g e th e r an d can deliver th e g oods. U su ally you h ave a co n ­ ference b efo re you s ta rt sh oo ting .

T h e agen cy peo p le sk etch th e ir ideas, an d I d o a lot o f d raw in g to illu stra te c a m e ra p o sitio n s an d fram in g . T hen we k n ow how to g et on w ith it.

What other aspects of film advertis­ ing have changed?

T h e ag encies them selv es have ch an g ­ ed a lot. T h e film p ro d u c e r a tta c h e d p e rm a n e n tly to th e a g e n c y h as a lm o st d isa p p e a re d — w e’re now 78 — Cinema Papers, March-April

Above: Setting up one of the many complex scenes involving large numbers of motor cycles during the shooting of Stone. m o re asso cia ted w ith a rt d irecto rs an d w riters. T h ese peo p le a re closer to th e p ro d u c tio n th a n ever befo re, an d often th e y ’ll get o u t an d form th e ir ow n little service agency. S o m e o f th em are do in g q u ite well.

Speaking broadly, what is the best work you consider you’ve done yourself?

I t’s h a rd to say. I’ve been h ap p y w ith so m e thin g s. T h ere a re o th ers I w ish t h e y ’d g o o u t a n d b u r y . O c ­ casio n ally , so m eth in g goes w rong w ith th e last sh o t o f th e d ay , and y o u ’ll be te m p te d to say, “ O h th a t’ll do — it’ll h ave to d o .”

on him . W e h ad to be rig h t over th e ta b le to get th a t sh ot. T h e re ’s no w ay you could d o th a t on a n o rm a l dolly.

What other inventions have you work­ ed on?

W ell I w ork on th e m w hen I ’m n o t lazy. I m a d e up so m e d isto rtio n lenses w hich w on a p h o to g ra p h ic aw ard . I t’s ro u g hly sim ilar to a vaselline effect, b u t th e re ’s d isto rtio n a t th e edges ra th e r th a n a b lu rrin g . I m a d e one fo r th e zo o m , w hich is a m o n stro u s th in g b u t it w o rk s, and th e o th e r one fits o n to a tw o-inch lens. Y ou can h an d -h o ld th e tw o-inch version an d do all so rts o f things.

A rriflex lens is d o w n th e fa r en d , an d inside y o u ’ve g o t an ae ria l im ag e lens an d a relay lens. I t actu a lly a m o u n ts to a th re e -fo o t lens, an d you lose ab o u t th ree sto p s. N e a r th e c a m e ra I ’ve g o t a k n o b w hich c o n tro ls a M eccan o ch ain lead in g dow n to pull focus. W ith an 18 m m lens I can focus from w ith in an inch to infinity.

In this w ay I can fill th e screen w ith a p o stag e sta m p , then in a fra c tio n o f a second, pull focus on y o u r face.

What can you tell us about the Overseas Telecommunications ad that won the awards?’— W ell th e b illia rd b alls in th a t ad w ere

ROSS WOOD: Cameraman/Producer

EILMOGRAPHY

How was it put into ‘Stone’?

W h en we sp o k e to S a n d y H a rb u tt a b o u t o u r inv estin g as w ell as su p p ly ­ in g c r e w a n d e q u i p m e n t , t h e A u stra lia n F ilm D ev elo p m en t C o r­ p o ra tio n h a d a lre a d y g iv en h im so m eth in g lik e $65,000, W e ag reed to c o n tr ib u te $ 3 8 ,0 0 0 , th e n th e G o v ern m en t c a m e in w ith m o re m oney. T o s ta rt w ith, w e d id n ’t co m e o ff to o w ell b ecau se w e p u t up a b o u t 30 p er cen t an d p aid an a d d itio n a l $22,00G w hen th e film w ent over b u dg et. S tric tly sp eak in g , th is w a sn ’t o u r resp o n sib ility b u t w e d id n ’t w an t a h o ld -u p in p ro d u c tio n . W h en th e film w as released , w e g o t o u r ex­ pected 19 p er cen t o f th e p ro fits a t ex actly th e sam e tim e th e A F D C w ere g e ttin g th e ir 50. In th is resp ect, th e A F D C have been very g o o d to us.

D o you still intend to sh o o t fe a tu re s yourself?

Above: A camera is mounted on the back of a motor cycle to capture some of the fast action in Stone. m a rk e d w ith figures rep re se n tin g a A d v ertisin g P ty. L td ., in S in g a­ sp a c e m a n , th e E iffel T o w er, an d p o re. Ia n h an d les a d v ertisin g for o th e r la n d m a rk s lik e Big Ben an d th e S in g a p o re A irlin es, an d in a very S ta tu e o f L ib erty . T h e idea w as to to n g u e-in -ch eek w ay, he h ad w ritten : show how O T C co u ld b rin g “ you an d “ S eein g you fellas seem to be ab le to th e w o rld a little c lo se r” . T h e O T C win a w a rd s all over th e p lace, how ball ro lls u p an d sto p s ex actly beside a b o u t h av in g a co u p le read y for us th e b all w ith ‘th e w o rld ’ m a p on it. a b o u t th e end o f N o v e m b e r.” W e T h e sn o rk e l allow ed us to rid e alo ng th o u g h t th e re w as no ch an ce of b eh in d th e b illiard b alls, so th a t in­ g ettin g an y th in g , b u t we decided to ste ad o f try in g to s e p a ra te thin g s fo r try a n d g e t an a w a rd fo r him th e c a m e ra to m o v e, we w ere gliding so m ew h ere. th ro u g h th e m w ith th e lens.

T h e A m e ric a n s h ave a system Is ‘S to n e ’ the first fe a tu re y o u ’ve in­ w h e re th e y s h o o t w ith th e len s vested in? p o in tin g d irectly d o w n. B elow this they h ave a m irro r w hich p iv o ts to Yes. Firstly, we saw it as an oppor­ give th e effect o f th e c a m e ra tiltin g . tunity for Graham Lind to do a bit of T h ey ta k e a full second to get focus, feature work. Secondly, we felt that b u t m in e ta k e s a frac tio n o f th a t being in the film business, we should tim e. put our money where our mouth was.

When we get a return from S to n e, we A nd, o f co u rse, you m ust be pleased want to reinvest it in another w ith y o ur su ccess over th e P eng u in feature. But it won't be invested in the same way.

A w ards.

I w o u ld n ’t m in d d o in g a featu re ag ain . A series b o res m e a bit. A series is u sually u n d e r b u d g et c o n ­ tro l, an d o nce y o u ’ve set a p a tte rn o f o p e ra tio n , a n o th e r c a m e ra m a n can ta k e over q u ite easily.

W h a t so rt o f fe a tu re w ould a ttr a c t you?

I wouldn’t mind doing a western style or a bushranger style of film. I did enjoy working on C a p ta in T h u n d erb o lt, although it was a bit of a drag trying to get a horse to stand in the right place. But I like the ac­ tion, with all these coaches and the mad gallops.

W ould this ex ten d to fin an cia l in­ vestm ent?

Oh yes, and 1 wouldn’t mind doing a good mystery. I've always been keen on Hitchcock. When we get our money back on S to n e we’ll be look­ ing around for suitable scripts.

W ell, G ra h a m to o k th e to p aw ard fo r B ritish A irw ay s. W e w on m usic A w ards fo r ‘A B igger D o b b a B u tter' an d ‘R ip p le S o le ’, w hich I felt should also h av e g o t an e d itin g aw ard . A n d fo r S in g a p o re A irlin es w e w on th e b est series, th e p h o to g ra p h ic aw ard , a n d ih e b est c o lo r aw ard .

The color in that commercial has something of a pastel quality.

It w as a d rin k c o m m e rc ia l fo r S in g a p o re A irlin es. W ith th e d is to r­ tio n lens we g o t th e n ecessary m o v e­ m e n t an d b le n d in g o f co lo r. W e w ere u sing a h ig h -k ey , d o m in a n tly w hite b a c k g ro u n d fo r o u r ex p o su re index, b u t t h e p r i n t w e o w e to th e la b o ra to ry as m u ch as to th e a p p lic a ­ tio n o f c o lo r in th e film .

W e d o n ’t n o rm a lly e n te r th ese c o m p e titio n s, b u t L ex M ered ith * g o t a le tte r fro m Ia n B atey o f B atey *Lex Meredith is a co-director of the com­ pany; also its resident producer.

Filming the escape of Charles Tingwel! (Blake) from Cockatoo Island in Captain Thunder­ bolt (1951).

AS DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY Strong is the Seed (Video Studios) Director; Arthur Collins Captain Thunderbolt (Associated TV) Director: Cecil Holmes I Found Joe Barton (Grace Gibson Productions) Director: Francis D. Lyon.

Half-hour featurette.

1954 King of the Coral Sea (Southern Inter­ national) Director: Lee Robinson; Underwater sequences: Noel Monkman Back of Beyond (Shell Film Unit) Direc­ tor: John Heyer Long John Silver (Treasure Island Pic­ tures) Director: Byron Haskin 1956 Three in One (Australian Traditional Films) Director: Cecil Holmes 1959­ 60 Whiplash (Artransa Park Television) Director: Cecil Holmes 1966 The Broken Hill (Southern Films) Director: R. .Barrington Scott. (Awards: Blue Ribbon at the 1966 American Film Festival. Received awards at Antwerp, and from the Australian Film Institute.

By N70 had received 11 awards in six different countries.) ¡973 Tomorrow a Mile (Australian Film and Television School) Director : Ross Hamilton AS CAM ERA O PERA TO R 1950 Bitter Springs (Ealing) Director: Ralph Sm art; Director of photography; George Heath ¡952 Return to Paradise (Aspen Productions) Director: Mark Robson; Director of photography: Winton Hoch 1956 Smiley (Twentieth Century Fox) Direc­ tor: Anthony Kimmins; Director of photography: Ted Scaife 1957 Smiley Gets a Gun (Canberra Films) Director: Anthony Kimmins; Director of photography: Ted Scaife. ¡959 On the Beach (Stanley Kramer Produc­ tions) Director: Stanley Kramer; Direc­ tor of photography: Guiseppe Rotunno 1973 Stone (Hedon Productions) Director: Sandy Harbutt. Wood shot additional material. Director of photography was Graham Lind. ^ 1949 1951 1952

AWARDS

Since their formation in October 1965, Ross Wood Productions have won many awards.

Some of them are: 1968 Television Society of Australia — Commercial Awards — Section 2 — Wholly straight cinematography — ‘Kleenex 200’s’.

1969 Television Society of Australia — C om m ercial Aw ards — Special photography, Ross Wood — Luxaflex ‘Point-of-View’.

1969 National Television Commercial Competition, Chicago — Best of Festival for the J. Walter Thompsoncommissioned Kleenex ‘Falling Pack’ — ‘Phffft’.

1969 Australian Film Awards, Australian Film Institute — Hon. Mention, Adver­ tising Category Under Five Minutes — ‘Kleenex 200'.

1969 Kodak Trophy — R. Barrington Scott’s ‘And Then There Was Glass’.

1973 Chicago International Film Festival Inc. — Television Commercial Competition — ‘Pool Snorkel’.

1973 Logie Award — Photography — Graham Lind — ‘Kingford Cigarettes’.

1974 Television Society of Australia — T.V. C om m ercial Aw ards — Special Commendation, Section 2 — Dairy Board: ‘Potato’.

1974 ACS Award for Cinematography — Cinema Commercials — Graham Lind for ‘Cadbury’s Dairymilk Chocolate'.

1974 Television Society of Australia — T.V. C om m ercial Aw ards — Special Commendation, Section 2 — Coca-Cola — ‘Ripple Sole Shoes’.

1974 Television Society of Australia — T.V. Commercial Awards — Singapore Airlines — Best Live Action — ‘Matches’, Best Series — ‘Lounge, ‘Food’, ‘Drinks’, Color Award — ‘Drinks’, Cinematography — series.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 79

HOLLYWOOD AND AFTER

Jerzy Toeplitz (Translated by Boleslaw Sulik Geo. Allen and Unwin — Recommended price: Hard cover $13.60.)

Bruce Hodsdon P ro fe sso r T o ep litz, fo r 20 y ears h ead o f th e P o lish film school a t L o dz, is now d ire c to r o f th e F ilm an d T elevision S cho o l in Sydney. H e has prev iou sly w ritten several b o o k s w hich have n o t been p u blished in E nglish, inclu d ing a m o n u m e n ­ ta l five-volum e History of Cinema as Art. Hollywood and After a p p a re n tly stem s from T o e p litz ’s first h a n d o b serv atio n o f th e A m e ric an film scene d u rin g th e sixties, b o th as research er an d v isiting p ro fesso r a t th e T h e a tre D e p a rtm e n t, UCLA. T h e b o o k opens w ith a b rie f survey o f th e ch an g in g face o f th e A m e ric a n film in d u stry follow ing th e d em ise o f th e stu d io system , an d d escrib es th e co n tro l o f th e m a jo rs p rogressively p assin g in to th e h an d s o f faceless, im p erso n al an d re m o te c o n g lo m erates, w hose c h ief in tere st seem ­ ed to be in th e d iv ersification o f th e ir o p eratio n s an d th e a cq u isitio n o f existing assets ra th e r th a n in film p ro d u c tio n p er se. D ra stic cuts in p ro d u c ­ tio n allied w ith th e p rev alen ce o f ‘ru n a w a y ’ film s (A m eric an -fin a n c ed p ro d u c tio n s sh o t o u tsid e th e U S ) are seen to h av e ta k e n th e c en tre o f activity aw ay fro m th e H o lly w o o d so un d stages.

T o ep litz arg u es th a t th e w eak en in g o f th e m a ­ jo rs’ m o n o p o ly an d th e end o f w h at rem ain e d o f th e old stu d io sy stem is linked, n o t only w ith th e lo n g -term effects o f television and en fo rcem en t o f a n ti-tru s t leg islatio n (sep aratin g p ro d u c tio n ’an d d istrib u tio n ), b u t also w ith th e failu re o f m o st of th e m u lti-m illio n d o lla r b lo ck b u ste rs in th e late sixties.

F u rth e r, m o d estly b u d g eted film s by in d ep en ­ d en t p ro d u c ers — o f w hich E asy R id er is th e a rc h e ty p a l ex am p le — a re supp o sed to have la rg e ­ ly su p p lan ted th e b lo ck b u ste r sy n d ro m e an d th e re h as been a shift in th e c o n c e n tra tio n o f re stra in ts fro m p ro d u c tio n to d istrib u tio n . E vidence o f this h as been p ro v id ed by th e grow ing n u m b er o f low an d m ediu m b u d g et film s w hich h ave been in a d e­ q u ate ly d istrib u te d o r ‘c a n n e d ’ in a cc o rd an ce w ith th e d is trib u to r’s assessm en t o f th e increasing ly stra tifie d m a rk e t.

H o w ev er, th e rece n t difficulties o f th e la rg e r in ­ d e p e n d e n t p ro d u c tio n c o m p a n ie s , A B C an d C in em a C e n tre , as w ell as u nsuccessful a tte m p ts by so m e p ro d u c ers to a rra n g e d istrib u tio n in­ d ep en d en tly o f th e m a jo rs, seem s to suggest a ra th e r d ifferen t p ic tu re fro m th a t d raw n in the b o o k . D avid G o rd o n , in th e a u tu m n 1973 issue o f Sight and Sound, arg u es th a t th e fin an ce-p ro d u c­ tio n -d istrib u tio n nexus is still very m u ch w ith us an d T o e p litz ’s co n clusio n th a t th e m o n o p o ly posi­ tio n o f th e m a jo rs h as been w eak en ed now seem s a b it p re m a tu re .

A fte r a u se fu l c h a p te r on th e c h a n g in g c h a ra c te r o f th e p ro d u c tio n set-u p — p a rtic u la rly in th e ro les o f p ro d u c e r an d d ire c to r — th e cen tral s e c tio n o f th e b o o k c o m b in e s e m b r y o n ic socio lo g ical o b se rv atio n , critica l ev alu atio n an d d a ta on th e in d u stry an d surveys th e w ay in w hich c o m m ercial cin em a h as reflected an d p ro jected p o litica l issues, sex an d violence. T h e b o o k how ever, d o es n o t o ffer an y th in g especially new o r co n tro v ersial. T h e c h a p te r on th e u n d e rg ro u n d cin em a re so rts to o o ften to assertio n ra th e r th a n e v a lu atio n an d is lib erally su p p o rted by o u t-o f­ c o n te x t q u o tes fro m such id io sy n c ratic ob serv ers as P a rk e r T y ler — w ith th e sp ectru m o f film s b e­ in g p ig e o n -h o le d in to b ro a d ‘s tr e a m s ’ (e.g . k in ep lastics, th e p o ets, th e o b serv ers etc.). O ne 80 — Cinema Papers, March-April

can only suggest, as a n tid o tes, S h eld o n R e n a n ’s Introduction to American Underground Film and D avid C u rtis ’s Experimental Cinema fo r b asic in ­ fo rm a tio n an d to A d a m S itn ey ’s recen t Visionary Film (review ed in th e last issue o f Cinema Papers) fo r d etailed critical a p p ra isa l o f th e w o rk o f key film m ak ers.

A fte r co n sid erin g th e in te ra c tio n betw een television an d film p ro d u c tio n , a b rie f survey o f th e cab le an d c a ssette rev o lutio n fails to pro v id e an y d irectio n s beyond th e ‘leap in to th e u n ­ k n o w n ’. In a b o o k ran g in g so w idely over th e A m e ric an C in em a it w ould h ave been w o rth co n ­ siderin g th e im p lica tio n s o f th e tech n olo g ical rev o lutio n fo r a lte rn a tiv e cin em a w hich o ffer th e sam e flexibility fo r m ass access as b o o k s an d reco rd s.

T h e last c h a p te r, in w hich so m e th re a d s are d raw n to g e th e r, is p erh ap s th e m o st in tere stin g in th e b o o k , p a rtic u la rly w ith th e n o tio n th a t T o ep litz pu ts fo rw ard o f a d ialectical re latio n sh ip betw een th e in fo rm atio n -g iv in g an d m y th -m a k in g roles o f co m m ercial cin em a an d television. T his, how ever, is only sketchily developed an d tails o ff in to a b rie f discussion o f so m e in d ep en d en tly m a d e p o litical film s.

T h e ch an g in g fo rm o f film n a rra tiv e — free w heeling, open-en d ed stru c tu re s an d th e sy m ­ biosis o f fictio n al an d d o c u m e n ta ry m a te ria l — T o ep litz a ttrib u te s to th e influence o f television c o m m e rc ia ls a n d th e u n d e rg ro u n d c in e m a , p ro p o sitio n s b o th in need o f m o re d etailed ex­ am in a tio n . N o co n sid era tio n is given to th e in ­ te ra c tio n betw een th e A m e ric an an d E u ro p e an cin em a, p a rtic u la rly w ith th e F ren ch ‘N ew W av e’.

In ad o p tin g a b ro ad ap p ro ach in Hollywood and After , T o ep litz h as u n d e rta k e n th e difficult ta sk o f estab lish in g cro ss relatio n sh ip s. N o d o u b t th e in ten tio n w as to raise q u estio n s ra th e r th a n to p rovide answ ers. W h a t is d isap p o in tin g ab o u t Hollywood and After, is th e failu re to ex p lo re any o f th e qu estio n s in su fficient d ep th to en su re fu rth er en g ag em en t.

THE FILMGOER’S COMPANION

Leslie Halliwell. Fourth edition 1974 by Hart­ Davis, MacGibbon Ltd., London. Recommended price: Hard cover $25; Paperback $4.95.

Graham Shirley T h ree m o re ed itio n s h ave co m e to pass since 1965, w hen A lfred H itch co ck , in his fo rew o rd to th e first ed itio n o f The Filmgoers Companion, w rote: “ . . . th e a u th o r h as d o n e his h o m ew o rk ra th e r b e tte r th a n th e villains in m y film s, w ho alw ays seem to g et fou n d o u t so o n er o r la te r.”

T h e th re e su bseq u en t ed itio n s have farm ed out q u ite a few e rro rs, b u t a u th o r L eslie H alliw ell’s em p h asis h as rem ain e d reso lutely on th e film in ­ d u stries o f H o lly w o od an d B ritain . A s th e fo reru n n er o f its field, The Filmgoers Companion in 1965 w as w elcom e indeed.

I f you rem em b er th e sickly film fare ladled th ro u g h y o u r local cin em a an d th e cries of “ W h a te v e r h a p p e n e d to th e film as a r t? ” , H alliw ell w as certain ly doin g his best to give you th e b irth d a te o f D o ris D ay , an d to su p p o rt y o u r la m e n ta tio n s th a t th e hey d ay s o f C lare n c e B row n an d C a ro l R eed w ere long gone. T h e changes of th e la st d ecad e h av e left H alliw ell fa r beh in d . H e seem s n o t to reco g n ise th a t y o u r local cin em a m ig h t be show ing m o re su b sta n tia l an d v aried fare — such as a d o ub le-b illin g o f Stolen Kisses an d Fellini-Satyricon — an d th a t w hile n o sta lg ia is on th e rise, m o re p eo p le a re flocking to film festivals an d giving c o m m ercial scope to th e still in ta c t p erso n al ex p ressio n s o f B erg m an , F ellini, T ru ffa u t, an d L uis B unuel.

A s if to m a tc h th e o p u len ce o f such d e sc e n d a n ts as The International Encyclopedia of Film , h as now op ted fo r th e inclusion o f stills, a d v ertisin g m a tte r, an d in th e w ak e o f a D ecem b er 1972 d ead lin e, an a d d en d a. B u t in sp ite o f th e se a d ­ d itio n s, I c a n ’t help w ishing H alliw ell w ould b eco m e m o re ‘in te rn a tio n a l’ in his o u tlo o k . The Filmgoers Companion m ig h t m o re rig h tly be called ‘S hu ffle B ack to B u rb a n k ’, fo r its cover co n ta in s a pu rely H o lly w o od p astich e fro m W a lsh ’s The Thief o f Baghdad to The Godfather, an d inside little a tte m p t is m a d e to tip th e b alan ce a w ay fro m A m e ric a a n d th e s o rt o f film b u ffo o nery th a t m ig h t a p p eal to lovers o f old M G M ,Films and Filming, an d tire so m e re-ru n s o f th e M a rx B ro th ers an d W . C . F ields. A u stra lia , o f c o u rs e , h a s little c h a n c e b e y o n d th e u s u a l re p re se n ta tio n by C h a rle s C h au v el, an d C h ip s R a fferty , b u t if y o u ’re sk im m in g th e p ag es you m ig h t reco g n ize e x p a tria te s lik e J u d ith A n d erso n , M a rie L o h r, o r R o d T ay lo r.

In his in tro d u c tio n , H alliw ell ju stifie s co n tin u ed p u b licatio n w ith, “ . . . it covers, how ever briefly, a m uch g re a te r ran g e o f su bject m a tte r th a n any o th er b o o k , an d becau se it is fun to re a d ” . I can only re la te th is to his p reco cio u s survey o f such topics as b a th tu b s, n uns an d n y m p h o m an iacs, an d if you d isre g a rd this (as you shou ld ), th e re rem ain s only th e m o st fash io n ab le selection of sta rs, d ire c to rs, w rite rs, th e o ccasio n al p ro d u c er, an d even m o re o ccasio n al tech n ician .

I t’s g ratify in g , a t least, to n o tice th a t H alliw ell is sta rtin g to reco g n ise m o re w o rk fro m th e silen t era, b u t a t th e o th e r end o f th e scale w e h av e his ra th e r n arro w c o n te m p o ra ry o u tlo o k ex p ressed w ith, “ . . . I find few film s o f th e seventies to m y ta ste , th e ir explicitness b eing no su b stitu te fo r th e im a g in atio n an d skill w hich w ere p o u red in to th e stu d io p ro d u c ts o f H o lly w o o d ’s g o ld en ag e” .

W hile in so m e w ays this is valid en o u gh , th e sta te- m en t elim in ates an a p p ro a c h to som e o f th e m o re refreshin g asp ects o f y ears g o ne by. W h ere, fo r in ­ stance, a re th e n am es o f Ja p a n e se d ire c to r T a s a k a T o m o ta k a , H u n g a ria n d ire c to r F elix M a ria ssy , o r F ren ch N ew W av e d irecto rs A rm a n d G a tti o r M arcel H an o u n ? A ra n d o m an d eso te ric selection I ’ll ad m it, b u t they do a p p e a r in P e te r G ra h a m ’s m o d est b u t useful A Dictionary of the Cinema, and in te rm s o f recen t film s th e re a re g la rin g om issio n s in th e case o f M ak av ejev , G all, H a s an d m o st con spicu o u sly , F assb in d er.

A Dictionary of the Cinema an d The Inter­ national Encyclopedia b o th h ave a titles index, b u t in stead o f this m u ch -n eeded sta rtin g p o in t, The Filmgoers Companion now gives us “ M y fav o rite h u n d re d film s” and “ In d ex o f A c to rs an d A ctresses fe atu red in illu stra tio n s” . H alliw ell claim s th a t an index to en ab le cro ss-referen cin g w ould d o u b le th e size o f his p u b licatio n . In his b o o k , P e te r G ra h a m h as g o t aw ay w ith 620 n u m b ered en tries in an index th a t occupies only a q u a rte r o f his v olum e. By lo o k in g u p , say, th e e n try fo r Outcast of the Islands, you can find fo u r referen ces w hich will lead to its d ire c to r, s ta r, co ­ s ta r an d p ro d u c er. I f y o u ’d tu rn e d , sim ply w ith title in h an d , to The Filmgoers Companion, y ou w ould h av e h a d n o w here to look.

A s G ra h a m ’s gu id e is now o u t o f p rin t, w ho w ould H alliw ell see as his m a in c o m p etito rs?

M o st ce rta in ly The International Encyclopedia oj Film, w ith its g re a te r v ariety o f en tries th a n an y o f th e o th ers. A lso The World Encyclopedia of Film, w hich in its sp are, b lu n t style, o ffers m o re in fo r­ m a tio n on specific ca re e rs, w ith a listin g o f th e ir film s an d th e ir d ates. L ik e H alliw ell’s b o o k , it lack s a cro ss-referen ce ind ex , b u t it m a k e s u p fo r th is w ith a m assiv e listin g o f fe a tu re s a n d sh o rts, w ith ab b rev iate d in fo rm a tio n on d a te s, m a in cred its, sig n ifican t tech n ica l asp ects, releasin g o rg a n iz a tio n s, an d a lte rn a tiv e titles.

BOOKS

I f a g a in , fo r c u rio sity ’s sak e, you go in search o f a refe ren ce to A u stra lia , y o u ’ll find th a t u n d e r ‘F ly n n , E rro l’, H e rm a n F . E rb en an d n o t C h a rle s C h au v el is c re d ite d w ith th e d irectio n o f In the Wake of the Bounty. Q u ite in a c c u ra te , o f co u rse, b u t a p a rt fro m an o c casio n a l lapse, The World Encyclopedia of Film is refresh in g ly th o ro u g h .

T h e A u s tra lia n e n try in The International En­ cyclopedia of Film o ccupies a full co lu m n . I w ent a little co ld w hen I saw th a t R o g e r M a n v e ll’s sole so u rce o f refe ren ce w as B a x te r’s The Australian Cinema, b u t M an v e ll m a n a g e s to avoid B a x te r’s m o re o b vio u s e rro rs, an d th e only false n o te c o m ­ es w ith his ‘h o p e s’ fo r th e fo rm a tio n o f th e F ilm an d T elev isio n S c h o o l an d th e E x p e rim e n ta l F ilm F u n d (th e la tte r w as a c tu a lly in ex isten ce by 1969, th re e y ears b efo re th e b o o k ’s p u b licatio n ).

T o q u ib b le n a tio n a listic a lly , h ow ever, is irre le ­ v a n t in th e face o f th e b o o k ’s co m p reh en siv e co v erag e o f film as b o th an a rt fo rm an d an in ­ d u stry . W h ile it m a k e s no claim to ex am in e in d e p th th e te ch n o lo g y o f film p ro d u c tio n , it co n ­ ta in s e n trie s u n d e r such h ead in g s as ‘A rch iv es an d F ilm P r e s e r v a t i o n ’ , ‘A v a n t - g a r d e a n d U n d e rg ro u n d F ilm ’, ‘C in e m a to g ra p h y ’, ‘E d itin g F ilm ’, ‘P u b lic ity ’, an d ‘S c re e n w ritin g ’. T h ere are 30 en trie s fo r ‘N a tio n a l C in e m a ’ — fro m ‘A ra b F ilm ’ to ‘Y u g o sla v ia ’ — a c h ro n o lo g ical o u tlin e to th e d ev elo p m en t o f th e film , an en cy clo p ed ia o f p erso n al e n trie s, an d a 15-page series o f fram e en la rg e m e n ts giving key ex am ples o f th e d ev elop ­ m e n t o f c o lo r c in e m a to g ra p h y . T h o u g h h isto ric a l­ ly it cov ers little new g ro u n d , The International Encyclopedia o f .Film g a th e rs its in fo rm a tio n fro m a m u ltitu d e o f pro v en w o rk s, w hich if called u p o n to rep lace th is vo lu m e, w ould occupy an av erag e-sized lib rary .

N e x t to th is, The Filmgoer’s Companion m ig h t h av e been assem b led fro m an y film fa n ’s sc ra p ­ b o o k . T h e b a t h t u b s , th e n u n s , a n d th e n y m p h o m a n ia c s (bless th e ir h e a rts) rep resen t a sc isso rs-a n d -p a ste jo b as lim ited as it is illco n sid ered , an d set besid e th e sp are d etail o f th e International’s still cap tio n s, H alliw ell’s a re self­ in d u lg en t to th e ex trem e . T a k e th e follow ing for ex am ple: “ L a u re l an d H a rd y . A n u n u su ally y o u th fu l sh o t (circa 1927) o f th e fu n m a k e rs w ho la te r b ecam e e v ery o n e’s fa v o rite u n cles” . A b it m u ch , I th o u g h t, b u t then I c am e acro ss “ In g rid B erg m an . A ra d ia n t s ta r o f th e fo rties p roved in Spellbound th a t m en m ay even m a k e passes a t girls w ho w ear g la sses” . . .

A s accessib le as it is, a n o th e r ed itio n o f The Filmgoer’s Companion will alw ay s be w elcom e.

But. I c a n ’t help ho pin g th a t H alliw ell w ould pick on a fetish th a t w as a t least w idely en te rta in in g . If this is n o t possib le, then th e b o o k should be red u c­ ed by a t least tw o -th ird s o f its size an d sold a t a ra te w hich th e $ 3 -a-tic k e t film g o er can affo rd .

in o p p o sitio n to th e m a in stre a m c o m m ercial c in em a, th e re is a p e rp e tu a l p ro b lem o f d is­ se m in atio n to a w ide au d ience. S u b v ersive cin em a ran g es fro m a v a n t-g a rd e fo rm a list exercises to a n a rc h ist an d a n ti-p u rita n tra c ts to social an d p o litica l critiq u es. B ecause th e se m ovies rely on a lie n a tio n o r c o n fro n ta tio n devices, they m ay n o t reac h th e au d iences they w ould m o st like to a ssau lt. T h u s cap tiv e au d iences a re often th o se d isp o sed to a p a rtic u la r p o in t o f view exp ressed w ith in a w o rk . .

V ogel believes th e 16m m n o n -th e a tric a l m a rk e t a ffo rd s th e g re a te st p o ssib ility fo r ex posing su b ­ v e rs iv e c in e m a to a r a n g e o f a u d ie n c e s .

N ev erth eless, m a n y m ovie titles cited by V ogel h av e rem ain e d in lim b o in te rm s o f g en eral reco g n itio n .

A lth o u g h V o g el’s b o o k is a m b itio u s in scope, he d oes n o t try to develop an y th e o re tic a l or an a ly tic a l issues in d ep th . F ro m th is p ersp ectiv e’ th e b o o k ap p e a rs to be in ten d ed as a referen ce w o rk .

In th e section ‘S u b v ersion o f F o rm ’, V ogel b ro ach es a w hole series o f to p ics relev an t to c u rre n t th e o re tic a l d iscu ssio n s — ‘D estru c tio n o f P lo t’, ‘N a rra tiv e ’, ‘D estru c tio n o f T im e an d S p a c e ’, ‘T h e A ssa u lt on M o n ta g e ’, ‘T riu m p h an d D eath o f th e M ov in g C a m e ra ’, ‘T h e S u b v ersion o f Illu sio n ’ — b u t he does n o t really ex p lo re th e issues he raises u n d e r th o se h ead ing s. H is te n o r o f discussion h ere invites such q u estio n s as — W h a t w as th e tru e n a tu re o f ‘c lassica l’ cinem a?

W hy h ave th e last 15 y ears been so v ig o ro u s in th e assa u lt o f film m a k in g on th e can o n s o f classical cinem a?

W h a t is th e relev an ce o f research in sem iology to u n d e rsta n d in g o f co m m u n ic a tio n p rocesses in cinem a?

W h a t is th e v alue o f M a rx ist th o u g h t on th e ideology o f re p resen tatio n ?

H ow h as subversive cin em a been influenced by th e crises in c o m m ercial film m a k in g an d vice­ versa? C h an g in g social fash ion s h ave deem ed a n u m b e r o f p a st m ovies no lo n g er to h ave su b ­ versive co n n o tatio n s.

T h u s, one rem ain s w ith th e im p ressio n th a t th e b o o k is a p p a re n tly p ro fo u n d ra th e r th a n actu ally so. I am n o t su gg esting th a t V ogel’s b o o k should have been an aca d e m ic tex t b o o k on film th eo ry .

Y et th e scope o f V o g el’s co n cern s, in itially im ­ pressive, a re u ltim ately a little p erfu n cto ry in resp ect o f th e a u th o r’s d esire to en c a p su la te issues and m a k e them su b serv ien t to th e refe ren tial p u r­ pose o f th e b o ok . In sp ite o f these criticism s, ‘Subversive Art ’ is certain ly useful fo r its concise and often p ercep tive co m m e n ta rie s on a w hole ran g e o f titles p resen ted in V ogel’s classificato ry sy stem . M o reo v er, th e b o o k is lavishly p ro d uced w ith an intellig en t selection o f stills.

N E X T IS S U E

Politica! Cinema A special feature by John O’Hara which examines notions of Political Cinema and explores the work of Bernado Bertolucci, Costa Gavras.

Also in the next issue: • Special feature on animation with extracts from an exclusive interview with Donald Duck. e Facts about Film Exhibition. Another special feature highlighted by interviews with leading exhibitors: Graham Burke of Village, David Williams of Greater Union and John Mostyn of Hoyts. e Revealing conversation with award-winning composer Bruce Smeaton. e Everything you wanted to know about Restrictive Trade Practices Legislation and the Film In­ dustry but were too afraid to ask . . . Part 2.

• Latest Australian feature films reviewed: Sunday Too Far Away, Inn of the Damned, The Removaiists, A Salute to the Great McCarthy many others.

and

Don’t miss out — subscribe now! © ®

BOOKS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW FILM AS A SUBVERSIVE ART

Amos Vogel, Wiedenfeld and Nicholson 1974 — Barrett Hodsdon. Recommended price: Hard cover $24.

Barrett Hodsdon A m o s V ogel, fo u n d e r o f N ew Y o rk ’s C in em a 16 an d d ire c to r o f th e N ew Y o rk F ilm F estiv al, h as p ro d u c ed a b o o k w hich a tte m p ts to classify th a t film m a k in g is co n sid ered subversive becau se it ch alleng es ex istin g social m o re s an d th e sta tu s q u o o f p o litica l an d social in stitu tio n s.

T h e m a in p a rt o f th e b o o k is divided into th ree sectio n s, u n d e r th e h ead in g , ‘W eap o n s o f S u b v er­ sio n ’. T h ey a re (a) T h e S u b v ersion o f F o rm ; (b) T h e S u b v ersio n o f C o n te n t; an d (c) F o rb id d en S u b jects o f C in em a.

T h e final sectio n , ‘T o w a rd s a N ew C o n ­ s c io u s n e s s ’, a tte m p ts to p la c e ‘S u b v e rsiv e C in e m a ’ (as d efin ed ) into relief, so th a t its fu n c­ tio n in so ciety is n o t o v ersta ted .

S in ce V ogel sees subversive cin em a as existing

Confessions of a Window Cleaner Timothy Lea Sphere Books Distributed by Book Wholesale SI.10

Brando _ David Shipman MacMillan & Co Distributed by MacMillan $4.95

Chaplin Denis Gifford MacMillan & Co Distributed by MacMillan

S4.95

An Appalling Talent John Baxter Michael Joseph Distributed by Thomas Nelson

$10.00

50 Superstars John Kobal Hamlyn Distributed by Hamlyn $9.95

The Great British Picture Show George Perry Rupert Hart Davis Distributed by J. Hicks & Sons $16.20

® © ® 4 > © ® * ® ® O « i

©

®

®

©

9 @ 4

Jessie Matthews Michael Thornton Rupert Hart MacGibbon (London) Distributed by J. Hicks & Sons $12.00 approx A Library of Film Criticism — American Film Directors Stanley Hockman Frederick Ungar (New York) Distributed by Ruth Walls Books Pty Ltd $21.00 (review next issue) Spectacular — The Story of Epic Films John Cary Hamlyn Distributed by Hamlyn $9.95 (This series reviewed next issue) This is Where I Came In T. E. B. Clarke Michael Joseph Distributed by Thomas Nelson $8.75

War Movies Tom Perlmutter Hamlyn Distributed by Hamlyn $9.95.

ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA

December Issue: David Baker stills by Virginia Coventry.

Having trouble with your image?

Then turn to page 84

Cinema Papers, March-April — 81

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

Continued from P.38 p ro v isio n s o f th e co n sen t decrees as fa r as they co n cern us h ere a re set o u t in th e R e p o rt o f th e E nglish M o n o p o lies C o m m issio n in to F ilm s.20 T h ey included: 1. D istrib u to rs m ay n o t stip u la te ad m issio n prices.

2. D istrib u to rs m ay n o t ag ree w ith o th e r d is­ trib u to rs to ‘m a in ta in a sy stem o f c le a ra n c e s’.

T h e te rm ‘c le a ra n c e ’ m ean s th e p erio d o f tim e w hich m u st elap se betw een ru n s w ithin a p a r­ tic u la r a re a , o r in specific th e a tre s. T h e p ro v i­ sion d oes n o t o u tlaw clearan ces, b u t is aim ed a t p rev en tin g an y th in g in th e n a tu re o f an ag reed m a ste r list o f clearan ce s fo r use by all d istrib u to rs an d ex h ib ito rs.

3. D istrib u to rs m ay n o t en fo rce clearan ces ‘in ex­ cess o f w h at is re aso n ab ly n ecessary to p ro te c t th e licensee in th e ru n g ra n te d ’; i.e. a clearan ce m u st be re a so n a b le and th e b u rd en in g o f su stain in g its leg ality is on th e d istrib u to r.

4. D istrib u to rs m ay n o t “ fu rth e r p erfo rm any ex­ isting fran ch ise” or m a k e an y fran ch ise in the fu tu re. A fran ch ise is a licensing ag reem en t w ith an ex h ib ito r coverin g m o re th a n one year, an d th e p u rp o se o f th is p rovision is to p revent p e rm a n e n t' tra d in g re la tio n s h ip s or asso cia tio n s betw een p a rtic u la r ex h ib ito rs and p a rtic u la r d istrib u to rs.

5. D i s t r i b u t o r s m a y n o t m a k e ‘m a s t e r a g re e m e n ts’ o r ‘b la n k e t d e a ls’. T h ese te rm s are sy n o n o m o u s an d m ean licensing ag reem en ts w ith w hole circu its.

6. D istrib u to rs m ay n o t m a k e th e licensing o f one film c o n tin g en t u p o n th e ex h ib ito r tak in g o th ers (full line forcing).

7. D istrib u to rs m ay only offer to license a film to an ex h ib ito r ‘th e a tre by th e a tre ’, solely upon th e m e rits an d w ith o u t d iscrim in atio n in favor o f a ffilia ted th e a tre s, circu it th e a tre s and o th ers.

ed au d ie n c e d e m a n d s fo r cin em a, a n d even w ith o u t d iv o rc e m e n t th e m ovie m o g u ls’ h ey d ay w as over. F u rth e r d iv o rce m en t g ave rise to th e g re a t w ave o f in d e p e n d e n t p ro d u cers in th e la te fifties an d sixties w no w ould have never been ab le to flourish in p re -d iv o rc e m e n t days.

A s to d iv estitu re, th e aim w as to red u ce th e size o f th e •circuits p a rtic u la rly to a tta c k th e closed tow n situ atio n , n o t to d e stro y them a lto g eth er.

C o n tro l o f b o o k in g m e th o d s w as ra th e r seen as a w ay to m itig a te c ircu it b o o k in g pow er. T h e P a ra m o u n t case saw th e in tro d u c tio n o f a system o f co m p u lso ry co m p etitiv e b id d in g fo r av ailab le film s. T h e idea w as th a t d istrib u to rs w ould be forced to acc ep t th e b est bid m a d e on a film an d n o t d isc rim in a te in fav o r o f a certain ex h ib ito r.

H ow ever, th e im p recisen ess o f th e d ifferen t styles o f b id d in g (h igh er p ercen tag es o f box-office ta k e ; h ig h e r m in im u m g u a r a n te e s ; h ig h e r fix e d p ay m en ts) an d th e d ifficulty o f c o m p ariso n led th e c o u rt to larg ely w ith d raw fro m superv ision . S o m e co m p etitiv e bid d in g still ta k e s p lace, b u t it is suggested its p u rp o se is larg ely to p rev en t p riv ate a n ti-tru s t suits by aggrieved ex h ib ito rs alleging d iscrim in atio n .

C e rta in ly th e a tre -b y -th e a tre b o o k in g and co m ­ petitive b id d in g h ave led to m o d e rn iz a tio n s an d im p ro v em e n ts o f cin em as (now th a t ex h ib ito rs believe they can m a k e a reaso n ab le re tu rn on th eir in v estm ent); b u t so m e ex h ib ito rs claim d is­ trib u to rs use co m p etitiv e b id d in g as a ru se for secu rin g h ig h er film ren tals. D istrib u to rs, on th e o th e r h an d , suggest collusion betw een ex h ib ito rs m ay m a k e for low er b id d in g an d film h ire. T hey also allege th a t th e a tre -b y -th e a tre b o o k in g forces th e d istrib u to r to invest in m o re p rin ts o f a film th an m ig h t be strictly eco n o m ical in o rd er to secure a su b sta n tia l sp lash release.

T h ere seem s to be so m e evidence th a t p o st­ P a ra m o u n t b o o k in g m e th o d s a re u n sa tisfa c to ry for a v ariety o f reaso n s, b u t th e re is no d o u b t th a t th e goal o f c o m p etitio n is now a m u ch m o re real

8. T h e five m a jo r co m p an ies w ere req u ired to div est them selves o f th e ir ex h ib itio n h o ld in gs (d ivo rcem en t).

9. T h e ir ex h ib ito r su ccessors w ere req u ired to divest them selves o f a co n sid era b le n u m b e r o f cinem as; in so m e cases p a rtic u la r cin em as w ere d esig n ated , an d in o th ers p a rtic u la r tow ns w ere d esig n ated in w hich one o r m o re cin em as w ere d isp o sed o f (d ivestitu re).

T h e last tw o elem ents o f th e co n sen t d ecrees re ­ q u ire so m e ind iv id u al co m m en t. T h e b asic a rg u ­ m e n t for divo rcin g ex h ib itio n fro m p ro d u c tio n an d d istrib u tio n w as th a t all p a rts o f th e in d u stry w ere said to be effectively co n tro lled by th e five v ertically in te g ra te d m a jo r co m p an ies. A lth o u g h each co m p an y ow ned a co n sid era b le n u m b er o f cin em as, none h ad n atio n w id e d o m in an ce. So alth o u g h th e re w as so m e assu red m a rk e t for th e film s th e co m p an y p ro d u ced , it also needed access to th e o th er circu its for full n atio n al d istrib u tio n .

It w as alleged th a t this w as so im p o rta n t to the film co m p an ies th a t each gave p referen ce to film s from o th er co m p an ies in o rd er to avoid possible rep risals ag a in st its ow n film s. T h is system o f recip ro cal p referen ce, it w as claim ed , w as th e p rin cip al fa c to r w hich in su b stitu tin g co m p etitio n fo r co -o p eratio n en ab led them to c o n tro l th e in ­ d u stry an d p rev en t ind ep en d en ts fro m b re a k in g in an d co m p etin g. A lth o u g h it w as possib le to o u t­ law certain tra d in g p ractices, th e D e p a rtm e n t o f Ju stice felt th a t it w as im p o ssib le to be certain a b o u t th e m otives o f b o o k in g an d th e q u alities o f film s, an d th e only w ay to b reak recip ro cal p referen ce w as by d iv o rcem en t.

It has been arg u ed th a t d iv o rcem en t w as largely resp o n sib le for th e decline in A m e ric an film p ro d u c tio n in th e fifties by dep rivin g p ro d u c ers o f an assu red m a rk e t, ju s t w hen they w ere beginning to feel the pinch o f television. T h e ‘d e a th ’ o f the m a jo r stu d io s an d o f th e ‘s ta r sy stem ’ h ave been laid at its feet. It seem s m o re co rrec t, how ever, th a t it w as th e ad v en t o f T V th a t rad ically ch an g ­

A p p e n d ix A MOTION PICTURE DISTRIBUTORS ASSOCIATION - OF AUSTRALIA

CINEMATOGRAPH EXHIBITORS’ ASSOCIATION

STANDARD FORM OF CONTRACT IN RELATION TO THE HIRING OF FILMS BY DISTRIBUTORS TO EXHIBITORS IN VICTORIA AND/OR TASMANIA (Operative as from 1st September 1967) AGREEMENT made between the D istributor named In the Schedule hereto of the one part and the Exhibitor named In the Schedule of the other part WHEREBY IT IS AGREED as follows:Formation 1. (a) The Exhibitor's signature to the said Schedule shall constitute the of document an offer to hire film s on the term s of this Agreement. (b) Such offer shall in consideration of the prom ise by the Distributor contained in subclause (d) of this clause (notwithstanding subsequent negotiations between the Distributor and Exhibitor) be irrevocable by the Exhibitor and capable of acceptance by the Distributor for the period of 14 days after the date of signing of the offer by the Exhibitor if the offer Is so signed in the m etropolitan area of Melbourne or in the cities of Hobart or Launceston or the suburban areas thereof o r for the period of 21 days after the date of signing of the offer by the Exhibitor if the offer is so signed in any other part of Victoria or Tasm ania, unless the D istributor before the expiry of the said period of 14 or 21 days (as the case may be) rejects the offer. If the offer be not accepted within the said period the sam e shall be deemed to be rejected. (c) If the Distributor desire to accept such offer acceptance shall be made by the D istributor before the expiry of the period mentioned in the preceding subclause by posting by prepaid post or delivering to the Exhibitor a copy of the said offer signed by its managing d irector, general m anager, general sales m anager, secretary , o r officer authorised in writing to accept offers to hire film s; and Lf the Distributor desire to reject such offer before the expiry of the Bald period such rejection (subject to subclause (d) of this clause) shall be made by posting by prepaid post or delivering to the Exhibitor a notice In writing of such rejection signed by its managing director, general m anager, general sales m anager, secretary, district or branch m anager, or officer so authorised In writing. (d) In consideration of the offer remaining irrevocable as above provided the D istributor shall not, while the offer is irrevocable and has not been rejected offer for exhibition in any opposition theatre any of the film s which are the subject m atter of this offer and the offer shall be deemed to be rejected If and when the D istributor does so offer any of such film s. (e) Any film or advertlsirg m atter supplied at the request of the Exhibitor while this document rem ains an offer shall be deemed to be supplied pursuant to this Agreement if the offer be accepted but If the offer be not accepted such film or advertising m atter shall be deemed to have been hired or purchased as the case may be upon such of the term s of this Agreement as may be applicable.

Period of h iic.

2. The period during which the film s to be supplied under this Agreement shall he supplied and exhibited shall be the period of hire set out in the Schedule.

If the Distributor After notice in writing fail to remedy any breach on the part of the Distributor of the provisions of U^is Agreement as regards the offer of films for selection (If applicable), the supply of film, Its condition, the protection period or Distributor. the priority of supply; (ii) be guilty of persistent breaches of this Agreement; (til) be guilty of any breach going to the root of this Agreement; then in any of such events the Exhibitor may by notice in writing either suspend the acceptance of all the films to be supplied under any or all of this Agreement and other film agreements (if any) between the same parties until such default shall cease or be remedied or may term inate all or any of this Agreement and such other film agreements (If any). (b) If the Exhibitor duly suspend the acceptance ctf film s under this clause he may upon notice in writing by him to the Distributor reduce the number of film s to be supplied by the number which in the ordinary course would have been exhibited during the period of suspension. . (c) If the Exhibitor duly suspend delivery by reason of default hereunder and such default continue for or be not remedied within two weeks from the date of such suspension the Exhibitor may by notice in writing to the Distributor term inate this Agreement and all or any of such other agreem ents. ’ 5. This Agreement shall not operate so as to derogate from any rights , of the Exhibitor or the D istributor, as the case may be, arising from the respective agreement between them either to receive notice or a greater period of notice of any breach which may be a ground of suspension or termination within this Agreement in a case where no notice or a leaser period of notice is provided for by clauses 3 or 4, as the case may be.

Termination

3

(a)

If the Exhibitor

(i)

Alter notice in writing lail to remedy any breach by the Exhibitor of the provisions ol this Agreement as regards payment of moneys due. furnishing returns, insurance, access to the theatre and records, copyright, ceasing exhibition on notice under clause 60. observance of Acts, or minimum admission prices (il specified).

(ii)

commit any breach of thts Agreement as regards the purpose, m anner, tim e, or place in, at. or for which, any film may or may not be used.

(ill)

be guilty of persistent breaches ol this Agreement.

(iv)

be guilty ot any bieach going to the root of this Agreement;

(v)

become insolvent or be adjudicated bankrupt or execute an assignment foi the benefit of his creditors, or in the case ol a comjxany go into liquidation or suffer a receiver to be appointed PROVIDED HOWEVER that where a receiver or hquidatoi is appointed he shall have the option (such option to be notified to the Distributor within fourteen days of his appointment) to accept responsibility under the Agreement (without prejudice to the liability thereunder of the Exhibitor) and lo car ry on without the Agreement being suspended or term inable merely by reason of his appointment PROVIDED ALSO that the provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to a company which goes into liquidation for the purpose ot i econsti uc'ion only, or

(vi)

either voluntarily or by opeiation of law should cease to have con'iol ol the theatre (if only one theatre is herein specified lor the purposes ol exhibition) or the majority of the theatres in which films are to be exhibited so that films cannot be exhibited there under this Agreement;

then and in any ol such events the Distributor may by notice in writing either suspend delivery ol all the film s to be supplied under any or all of this Agreement and othei Him agreements (if any) between the same ' parties until such default shall cease or be remedied, or may term inate all or any of this Agreement and such other film agieem ents (If any) PROVIDED THAT the Distributor shall not term inate or suspend for a trivial breach within paragraph (u) of this subclause unless after notice In writing the Exhibitor fail forthwith to remedy such tiivial breach. (b) . If the Disitibuloi duly suspend deliveiy under this clause It may upon notice in writing by U reduce the numbei of film s to be supplied by the numbei which in the ordinary course would have been exhibited during the period of suspension (c) If the Distributor dulv suspend deliveiy bv reason of default hereundei and such delault continue lor or not remedied within two weeks lioni the date suspension the Distributor may by notice in writing to the Exhibitoi term inate this Agreement and all or any of such other agreements

suspension

(a) [i)

by

Operation of notice.

6. A notice of suspension or termination under clauses 3 or 4 shall take effect Immediately upon service of the notice.

Impossibility 7. (a) If by reason of any present or future legislation or of aqy of performance action based upon any present or future legislation whether of the

by D istributor. Commonwealth or of any State of the Commonwealth or of any State or country outside the Commonwealth or by reason of w ar, strik es, public disorders or abnormal conditions attaching to foreign exchange It Is not or will not be commercially practicable for the Distributor to carry out its film agreem ents in the Commonwealth or (If the disability exists In the State or States to which this Agreement relates) in that State, then the Distributor may term inate this Agreement by not less than one month's notice in writing to the Exhibitor PROVIDED THAT all the D istributor’s other current film agreements in Australia or in the State or States to which this Agreement relates (as the case may be) are terminated within one month of the termination of this Agreement. (b) Notwithstanding such termination the Distributor shall supply such films the subject of this Agreement as are then In Australia and which it can legally supply without breach of contract. (c) Provided nevertheless that if the Distributor has pursuant to this clause terminated the said agreements for exhibition In A ustralia or in the Stale or States to which this Agreement relates (as the case may be) and if the Distributor thereafter within a period of six months make any agreement for the exhibition of films in Australia or in the State or

■ 82 — Cinema Papers, March-April

V - :■ . '

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES o n e . P o s t - P a r a m o u n t c a s e s h a v e in c lu d e d Milgram v. Loews Inc.21 w h ere th e refu sal o f m a ­ jo r d is trib u to rs to licen se fe a tu re s first-ru n fo r a n ew ly -co n stru cted P e n n sy lv a n ia d rive-in w as held to b e a re s tra in t o f tra d e a n d a d ecree w as issued re q u irin g th e d istrib u to rs to give th e p la in tiff an eq u al o p p o rtu n ity w ith th e o p e ra to rs o f co n v en ­ tio n a l th e a tre s to bid fo r p ic tu res on first ru n . T h e ev idence h a d in clu d ed th e fa c t th a t th e d istric t m a n a g e rs o f each o f th e d istrib u to rs testified th a t th e ir co m p an ies w ould n o t license first run fe a tu re s to th e B o u lev ard (th e drive-in ) even sh o u ld th e p la in tiff o ffer to p ay a re n ta l in excess o f th a t o ffered by o n e o f th e d o w nto w n th e a tre s.

T h u s ‘co n scio u sly p ara lle l p ra c tic e ’ a m o u n te d to co n sp irac y .

O n th e o th e r h a n d in Fanchon and Marco v.

Paramount22 trie d in C a lifo rn ia b efo re M r Ju stic e Jan k w ic h , w h ere th e c o m p la in t w as th e d en ial of first ru n s by d is trib u to rs to a m o d e rn cin em a in a su b u rb a n a re a o f L o s A n g eles, it w as held th a t on th e facts th e actio n o f th e in d iv id u al d istrib u to rs w ere ex p la in ed by n o rm a l busin ess decisio n s. “ N o p a ra lle l, co n scio u s o r u n co n scio u s, can o v erco m e a fin din g o f re a so n a b le n e ss,” th e c o u rt said.

T h e S u p re m e C o u rt in Theatre Enterprises v Paramount23 acc ep ted evidence o f th e F a n c h o n a n d M a rc o s o rt to ex p lain d en ial o f first ru n s to a B a ltim o re su b u rb a n cin em a. B usiness reaso n s w ere discu ssed . “ C o n scio u s p a ra lle lism ,” M r Ju stic e S to n e said, “ h as n o t y et re a d co n sp iracy o u t o f th e S h e rm a n A c t e n tire ly .”

I t is clear, th e re fo re , th a t th e a tte m p t to ex ten d th e m e an in g o f ‘c o n sp ira c y ’ to cover p arallel

Appendix B

co u rses o f actio n h as larg ely failed. A m e etin g of m in d s is still req u ired , an d p a ra lle l activ ity is o f ev id en tial v alue only.

F in ally in 1962 in US v. Loews Inc . 24 an a tte m p t w as m a d e to b lo ck sell a series o f fe a tu re film s fo r T V ex h ib itio n . It w as held to be an illegal p a c k a g e tra n sa c tio n th a t v io lated th e S h e rm a n A ct. T h e re w ere no g ro u n d s fo r d istin g u ish in g b etw een film s an d T V here. F u rth e r it w as n o ted th a t a p rice d ifferen tia l betw een film s o ffered in ­ d iv id u ally an d as p a rt o f a p a c k a g e w as only p ro h ib ite d w hen “ it h as th e effect o f co n d itio n in g th e sale o r licence o f a film u p on th e sale o r licence o f one o r m o re o th e r film s” ; i.e. n on co st ju stifie d p rice d ifferen tials.

FOOTNOTES 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

“Motion Picture Films and TV Programs”: Tariff Board Report 1973 at p.32.

The Night of the Living Dead: The Australian Film In­ dustry; Filmways Quarterly No. 6. Ginnane, A. at P.7.

“Advantages of a Local Film Industry”: Showbusiness Magazine. Ryan, G. 6, September at p.7.

Supra fn 1 at p.39.

Independent Showman’s Guild: Comment on Roadshow controversy. Reprinted Showbusiness: 7, 21, July, and 6, August.

“Everything you wanted to know about Film distribution but were afraid to ask”: Burke, G.W. (Executive director, Village Theatres:) Transcript of seminar.

Supra fn 1 at p.50.

Correspondence between Dr Killen of the Cinema Center Group and the author.

Supra fn 1 at p.49.

“Our two big cinema scenes”: Nation Dec. 13, 1969 p.12.

11. The Big 6 were a group of independent suburban drive-in owners centred around the former Palladium-Tivoli city circuit which, save for Sandringham Drive-in which is still independent, have, since 1966, been taken over either by Hoyts or Village. They were forced out of operation by the two major circuits.

12. 334 US 131 (1948) 13. 282 US 30 (1930) 14.

15. 310 US 69 (1939) 16. “Federal Anti-Trust Law”: Oppenheim S.C. and Weston G.E. 1968 at p.281. .

17. 334 US 100 (1948) 18. 334 US 110 (1948) Cf US v. Crescent Amusement Co (1944) 319 US 231 19. 334 US 131 (1948) .

20. “A report on the supply of films for exhibition in cinemas”: HMSO 1966. Monopolies Commission, p.100 21. 192 F. 2d 279. (1951) 22. 100 Fed Supp. 84 (1951) 23. 306 US 208 (1054) 24. 371 US 38 (1962)

N EX T ISSUE Overseas reaction to film in­ dustry monopolies: The UK, Australian Restrictive Trade P ra c tic e s le g is la tio n — em erg en ce, gr owt h and relevance.

A typical letter of acceptance from a distributor and contract schedule.

Cinema Papers, March-April — 83

Announcing THE WORLD PREMIERE season of a new rip-roaring adventure-com edy

BIG STAR T-SHIRT OTFtR NoJKINGKONG S ee everyone go bananas when you wear a C inem a Papers T-Shirt

starring Gillies, Serge Lazareff, Graharne J jiu l Vachon and Abigail as ^ sr

Directed by Richard Franklin Written by Alan Hopgood & Richard Franklin Music by Brian May Filmed in Australia and on location in Montreal and Sept Isles,Canada.

Color.

Co-produced and released by FILM W A YS

WORLD PREMIERE N E X T T U E S D A Y ,25 MARCH, 8.30 PM Come and see the stars of this great film arrive at the cinema

N ow P ro udly Show ing A t H O Y T S C IN EM A 3 See d a ily n e w sp a p e rs fo r session tim e s

SEASON COMMENCES T H U R S D A Y ,27 MARCH Group bookings now open, Phone 663 3303

T h e Stars o f 'T h e T r u e S to ry o f E s k im o N e ll' fly A n s ett.

Limited number available

King Kong T-Shirt Please send me:

|

|

□ □

Red White Yellow

s M L □

□

$3.50*

□

□ □□ □ □□

Name ...................................................................................... ............... ......... ...............

A ddress............................................................................................................................ ......................................................................... ........................ ................... Postcode . . ‘ Price includes postage anywhere in Australia.

Cinema Papers

143 Therry Street

Melbourne, Victoria 3000

Dear Sir, Readers of Cinema Papers would have noted with Interest the observations of the National Library’s Film Archives Officer, Ray E d m o n d so n , p u b lis h e d in th e December issue. The National Library con­ tributed the major part of the expenses of M r Edm ondson’s trip (one of th ree overseas visits made by the Library’s film staff in the past two years) because it was conscious of the need to become familiar with both the more advanced practices of film archives and the latest technology of film preservation. Mr Edmondson’s obser­ vations, especially of methods and techni­ ques usefully recorded in his report, will certainly promote the development of the film archival activities of the Library.

Indeed, several ideas discussed by Mr Ed­ mondson are already being implemented.

At the same time, the report is mis­ leading in that Its generally accurate, but rather simple, description of the activities of film archives suggests that these were not previously known of in Australia nor being performed here, and in its assump­ tion that Australia should copy these ac­ tivities without qualification. The report is not revelationary to the Library, which is already providing many of the general ser­ vices of film archives and is aware of the need to develop others. Film preservation has been a responsibility actively pursued by the Library for 35 years. What it has been able to achieve is largely dependent on the level of resources made available by the Government.

Readers may be interested to learn of some recent developments undertaken with the substantially increased resources of today.

Nitrate copying: The copying program is now running at 121,600m a year (costing $80,000). More trained staff are necessary if this rate is to be lifted.

Storage facilities: A convenient site in Canberra for a nitrate vault has been made available to the Library. Plans are un­ derway for a design which will hopefully be built in 1975-76. The preservation acetate film is now held in a cool room (constant 14°C, 50% RH) at the Library.

Film study resources: Following a sem inar at the National Library in Septem ber and a series of meetings arranged by the Film and Television Board, the resources for film study available from the National Library are be­ ing developed. Expenditure in 1974-75 would be about $70,000 and should be considerably higher in 1975-76. This development is being directed, taking ac­ count of resources available elsewhere, by Mr Andrew Pike, a consultant to the - Library. Also, the Library is negotiating with a major distributor for the retention here for study purposes of films which have recently been on commercial release in this country.

Staff: It has been the Library’s ex­ perience, as the pioneer in film archive work in Australia, that the lack of staff with appropriate training has been one of the critical factors limiting the development of its archival activities. The formal courses in various aspects of film and television now becoming available will provide a variety of professional qualifications which the Library can recognise. At the same time, the L ibrary has been en ergetically developing its staff resources, and, through this staff, its wider ties with related organizations both in A ustralia and overseas.

Regional offices: The Library hopes to open regional offices in the metropolitan centres where material restricted by their copyright owners to use on the Library’s premises could be viewed. Video copies would be employed for much of this research use as they offer advantages as being cheaper than 16mm film, easier to prepare and the equipment needed is cheaper than for film.

T h e p a s t few y e a rs h ave b een significant, not only for the development of the National Film Collection but also for the Australian film industry and for the study of film in Australia. I am confident that the in­ terest of and the contact with this vital and creative en terp rise will continue to stimulate the full and proper development of the national archiyal responsibilities of the National Library in film and television.

G. Chandler, Director-General, National Library of Australia.

Dear Sir, We were pleased to see the summary of Ray Edmondson’s report on film archives in the last issue of Cinema Papers.

We are some of the members of a new body — the Association for a National Film and Television Archive — designed to en­ courage the Government to set up a single comprehensive national archive on the lines of film archives as they are under­ stood and as they function elsewhere in the world. Our first activity has been to present a submission to the Committee of Inquiry on Museums and National Collec­ tions.

The preservation of films and television programs in Australia is in urgent need of overhaul and expert planning. At present there is virtually no overall plan and policy, and no single location. Archives are fragmented between many bodies. The Federal G overnm ent alone has the National Library, the Australian War Memorial, the Australian Archive, the Australian Broadcasting Commission, Film Australia, the Film and Television School, the CSIRO, and possibly others. The various State governments hold archival films. Bodies such as the Australian Film Institute and the National Film Theatre hold film collections of their own. Produc­ tion units and private collectors hold others. All these are separate from lending libraries.

The National Library in Canberra refers to its historical collection as ‘the film arch ive’, and, thanks largely to the pioneering work of Rod Wallace, Larry Lake, Ray Edmondson and others, it has managed to rescue some remnants of hundreds and hundreds of feature and ac­ tuality films made in Australia in the silent era, the majority of them lost for ever.

(What an outcry there would be if 90 per cent of the books published in Australia between 1898 and 1930 had disappeared without trace!)

P r e o c c u p ie d w ith c h a s in g th e remainder of the films from the nitrate era before they deteriorate (up to 1950), the Library has neglected the post-1950 era.

There is still no policy of buying a copy of e v ery film p ro fe s s io n a lly m a d e in Australia, or of requiring producers to deposit copies of their films. The Film Divi­ sion of the Library has been starved for funds, and administered by a Library heirarchy whose training and interest are geared to book librarianship.

The National Library’s film archive ac­ tivities take place only as an adjunct to its film lending function. These dual activities are a source of confusion within the film in­ dustry, the film trade, the film societies and o th e r w o u ld -b e u s e rs of a r c h iv a l resources.

Furthermore, there is little material of overseas origin in the National Library. Yet prints in good condition or feature films from many other countries have been and are being destroyed in great numbers by the film trade because they are no longer considered commercially viable. These could have, and could still, with the right negotiation, form part of a great national collection for film study purposes.

As the Edmondson report revealed, the

National Library falls far short in other ways of the functions of a national film archive as they are understood in most other countries of the world. The physical isolation of the National Library’s collec­ tion in Canberra, which has a tiny popula­ tion and no film industry, is not only un­ democratic, it is a severe handicap to scholars, filmmakers and educationists.

This handicap will become increasingly obvious and a source of much frustration as our film industry and film education and training develop.

Film archives overseas have played a vital role in the education and creative stimulation of filmmakers. Think of the C in e m a th e q u e in P a ris , p u b lic ly acknowledged by the creators of the New Wave as the major factor in their film education; the British Film Institute, with its vital contribution to the intellectual and ar­ tistic life of the English; the Museum of Modern Art in New York, where Orson Welles and, many years later, Peter Bogdanovich saturated themselves in films of the past before embarking on their first features.

The film archive should be in the largest centre of population and in the largest centre of film m aking, with regional branches in other capitals. Producers, directors, scriptwriters, art directors, costume designers, cameram en, film students, history students, film teachers should be able to go to the archive and use its resources without the expense and tim e -w a s tin g of p lane jo u rn ey s to Canberra and enforced stays overnight.

Our filmmakers and their products are already suffering through lack of easy access to archival films.

The logical centre for the archive is S yd n ey, with in itia lly a b ran ch in Melbourne. The archive should also be in proximity to the Film and Television School, because the School is concerned not just with the training of its 25 full-time students per year, but with spreading k n o w le d g e and ra is in g s ta n d a rd s throughout the industry and all teaching bodies.

We recognise that the National Library’s staff have achieved a great deal over the years in the face of governmental and public lack of interest. The Association hopes that the National Library’s Council will see our submission as evidence of growing needs within Australia, and, rather than expend its energies on defending itself against criticism, the Library will lend its experience to help establish a truly effective national archive in the centre where it is most needed.

Anyone wishing to participate in the ac­ tivities of the Association or obtain a copy of the submission to the Committee of In­ quiry can contact either: Barrie King, 137 Riverview Av, South Guildford, WA, 6055; or Ross Cooper, Dept, of History, Monash University, Clayton, Vic. 3168.

Joan Long, Judy Adamson, Ian Dunlop, Anthony Buckley, Graham Shirley.

Dear Sir, In June 1974 I wrote to David Stone (head of Program Sales and Procurement) asking him if he" would be interested in viewing a film of mine — Joker — with a view to purchasing it for the ABC. I waited three months for a reply but did not receive one.

Having heard numerous tales about David Stone’s contemptuous attitude towards Australian filmmakers I decided to write to Graeme White and see if he would be interested in purchasing.

After waiting a month I rang his office to inquire whether he had received my letter.

Mr White was not available and his secretary told me that she had no

knowledge of my letter but that if I would like to leave my telephone number my call would be returned when the existence (or non-existence) of my letter had been determined.

After a few days, in which I received no reply, I rang Mr White’s office again and this time another secretary asked me to leave my name and address and details of the film.

A month later (13, November), I received a letter from Colin Dean (Mr White’s assistant) asking for “more details of the story line” before supplying them with an audition print. I wrote to Mr Duckmanton complaining that it had taken five months, two letters and two telephone calls to get any reply at all from the ABC. A few days later I received a letter from David Stone claiming that he had not received the letter I wrote to him in June. If he had been doing his job properly he would not have needed a letter from me. The fact that Joker had won a prize in the Greater Union Awards at the Sydney Film Festival should have in­ dicated that it may have been worth asking me for a print to view. To my knowledge he has not contacted other filmmakers and asked them for prints of their films with a view to purchasing them.

Late in November, I delivered a print of Joker to Mr Dean’s office at his request.

After six weeks without word from him his secretary told me that the assessors liked the film but that the ABC could not purchase it because it was in black and white. This annoyed me considerably because David Stone had seen the film in December, 1973 — 15 months before color TV. I asked to be notified of the ABC’s deci­ sion in writing and, after four more phone calls and a two-week wait, I received letters from Colin Dean and David Stone, in his letter David Stone writes: “We have been considering and/or p u rc h a s in g v e ry little by w ay of monochrome television programs and I am sorry to say that the fact that your film is a black and white production con­ tributes substantially to a decision that we do not wish to purchase television rights to

Joker.”

After almost 20 years of black and white television, black and white films are, in the ABC’s estimation, no longer acceptable to the Australian public — irrespective of their quality.

In five years’ time when color sets have, to a large extent, replaced black and white sets, and the public expects to see everything in color, such an attitude might be understandable. But to adopt such a rigid policy during the transition period seems absurd — especially since the ma­ jority of Australians will not have color television sets for many years yet.

Even if the majority of Australians did have color television sets I would still ques­ tion the wisdom of a decision to transmit only color programs, since such a decision is based on the erroneous assumption that black and white is inferior to color.

It is neither necessary nor desirable that all TV programs be shot in color. Such a policy denies the fact that black and white may be chosen in preference to color as a matter of artistic choice. Surely the ABC should be more concerned with the con­ tent of programs than with their color (or lack of it).

I wonder if the many outstanding films that have been made over the past 50 years are now unacceptable to the ABC because they are not in color! (Dear Mr Welles — We like Citizen Kane very much but regret that with the introduction of color television . . . ) Because the commercial channels rely on advertising for their continued ex­ istence it is difficult to sell them films that do not have mass appeal. The maker of non-commercial films is then left with the ABC as his or her only television outlet in

Cinema Papers, March-April — 85

BYRON HASKIN this country. This applies to both fiction and documentary films.

Part of the ABC’s function, surely, is to provide the Australian public with diverse programming and to fill those gaps left by the commercial channels — i.e. to cater for minority audiences who want to see something other than the formularised soap-operas and cops and robbers shows that dominate Australian television.

To achieve diversity in programming the ABC should encourage the making of films that are not being made or could not be made by either the commercial channels or the ABC — i.e. to recognise that in­ dependent filmmakers have a contribution to make to Australian television. At present such recognition does not exist.

For as long as the ABC retains its pre­ sent attitude the outlook for independent filmmakers interested in making films for television, is grim. It is time the ABC ceas­ ed its patronising and contemptuous at­ titude towards Australian filmmakers.

I speak not only for myself but for the large number of other filmmakers who have experienced similar frustrations in trying to sell their films to the ABC.

James Ricketson.

Dear Sir, In May 1974 the ABC previewed my film

Matchless and decided to buy it. Almost five months later they confirmed the deci­ sion and the contract was signed. During this five month period we received three letters from a man who was not present at the first screening stating that the film was of poor quality, experimental, and suitable only for late night viewing.

The first offer for the film was $5,250 — we weren’t surprised. On the day that offer came it was announced that the film had won a First Prize at an overseas film festival. This, combined with the fact that a prominent Australian (with various con­ tacts) was one of the festival judges, soon had us receiving a second offer from the ABC for $10,000.

That’s all I need to say.

John Papadopoulos

OBITUARY On 2 February, Norman Dawn, who film­ ed the Australian epic For the Term of his Natural Life (1927), died in Santa Monica, California. Dawn had been seriously ill since June last year, but four years previous he had corresponded regularly with Sydney writer and filmmaker Graham Shirley on his work in Australia.

Dawn first filmed here in 1908, but his best known local achievements were between 1926 and 1931, when he made

For the Term of his Natural Life, The Adorable Outcast and Showgirl’s Luck.

He is survived by his wife Katherine, who appeared in and helped produce most of his films from the early twenties.

Continued from P.23 Y e s , a n d t h a t h a s g le a n e d su p erlativ es fro m certain q u a rte rs.

T h at’s rig ht.

What TV work have you done? few have commented that its dis­ advantage was in being released in the Q u ite a lot. T h e last T V I d id w as same year as Kubrick’s “2001”.

The Outer Limits science fiction

W ell, th a t an d th e elem en ts th a t to th e o u tsid er a p p e a r lik e so m eth in g o u t o f Alice In Wonderland.

What were they?

T h e p e rs o n a l fric tio n b etw een M G M an d G eo rg e P a l, th e h a tre d s you co u ld n ’t believe w ere allow ed to o p e ra te on th a t film ’s eco n o m y . A nd it w as n o t released w ith any fan fare.

It w as g ru d gin g ly left to escape, w ith e v e ry b o d y h o p in g it w o u ld flo p b ecau se they w ere try in g to get rid of P al.

I d id n ’t th in k th e film itse lf w as to o b ad , alth o u g h you could b eco m e co n fu sed unless you p aid very close a tte n tio n . B ut w h at did co m e acro ss very sh arp ly w as th e te rro r o f a m an w ho, step by in evitab le step, h as his ow n id e n tity rip p ed fro m u n d e r him u n til finally he begins to d o u b t w ho th e hell he is. H ere is a guy in a high p o sitio n on a scientific p ro je ct w ho h as an enem y th a t begins to strip him o f all his reco rd b ack g ro u n d . E ven to th e p o in t w here they go to inv estigate his cred its a t th e u n iv ersity an d find o u t he n ever even w ent th e re. T h a t’s p re tty frig h ten in g to a p erso n V h o is a h ero o f th e scientific w orld and suddenly beco m es n o th in g . H e ’s b e­ ing p u rsu ed by a po w er, he d o esn ’t know w here it com es fro m , an d th e tric k y en ding h as him possessing th e g o d d am n ed po w er him self.

Did you collaborate on the script?

V ery little. I cam e o n to th e show w hen it w as fully p rep ared . I assisted th e w rite r Jo h n G ay in p olishing one o r tw o p o in ts, b u t I h ad no a u th o rity to ch an g e an y th in g fu rth er. I felt th a t a few th in g s c o u ld h a v e b e e n ch an g ed , b u t I d id n ’t go in to it b ecau se I w as glad to be doing so m eth in g again.

One memorable effect has George Hamilton spinning at a very high speed away from the camera.

Have you ever encountered policy clashes in special effects work?

86 — Cinema Papers, March-April

So that “Captain Sinbad” provided the rare exception.

A

T h a t w as th e co n clusio n , w here we h ad an effects m o n tag e o f h im self an d th e P o w er. W e h ad H a m ilto n lie acro ss a tu rn ta b le an d film ed him w ith a zo o m lens from th e ceiling.

NORMAN DAWN 1930

tw o b efo re he finished.

N o . I h ad co m p lete say a t W a rn e r B ro th ers fo r nine y ears an d w ent th e w ay th a t w as eco n o m ically sound an d h ad th e b est d ra m a tic effect.

T h ere w ere h u n d re d s o f these film s an d I c a n ’t claim to h av e p erso n ally w o rk ed o n m o st o f th em . L a te r, G o rd o n Jen n in g s did th e effects u n ­ d er m y supervision fo r War of the Worlds a t P a ra m o u n t. I left him an d w ent to F iji to m a k e His Majesty O’Keefe ( 1 9 5 4 ) , th e n v is ite d A u stra lia , T o k y o an d O k in a w a , an d arriv ed b ack in H o lly w o od a w eek o r

series. I d irected six an d w as on the series w ith o u t cred it as asso cia te p ro d u c er in o rd er to supervise the special effects. T h e p ro d u c er, Jo sep h S tefa n o , w as also a fine w rite r and h ad d o n e th e screen p lay o f Psycho fo r A lfred H itch co ck . H e w as p e r­ sonally resp o n sib le for th e polish on every o ne o f th e scrip ts, an d in th e first y ear it really cau g h t on. T h e kids sta rte d ta lk in g b ack to th e m o n sters, an d it w as d a m n g ood.

A s u sually h ap p en s to th e go od thin g s in th is venal business, so m e o f th e n etw o rk executives felt th a t th e series w as b eco m in g a little to o b iz arre, an d one o f th e ir n u m b er sta rte d sending m em o s to S tefa n o a b o u t th in g s h e did an d d id n ’t like a b o u t th e scrip ts, an d th in g s h e w as going to ch an g e. S tefa n o w ould re a d th e se w ith g re a t in te re st, d ro p them in th e w aste b a sk et, an d m a k e th e film s as he saw th e m . A t th e end o f th e first y e a r, w hen th e series h ad en tered th e h it categ o ry , th e n etw o rk an n o u n ce d th a t they w ould renew — b u t w ith o u t S tefa n o . S o they p u t in a guy k n ow n to th e tra d e as ‘G u illo tin e C h a rlie ’, an d he g u illotin ed th e show .

What were your other series?

T h e re w as a Meet McGraw an d The Californians, b u t th e se a re older.

I ’ve co n c e n tra te d m ain ly on m ovies.

Do you find television vastly different?

V ou n o tice th e speed a t w hich you have to o p e ra te an d th e acc ep tan ce o f th e m ed io cre w hich is fo stered upon you, and th e u n tru e im p ression t h a t th e im a g e s h o u ld c o n ta in n o th in g b u t b it close-ups. I t ’s like m usic, in th a t you can be so g o d ­ d am n ed co rn y in a w ay th a t is far from d ra m a tic . W ith T V you can le a n m u c h m o re to w a r d an h y sterical, e x tra tem p o d ra m a tic effect, w hich in a m ovie h as to be m o d elled an d m a d e realistic, to be developed an d played on a m o re b eh av io ral level. "

FOOTNOTES:

1. Haskin’s work for Holubar was on the never-completed Bishop of Cottontown (c.

1923). Haskin recalls that “It was a story of child slave labor set in the South just after the Civil War. The effort of trying to re­ create the Battle of Franklin was something of a strain on our director, and after contracting, kidney problems, he died”.

2. Scientist Albert Einstein and his wife were being given a VIP tour of the Warner Brothers lot. ' 3. I can find no reference among the Academy Awards listing Scientific or Technical achievements for Haskin having won this award in the 40’s. The Paramount Transparency Department (under Farciot Edouart) won awards in 1942 and 1943.

4. John Baxter, in ‘Science Fiction in the Cinema’ (Zwemmer/Barnes, 1970).

5. Neither Ross Wood nor Carl Kayser had worked on His Majesty O’Keefe.

6. Tom Howard was special effects supervisor at MGM’s British studio.

BYRON HASKIN FILMOGRAPHY Bom Portland, 2 April 1899. Father a school teacher. Took liberal arts for three years, enlisted as a Naval Aviation cadet in World War I. Studied art, worked as a cartoonist for San Francisco News. Summer vacation employment with International Newsreel and Pathe News.

FEATURES AS DIRECTOR

1927: Matinee Ladies (Warner Brothers), Irish Hearts (Warner Brothers), The Siren (Columbia), Ginsberg the Great (Warner Brothers).

1929: To England for three years as a techni­ cian and production executive for Herbert Wilcox. With Tom Walls directed a series of films based on stage hits, e.g. On Approval.

1947: Gave up Warners position to accom­ pany Hal Wallis when the latter left the Burbank studio and set up his own producing organization to make pic­ tures for Paramount release. Wallis created him production assistant and contract director. Second unit work on Wallis’ Technicolor feature Desert Fury (1947) and director of Wallis’ I Walk Alone (1947), Too Late for Tears (1949), and The Crying Sisters.

1950: To England for Disney’s Treasure Island.

1951: Under contract to Paramount for whom he made three Technicolor Nat Holt productions — Warpath (1951), Silver City, also released as High Ver­ million (1951) and Denver and Rio Grande (1952) — as well as George Pal’s War of the Worlds (1953).

OTHERS

1948: Man-eater of Kumaon 1950: Tarzan and the Jungle Queen.

1953: His Majesty O’Keefe 1954: The Naked Jungle 1955:vConquest of Space Long’John Silver 1956: The Boss The First Texan 1958: From the Earth to the Moon 1959: The Little Savage 1960: Jet over the Atlantic September Storm 1961: Armored Command 1963: Captain Sinbad 1964: Robinson Crusoe on Mars * 1967: The Power (co-directed witn George Pal). ' *

TV SERIES

Includes Long John Silver; Meet McGraw, The Californians and The Outer Limits.

r Why not fet us put yoa r\ Movie on the right trade?

AUSTRALIA COUNCIL

(formerly the Australian Council for the Arts) FILM, RADIO AN D TELEVISION BOARD

A CREATIVE ADMINISTRATOR

EARTH MEDIA RECORDING COMPANY FULLY P R O FE S S IO N A L 8 TRACK RECORDING AND MIXING FACILITIES INCORPORATING “ E A R T H RECORDS”

14 Glen St Mil8ons Point, NSW Tel. 929 8669

T h e F ilm , R a d io an d T elev isio n B o a rd offers a se n io r ex ecu tiv e w ith p ro v e n a d m in istra tiv e a n d fin an cial e x p erien ce a u n iq u e an d ex citin g c h allen g e to a c t as D ire c to r.

A k n o w led g e o f film , ra d io a n d telev isio n is d e sira b le ; an in te re st in th e se m e d ia is essen tial.

S alary : N eg o tiab le to $ 1 9 ,3 0 0 (m ax im u m ) T e n u re : T h re e y e a rs , C lo sin g D a te : 7 th A p ril 1975 A p p lic a tio n s in c lu d in g th e n am e s an d ^ a d d re sse s o f th re e refe rees to:

929 4808

The Executive Officer Australia Council P.O. Box 302 NORTH SYDNEY 2060

smart st. films inema enter group Smart St has joined forces with another great culture.

So as well as full production, editing and theatrette facilities, there is an extensive range of Kosher foods nearby. .

IN RELEASE 1975

John Chew on 371 0266 467 Old South Head Road Rose Bay oyoyoyoy

Los Olvidados Exterminating Angel Viridiana Love 27A I Can Jump Puddles Tony and the Tick Took Dragon The Big Dig 100 a Day Ballet Adagio Elnaufrago de La Calle Providencia — 50 minute color documentary about Luis Buñuel.

Above: (left) Walerian Borowczyk's Immoral Tales. (Right) Nikolai van der Heyde’s Award winning Angela “love comae quietly..

ALSO AVAILABLE: The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman Directed by

John Korty

Ape and Super Ape

Directed by Bert Haanstra

Blanche Directed by Walerian Borowczyk

La Rupture Directed by Claude Chabrol

27 stonnington place, toorak, victoria, 3142, australia telephone: 205329 cables: 'sharfilms' melbourne

CINEMA CENTER GROUP 6

2

8

7

^

413' Canberra Cfty’ ACT 2601 •Cabtes: Cinecenta. Canberra. Tele*:

SYONEY: Academy Twin Cinema, 3A Oxford St Paddington, NSW. 2010. Phone: (02) 33 4453. Telex: 26847.

MELBOURNE: Clarkson Taylor Films, P.O'. Box 430, Frankston, Vic. 3199. Phone: (03) 783 7126, 783 2860.

With this issue Cinema Papers begins a series of columns aim­ ed at creating a flow of informa­ tion between the various guilds, societies, councils, institutes, unions and co-operatives in­ volved in movie production, dis­ tribution and exhibition in Australia.

In following issues these pages will provide an open forum for the above organizations. All in­ terested parties are invited to participate and enquiries should be directed to: The Columns Editor Cinem a Papers 143 Therry Street Melbourne, Victoria, 3000: THE FILM PR OD UC TIO N A S S O C IA T IO N OF A USTRALIA The Film Production Association of Australia came into being in 1972 to promote, foster and encourage the production of films in Australia. Today, It represents some 40 movie producing co m p an ies and, by necessity, is registered under the Australian Concilia­ tion and Arbitration Act in order that it m ay r e p r e s e n t its m e m b e rs in negotiations on all industrial matters.

In 1973, most of its time and effort went into negotiations with the Australian Theatrical Am usem ent Employees Association, in establishing a new Theatrical Employees’ Motion Picture Production Award, and with Actors’ Equi­ ty in establishing the Actors' Television Program Award which was previously non-existent. Even though the latter award was granted in late 1973, matters relating to it are still under discussion.

The rights of repeats and residuals and, in fact, the whole question of copyright of performance will no doubt be settled this year with the scheduled government legislation for the protection of per­ formers.

As producers, we are as vitally in­ terested in this legislation as are the ac­ tors and writers. Our members are the innovators and obtainers of finance for commercial movie production and con­ sider the rights vested in the producer to form a vital part of the packaging of a project, in that a viable return must be forthcoming to investors or there will be no investment, hence no production.

However, it is agreed that the performer and writer must be protected, as well as the producer.

Another aspect of our association’s activity Is in negotiations with govern­ ment departments. We had much to say during the Tariff Enquiry of 1972-1973 and, more recently, with the Australian Films Commission Bill. In certain sec­ tions of the industry, the FPAA have been blamed for the initial failure of the Bill, but I would remind readers that it is the democratic right of all Australians and organizations to put their point of view to the best of their ability.

Basically, we believed that the finding of the Tariff Board’s impartial and con­ structive suggestions should have been im p le m e n te d in full and th at the Australian Films Commission should be e s ta b lis h e d w ith th e s tr u c tu r e , membership and powers recommended by the Tariff Board of Enquiry. In par­ ticular, in respect to the make up of

88 — Cinema Papers, March-April

membership of the Board, its powers and ability to enquire into such matters as exhibition-distribution in Australia and the establishment of a short films quota.

We believe in a government-assisted free enterprise movie production in­ dustry.

Our association is divided into four divisions — Feature and Television Series Division; Documentary Division; F acilitie s Division and T elevision Commercial Division. Over the past 14 years the production of television com­ mercials in Australia — thanks to the foresighted government legislation re­ quiring that all commercials shown on Australian television be produced in Australia — has kept the industry viable but with the worldwide trends towards the much improved color video tape type production, movie producers in Australia must look towards increased feature and television (i.e., series and documentary) program production to survive.

F IL M

E D IT O R S ’ G U IL D AUSTRALIA

OF

The Film Editors’ Guild consists of a large body of people made up of senior, junior and associate members. Senior and junior members have to be engaged currently in film editing and the associate membership covers a large cross­ section of people working in the film in­ dustry. Although we welcome associate members, it is basically an editors’ guild and our object is to ensure that the true value of film and sound editing is recognized as a creative part of film production.

The guild meets once a month and our meetings are aimed at stimulating in­ terest conducive to the many technical aspects an editor encounters in his field of work.

At a recent meeting we screened the results of the FEGA 1974 Workshop Films. The FEGA Editing Workshop is held every year, with assistance from the Film and Television School. Assistant editors in the guild are invited to take part, at no cost to themselves. The workshop is held over three weekends and each student is given rushes of a commercial and drama-comedy movie segment. The first weekend is devoted to the students editing the drama or com­ edy (whichever has been decided on by the committee for that year). The second weekend is devoted to editing the com­ mercial and the final weekend allows the students time to lay the sound tracks for mixing — which is done a few weeks later. , During each week-end the committee arranges for a senior editor to introduce the students to their task and to answer questions.

Briefly that is what the FEGA workshop is about. Students who have taken part: find that the basic grounding they receive during the workshop weekends is of tremendous benefit when they continue in their jobs as assistant film editors.

FEGA is planning another workshop this; year. Committee member, Barry Fawcett, is heading a sub-committee dealing with the planning which is necessary to en­ sure that this year’s workshop is as successful as those in the past.

The Film Editors’ Guild of Australia is an active, viable guild and its activities and involvement in the industry span a. large area. It is hoped the guild will con­ tinue to grow and play an important pari: in the Australian film industry. Enquiries are welcome from people working the film industry, who wish to join. Please

write to FEGA, P.O. Box 195, Roseville.

NSW. 2069.

MELBOURNE FILMMAKERS’ CO-OPERATIVE

THE AUSTRALIAN WRITERS’ GUILD

Many people are aware of the history of the Melbourne Filmmakers’ Co­ operative and the crises it has experienc­ ed over the years — the moves to dis­ band it, take it over or just to destroy it.

However, that is the past and it’s the future that’s important now.

The co-op — heavily subsidised by the Film and Television Board — is now working towards becoming a self­ supporting organization. It’s going to take a long time before it is strong enough to survive without grants from the Government — but it’s on the way.

The main thing, however, is that it will survive and grow to fulfil its purpose of bringing Australian movies to the public and getting money back to the film­ makers.

The co-op operates in three areas — the cinem a, distribution and as a resource centre. The cinema screens 14 sessions a week and the programs con­ sist mainly of Australian movies. In some instances, we screen movies from Bolivia, Cuba, Argentina, France, etc., in the programs — all experimental or un­ derground.

The cinema will be the co-op’s main source of revenue, with other areas such as distribution coming sharply into focus.

We have been trying to restrict the 8 pm session purely to Australian movies such as Dalmas, 27A, Come Out Fighting, Yakkety Yak. If there are insuf­ ficient feature length movies, a program of a particular film m aker’s work is shown.

At the 10 p.m. session we usually screen Third World movies coupled with Australian shorts between five and 30 minutes long.

W e h o p ed to run m any sh o rt Australian movies at a 6 pm session but there just weren’t enough people coming when we put them on. We haven’t scrapped the idea yet but will wait till we consolidate our 8 and 10 pm sessions before venturing again Into the 6 pm sessions. Midnight sessions on Friday and Saturday night are mainly overseas movies, again coupled with Australian movies. The overseas movies range from Charlie Chaplin to Peter W atkins’ Gladiators or Adolfas Mekas’ Going Home back to Luis Bunuel’s Robinson

The Australian Writers’ Guild has in­ troduced its first Industry-wide Agree­ ment — and is now beginning to realize what the world ‘hassle’ means.

The guild is facing opposition from the networks and the packagers in spite of the fact that it is NOT claiming an in­ crease in rates for writers (with the ex­ ception of a few sections in some categories — mainly radio).

This is in response to the Federal government’s general request to unions for restraint in wage claims during Australia’s current inflationary period.

The guild feels that a demand for in­ creased fees at this time would be irresponsible and would merely add to the inflationary spiral.

However, it has not lost sight of the fact that its main responsibility is to its members, particularly the less establish­ ed majority still struggling to gain a foothold in a competitive market.

Because of this, the guild committee has introduced into the agreement a system which splits the rate for each category into three — as an additional in­ centive to producers to use new talent.

These rates are (a) Basic (b) Going, and (c) Bonus.

The going rate is taken as the stan­ dard or average rate currently being paid to reasonably well-established writers.

The basic rate will apply to new or less-experienced writers. This rate is calculated at 25 per cent less than the going rate.

The bonus rate applies to those writers in a position, through their experience, to negotiate fees with producers. This rate will be based on the going rate.

The agreement, which has been nine months in the making, will take effect from the date of signing and covers all writers working for producers engaged in the creation of all radio and television programs as defined.

In the past, the guild has negotiated separate agreements with individual producers for different conditions at various times — a number of them within weeks of each other. Such a procedure is not now, and probably never was, a prac­ ticality.

This agreement, however, will place all producers on an equal footing, simplify dealings with individual writers and stan­ dardize fees and conditions throughout the country.

Unlike previous agreem ents, its provisions are not negotiable. They represent a realistic set of conditions to bring the Australian industry into line w ith b a s ic p r in c ip le s a c c e p te d throughout the English-speaking world.

For instance, the payment of local and overseas residuals is not only accepted as a fair return for the writer’s creativity; it is a tenet recognized by international copyright law.

The Industry-wide Agreement has the support of Actors’ and Announcers’ Equity Association of Australia, the Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees’ Association, the Australian B ro a d c a s tin g C o m m is s io n S ta ff Association, the W riters’ Guild of America East, the W riters’ Guild of America West, the Writers’ Guild of Great Britain, and the Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists.

Crusoe.

Distribution suffered a few setbacks last year due to lack of finance. However, it’s now back on its feet and working to w a rd s a h ig h e r re tu rn to th e film m akers. W e’re getting Into the schools and clubs and, hopefully in the next few months, we’ll be knocking on the doors of a few television executives and movie distributors to present them with Australian movies that come up to the requirem ents they believe are necessary for them to be accepted by the public. More information on this In the next issue.

As a resource centre the co-op is offering many services: Editing facilities with the following equipment; moviola, pic sync, four gang sync with amp and mixer, splicers (tape and cement), two HKS viewers and assorted split reels, spring locks etc. etc. all at cheap rates.

Files on where to hire equipment, talent, technicians, writers etc.; files on where to buy equipment (second hand or new, overseas or in Australia). Assistance on p re p a rin g bud g ets, Operating, equipment, laboratory processes and pitfalls. ’

COLUMNS

We are also into getting a movie workshop off the ground. Hopefully, we will be running up to two of these each year. If you are interested in joining (or rejoining) the co-op, get in touch with us. 1975 is going to be a big year for the co-op so be part of it. After all it’s there for people who love films.

THE AUSTRALIAN CINEMATOGRAPHERS SOCIETY The Australian Cinematographers’ Society was formed 15 years ago and was the first organization of its type to be started within the local film industry. It is controlled by a federal executive elected from executive committees of the various State bodies.

There is an affinity between the ACS and similar bodies overseas such as the American Society of Cinematographers and th e British Society of Cinematographers.

Whereas overseas societies have con­ cerned themselves with promoting the exchange of ideas and cinematographic standards between established cameramen, the ACS has extended this concept to include younger cinematographers and assistants as well.

Other members of the film industry such as laboratory experts, motion picture engineering specialists, experienced editors, etc., are encouraged and invited to join the society as associate members.

Regular monthly meetings are held with the accent usually on assisting younger members. Because of the s o c i e t y ’s r a p p o r t with o v e r s e a s o r gani z a t i ons and the cont i nui ng overseas experience of some of the society members, it has access to current technical information.

The constitution of the ACS demands that the society be non-profit making and

non-political. This has resulted in an un­ inhibited cross-fertilization of ideas between members and between other organizations.

To co m p are, m aintain and raise professional cinematographic standards in the industry, the society conducts an annual Milli Award event where awards are presented for outstanding achieve­ ment in various fields of cinematography.

M e m b e r s w h o s e s t a n d a r d of cinematography is of consistently high nature, or who have shown outstanding t a l e n t in a s p e c i f i c f i e l d of cinematography, are honored by the society with accreditation and are per­ mitted to use the letters ACS after their names. In this way the society draws attention to the standard of work of the individual—work which could go un­ recognized by other sections of the film industry.

One of the society’s major concerns is the lack of adequate formal training facilities for cameramen in Australia.

Traditionally, training was achieved by the trainee working under practising cameramen at the large studios. But as most studios have closed down or have become fragmented, this form of training has almost ceased to exist. This will ultimately lead to a lowering of cinematic standards.

The society believes that facilities for formal training should be urgently es­ tablished, either separately or in con­ junction with the new Film and Television School.'

Since methods, techniques and aesthetic ideas are constantly changing in the industry, the society believes in the practical feasibility of using as instruc­ tors distinguished, working cinematographers — between com­ mitments — as in leading training schools overseas.

The society also believes that the local industry should be strong and viable and capable of absorbing graduates from such an institution.

Back Issues ISSUE 1: Decem ber 1973 e Exclusive, in-depth interview with Ken G. Hall e Script-writer David Williamson interviewed e Production Report on The Cars That Ate Paris

• Special report: The Tariff Board Inquiry • Special effects animator Ray Harryhausen inter­ viewed. . . . $1.75

plus postage*

ISSU E 2: April 1974

e Special Censorship issue featuring an interview with Chief Censor Richard Prowse 9 Violence in the Cinema: Report by Patricia Edgar o Scriptwriter Frank Moorhouse interviewed e Production Report on Between Wars e Nicholas Roeg interviewed e Hollywood Agents . . . $1.75

plus postage* ISSUE 3: July 1974

ISSU E 4: Decem ber 1974

® Special interview with William Friedkin e Feature article on special effects animator Willis O’Brien, creator of King Kong e Production Report on The True Story of Eskimo

e Special: Film Archives Report • Script-writer Cliff Green interviewed 9 Werner Herzog Interviewed s Production Report on A Salute to the Great

Nell e Melbourne and Sydney Film Festivals reviewed. e Reviews of Zardoz, Don’t Look Now and Crystal Voyager.

McCarthy

® Perth Film Festival report e Reviews of Between Wars, Petersen, Am arcord, Yaketty Yak and others . . . $1.50

plus postage*

. . . $1.50

plus postage*

LIMITED NUMBERS

i— ..............— -— —-------—— — — — —— .....................

□ □ □ □

Back Issues

copie(s) of Number 1 @ $1.75

........

copie(s) of Number 2 @ $1'.75 ........ copie(s) of Number 3 @ $1.50 ........ copie(s) of Number 4 @ $1.50 ........ ♦ POSTAGE: Add 50c per copy » TOTAL AMOUNT ENCLOSED: $ ........

.

I NAME ......................................................................................................................... \ ADDRESS ......................................................................................... POSTCODE i 1—

CINEMA PAPERS 143 Therry Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —

—

— —

—

PP A 5075

Rathe introduce two craftsm an camerasD S 8 and 16mm.

Both are professional.

Possibly the latest electronic Duolight cameras fro m the Pathe cockerell look like ugly ducklings, but look at their capabilities: The electronic double super 8 version takes one hundred feet o f film which after processing becomes tw o hundred feet in the super 8 form at.

The 16m m version o f the camera is similar in design to the DS8.

Either camera w ill take an auxiliary 4 0 0 fo o t magazine w ith its own m otor and autom atic camera connections that w ill provide long running capability.

The new exposure meter has no moving needle, but solid state electronics w ith LED display. The CdS cell is behind the lens and gives accurate measurement whether the camera is running or not. It drives the lens

DEPEND ON IT

diaphragm autom atically through a servo m otor, so you can concentrate on film ing.

The meter is also coupled w ith f.p.s. control, the variable shutter opening and film sensitivity (1 0 -4 0 0 A S A ).

The speed range is remarkable: 8, 18, 25, 4 8 , 6 4 and 8 0 fps, forward or reverse, with variable shutter opening for lap dissolves.

T w o sync sound systems: A built-in pilot tone, 5 0 H z at 25 fps for use w ith pilot tone tape recorders and single fram e pulse sync fo r use w ith the new pulse systems. No extras to buy.

Lenses are interchangeable, using a threelens turret that takes standard C m ount lenses. You can also use some still camera lenses w ith adapters. Choose a lens to create the effect you want. You might like to start

with Angenieux's new f 1.2 zoom lens, w ith focal lengths from 6 to 80m m . That's a 13.3 to 1 zoom ratio.

Viewing is reflex through a ground glass screen w ith hairlines. It also provides an exposure indicator, battery charge level indicator and T V framing limits. Compare its com pact dimensions and weight (7lbs) w ith what you're carrying around.

N ow which is the ugly duckling?

W rite for literature. Or phone fo r a demon­ stration at Photim port (Aust) Pty Ltd. Melbourne: 6 9 Nicholson St, East Brunswick. 38 6 9 2 2 . Sydney: 17 A lberta St. 26 292 6. Brisbane: 2 4 4 St Paul's Terrace, Fortitude V alley. 52 8 1 8 8 . Adelaide: L H Marcus Pty Ltd, 2 4 2 Pirie St. 23 2946.

Perth: L Gunzburg Pty Ltd, 3 3 9 Charles St, N orth Perth. 28 3 37 7.

IT'S FROM PHOTIMPORT

Cinema Papers, March-April — 89

A MATTER OF FACT

Continued from P.47

accep ted it fo r real a n d b eh aved so co m p letely n a tu ra lly th a t it w as possible fo r us to get b eau tifu l an d a u th e n tic p ictu res o f A u stra lia n fau n a carry in g on th e ir n o rm a l lives. A t play — an d in fear o f th e ir lives w hen m en w ith g uns cam e to th e glade.

I w an t th e reco rd on th is film to be stra ig h t once an d fo r all, especially as to th e w ork o f tw o excep­ tio n a l m e n w h o a r e u n a b le to s p e a k fo r them selves, th e late G eo rg e H e a th an d J. A lan (G eo rg e) K enyon. A n d th a t trib u te to th e m does n o t o v erloo k in any w ay th e c o n trib u tio n th a t S h ep h erd , his s ta ff an d m an y o th ers m ade.

T h e film has n o t so fa r been seen on T V in this c o u n try becau se o f so m e d ifficulty over rig h ts and th is is u n fo rtu n a te becau se the first tw o reels sta n d up as a b eau tifu l p resen tatio n o f a section of th e fau n a o f this c o u n try behaving n o rm ally in (a p p a re n tly ) n a tu ra l su rro u n d in g s.

T h e sh o o tin g plan on this film w as qu ite stra ig h tfo rw a rd . K n o ck o ff all th e in terio rs, ta k e th e co m p an y on lo c atio n to B u rra g o ra n g V alley fo r th e m a jo r ex terio rs leaving th e b ulk o f th e stu d io space to be occupied by G eo rg e K en y o n ’s carefu lly p lan n ed an d d raw n up setting. H e used th e real th in g all th e tim e — g rass sods, grow ing bu sh , sh ru b s, trees etc., — I still have an Illa w a rra L ily gro w in g in m y g ard en th a t cam e fro m th a t set b u ilt g e ttin g on fo r 40 y ears ago! T h e g rass w as w atered daily an d actu ally grew b ecau se o f th e h e a t fro m a n u m b e r o f tw o an d five kw ., lights w e h ad a rra n g e d to be tu rn e d on fo r p erio d s each d ay in o rd e r to accu sto m th e an im als to th e a r­ tificial co n d ition s.

T h e ’ro o s to o k to th e settin g like d u ck s to w ater. T h ey w ere soon p laying a ro u n d th e g lade, d rin k in g a t th e pool, living th e life o f R iley on a lucern e d iet.

W h en w e b ro u g h t th e co m p an y in fro m locatio n we w ere finished w ith th e cast an d h ad th e p ictu re in th e b ag — ex cep t fo r th e all im p o rta n t o pening an im al sequences.

L eo C rack n ell, an old circus an d vaudeville p e r­ fo rm er w ho, w ith his w ife, had a w h ip -crack in g an d sh arp -sh o o tin g a ct, w as in c h arg e o f th e an im als. L eo h ad a p ro p list o f th e an im als w e’d req u ire — b ecau se th e scrip t called fo r th e m — long b efo re sh o o tin g b egan on th e film . H e cam e u p w ith so m e w e h ad n o t o rd ered an d w herever p ossible w e w o rk ed th e m into th e sto ry .

I am fra n k ly am azed th a t Bill S h ep h erd w ould allow h im se lf to be q u o ted as saying, “ . . . I d id n o t know how it w as going to w ork o u t u n til I ’d run all th e fo o tag e an d d ecided on how to cu t one sh o t w ith th e n ex t” (sic) “ I h a d n ’t been given a sto ry lin e fo r th a t section e t c . . . ” T h a t sta te m e n t is ju s t a b ald u n tru th . H e h ad th e scrip t — 12 pages o f it dev o ted to th is se­ q u en ce alo ne. T h e o rig in al sto ry w as w ritten by A u stra lia n a u th o re ss, D o ro th y C o tterill, th e n liv­ ing in M ia m i, F lo rid a , an d published in McCalls Magazine. I t w as a d a p te d to th e screen by E d ­ m o n d S ew ard , th e n on th e C in eso u nd s ta ff h aving been b ro u g h t in fro m H olly w o od . I h ad a lo t to do w ith th e scrip ted sto ry becau se I knew I h a d to b r­ ing to life w h at w as on p ap er an d I did n o t w a n t an y ‘im p o ssib le’ actio n w ritten in by a m a n u n ­ fa m ilia r w ith A u stra lia n an im als an d w h at you m ig h t possibly g et th e m to do.

W e sh o t th e an im al sequence to th e scrip ted sto ry lin e em bellish in g it w here w e could an d th e an im als w ould co -o p e ra te , an d in tro d u cin g new an im als as they b ecam e available.

B ut th e sto ry o f C h u t, th e jo e y o rp h a n e d by a sh o t fro m a h u n te r’s gun, w as th e sam e sto ry on - th e screen th a t S ew ard h ad w ritten in th e screen p lay th e o rig in al o f w hich I still h av e in m y possession.

T h ere can be no ifs o r b u ts ab o u t it, th a t’s th e w a y it w a s ! T h e r e w e r e a d d it i o n s a n d em b ellish m en ts as I have said b u t th ese d id n o t d ev ia te fro m th e o rigin al storyline.

A p a r t fro m th e s c r ip t — to w h ic h a ll d e p a rtm e n ts w o rk e d — S h e p h e rd g o t a d ­ d itio n ally , a lm o st every d ay , n otes I d ic ta te d to 90 — Cinema Papers, March-April

Je a n S m ith a b o u t th e d a y ’s sh o o tin g as well as th e n o tes she to o k in th e n o rm a l co u rse o f h e r du ties.

T h ey in d icated how an d w here incid en ts w e h ad m a n ag ed to c a p tu re — often by go od luck b u t w ith a grow ing cap ac ity on ev ery b o d y ’s p a rt to a n tic ip a te w h at th e an im als m ig h t be expected to do in given circu m stan ces — m ig h t b e used.

F u rth e r S h ep h erd w as on th e set each d ay dis­ cussing w ith m e th e ed itin g w hich w as pro ceed in g w hile we w ere sh o o tin g as is th e case w ith all p ro p erly o rg an ized featu re film s.

Is it co n ceiv ab le — as S h ep h erd on his ow n sta te m e n t w ould h ave you believe — th a t H eath an d I, tw o reaso n ab ly in tellig en t people, w ould go on sh oo ting , w ith o u t plan o r p u rp ose, an y th in g an d every th in g , w illy nilly, u n til w e h ad a c ­ cu m u lated in excess o f 6,000m o f u n relate d film all o f w hich w as d u m p ed in S h e p h e rd ’s lap w ith th e sugg estion , “ G o on, m a k e so m eth in g o u t of th a t!”

R eally th a t’s ju s t to o th ick to be sw allow ed an d it w eakens th e m a n ’s cred ib ility all alo ng th e line.

T h e sto ry lin e w as in th e scrip t all th e tim e and th a t is w h at S h ep h erd (ably assisted by P hyllis O ’R eilly an d T e rry B anks on this film ) w o rk ed to.

A copy o f th e original scrip t is in th e N a tio n a l L ib ra ry , C a n b e rra , w here any b od y can verify w h at I have said.

Bill S h ep h erd did a go od jo b o f ed itin g on Orphan as he did on all film s he edited for C in eso u nd . B ut o th ers also d id splendid jo b s as I h ave tried to show in th is factu al sto ry o f w h at re a lly h a p p e n e d . G e o rg e H e a th , a c re a tiv e c in e m a to g ra p h e r, w as sh o o tin g “ on th e fly” a lot o f th e tim e on th e se an im al sequences. Y o u can ­ n o t d irect k a n g a ro o s — ju s t as you d o n ’t ‘d ire c t’ P rim e M in isters.

Y ou p lace a c a rp e t sn ak e, fo r in stan ce n e a r a joey an d w ait to see w h at will h ap p en . Y ou h o pe th e sn ak e will m enace th e jo e y b ecause th a t is w h at th e scrip t calls for. B ut you d o n ’t alw ays get w h at you w an t. T h e first tim e th e sn ak e slith ers p ast an d th e little ’ro o , q u ite u n a fra id , m erely sniffs a t th e rep tile’s body.

It to o k a lot o f tim e, an d p atien ce to get the sn ak e to appear to be m enacin g th e little ’ro o . B ut w ith go od cro ss-cu ttin g o f c .u .’s o f th e sn ak e an d ’roo, plus a lucky m id-shot- o f th e rep tile curling a ro u n d th e ro o ’s body (th a n k s to th e sm a rt w ork o f th e alw ays in v alu ab le set-assistan ts Ju lian S avieri an d th e late G eo rg e Y ates), we g o t w hat w e w an ted .

G eo rg e H e a th w as trem e n d o u sly en th u siastic on th is sequence. I, o r so m eo n e else, m ig h t n o tice one o r m o re ’ro o s a b o u t to d o so m eth in g we could use an d signal G eorge. H e in tu rn w ould h a n d ­ signal th e electricians on th e g an tries an d they w ould have arcs stru c k an d fives sw ung o n to th e objective in no tim e a t all. F ra n k B agn all, assis­ ta n t c a m e ra , w ould h ave to m a k e a sn ap ju d g m e n t on focus an d w e’d be rolling. T h a t w ay w e got so m e m arv ello u sly n a tu ra l p ic tu res n o t only o f k a n g a ro o s b u t o f dingoes, rab b its, sn ak es, an d o f a ro g u e em u w ho, as soon as he w as set free on th e set, b egan ch asing th e d oes an d jo e y s all over th e p lace, b eatin g a t th e m w ith his w ings. A n d then, to m a k e o u r d ay , th e O ld M a n R o o g o t fed u p an d to o k to th e em u, w rap p ing his forepaw s ro u n d th e cran k y b ird ’s neck an d k ickin g him in th e slats w ith his pow erful hind h o p p ers. A n d H e a th ’s c a m e ra w as on th e a ctio n all th e w ay. T h a t w as n o t in th e scrip t b u t it is certain ly in th e pictu re.

D id n ’t need m uch ed itin g eith e r. W en t in p ra c ­ tically ‘in o n e’.

T h e sm all crew on th a t sequence d id a fan tastic jo b an d in ad d itio n to th o se alread y m en tio n ed w ere, if m e m o ry serves m e, Jo h n n y M cC o lL an d S now L au n t on th e lights.

Orphan of the Wilderness w on th e F ilm C ritics A w ard o f 1937, w as released in E n glan d , A m e ric a (as Wild Innocence) on th e c o n tin en t an d ran on A m e ric an T V in th e early fifties. It achieved all th a t n o t b ecau se o f th e w ay it w as edited, p h o to g rap h ed , designed o r d irected b u t b ecau se o f its sh eer e n te rta in m e n t value an d th e n ovelty an d ch arm o f an im als b eh aving co m p letely n a tu ra lly

in w h at seem ed to th e au d ie n c e to b e th e ir n a tu ra l h a b ita t.

T w o final thin g s need co m m en t in o rd e r to g et th e reco rd stra ig h t. T h e first h as to d o w ith

Smithy:

Shirley: Did you edit Smithy? 1 notice Terry Banks received editor’s credit.

Shepherd: I edited the two reels containing the Pacific flight. They were the main reels and Hall wanted me to work on them. The description of the trip took ONE PAGE IN THE SCRIPT and I estimated that it would come out at 600 m. "

T h a t is ju s t n o t tru e an d leaves th e im ­ p licatio n th a t T e rry B ank s w as n o t c ap ab le o f ed itin g th e ‘tw o m a in reels’. T h e facts a re th a t I used S h ep h erd , in th e absen ce o f R o n W h elan , as a ssistan t d ire c to r on Smithy. T e rry B ank s w as film e d ito r, assisted by S ta n M o o re . B ecause o f p ressure we g o t from C o lu m b ia w ho w ere ask in g fo r th e finished film u rg en tly , I p u t S h ep h erd , by now free o f his o th er d u ties, o n to th e P acific flight reels.

F o r him to say “ th e d escrip tio n o f th e flight too k one p age in th e scrip t an d I e stim ated it w ould co m e o u t a t 6 0 0 m ” , show s clearly th a t he is having scrip t tro u b le ag ain . H ow d oes a p ro d u c ­ tio n crew g et 600m , o u t o f one p ag e o f script?

T h e facts a re th a t th e P acific flight A L O N E oc­ cupied 12 pages o f scrip t n o t co u n tin g an y o f th e n u m ero u s pages dev o ted to th e lead u p to an d a fte rm a th o f th e flight. H e re ag ain w h at w ent o n to th e screen w as in th e scrip t.

T e rry B anks g o t film ed ito r cred it on Smithy becau se th a t w as w h at he w as! A n d no a m o u n t o f w ild o v ersta tem en t can a lte r an y o f th ese facts.

O n e fin a l th in g n eed s a tte n tio n . I q u o te S hep h erd : “ In 1937-38 w e sta rte d pressing fo r a union in th e in d u stry an d th e only reaso n I w asn ’t sa c k e d w as b e c a u s e C in e so u n d c o u ld n ’t d o w ith o u t m e. W e h ad a m eetin g atte n d e d by H a ll, th e C in e s o u n d e m p lo y e s a n d p e o p le fro m F ilm craft. W hen we w en t b ack to w ork n ext m o rn in g everybody w as p u t on th e m a t an d ask ed w hy they h ad been a t the^m eeting. W e’d h av e g o t an in d u stry go in g th en w hich w ould h ave been a terrific th in g . . . ” H e fails to explain how giving th e finan cial p rincip als un io n tro u b le an d sh o o tin g up co sts w ould have g o t an in d u stry going — o ne w as g o ­ ing anyw ay. B ut I can assu re him w ith ab so lu te certain ty th a t if he h ad been ab le to p ersu ad e his colleagues to follow his lead , C in eso u nd , w ith th e w o rld-w ar inevitab ly closing in an d pessim ism all a b o u t, w ould h ave closed dow n in 1938 in stead o f 1940!

S h ep h erd h as m e a t th is m eetin g — w hich I did n o t a tte n d — b u t fails to ex p lain how , n ex t m o r­ ning, I w as suddenly ab le to ch an g e h a ts an d p u t everybody on th e m a t fo r being there! “ I 'w as n o t sa c k e d ” says S h ep h erd , “ b ecau se C in eso u nd co u ld n o t do w ith o u t m e .”

O n th a t n o te — an d , very g enuinely, m o re in so rro w th a n in an g er — I will rest th is case w hich is o n e fo r so m e o f th o s e m e m b e rs o f th e C in eso u nd o rg an iz atio n to w hom th e co m p an y , an d I, ow e so m u ch an d to w h o m , in th e S h ep h erd interview , ju stic e h as n o t been done. • STILLS THIS ISSUE Special thanks to Wendell Watkins and the N.F.T.A. Film Archive.

Anthony Buckley CIC ' Columbia Crawford Productions David Elfick Filmways Val Frost Hexagon Home Entertainment Film Library National Library of Australia — Films Division Andrew Pike Eric Reade Roadshow Graham Shirley .

South'Australian Film Corporation Terry rod Productions Tracks .

20th Century Fox Universal Pictures

SYDNEY UNIVERSITY FILM GROUP

RE-LAM PING I USE FILMS AVAILABLE FOR HIRE M

LOLA MONTES (1956) Max Ophuls’ legendary last film — a new 35 mm Cinemascope color print — 110 mins. — the largest surviving version of this film. With Peter Ustinov, Mar­ tine Carol and Anton Walbrook. French language with English subtitles.

Also available soon — two films by Polish director, K. Zanussi — FAMILY LIFE (1972) and BEHIND THE WALL (1972) — both 16mm prints with English subtitles.

Also available on 16mm: SHOCK CORRIDOR (Fuller), HISTORY LESSON (Straub), DIARY OF A SHINJUKI THIEF (Oshim a), HOUR OF THE FURNACES (Solamas), BARRIER (Skolimowski), WALKOVER (Skolimowski), WHITE NIGHTS (Visconti), and others.

Write for catalogue to Sydney University Film Group, Box 28, The Union, University of Sydney 2006, enclosing S.A.E. (11c stamp + 4x9 env.) Tel.: 660 2365 a.h.

Sydney University Film Group screens twice weekly during term at the Sydney University.

Membership $9 per year (non-students), $5 (students).

April 15-19: Premiere screening of

£

m

£

m

i m

For your supply of Studio & Projection Lamps Color and Lighting Correction Filters Reflection and Diffusion Materials Phone 870 5616 (Melbourne) all hours.

2 Bemboka Road, Warranwood, 3134 Melbourne, Vic.

Your needs are our concern.

Our clients will tell you.

LOLA MONTES .

ASIAN CINEMA A series of 10 illustrated evening lecture-discussions about the films of KUROSAWA, RAY and others.

• Course begins June 24 e Enrolment open now.

Enquiries: Council of Adult Education, 256 Flinders Street, MELBOURNE. 3000 Phone: 63 4231

Eiki 16mm projector for sale.

Magnetic and optical sound plus spare parts. Serviced by distributor since new.

Phone: 977 4635 Write: David Elfick, P.O. Box 590, Manly.

RESTRICTIVE TRADE p r a c t i c e s

Continued from P.83

Appendix C

Appendix D

Independent Theatre case history.

Independent theatre case history

O c to b e r

0,

197.*

PERSONAL

S e p te m b e r

F u r t h e r t o my d i s c u s s i o n s w it h y o u som e m o n th s a g o a n d su b se q u e n t d a te s f o r " '• “ '• an<j :i " p ro g ra m m e s f o r o u r t h e a t r e s .

,

197.

The General Manager,

Y ou a r e a w a re t h a t y o u r c o m p a n y 's r e l a t i o n s h i p w it h M r. o v e r t h e p a s t few y e a r s h a s n o t b ee n o n e o f a n y s a t i s f a c t i o n to e it h e r p a r t y .

T h i s a s y o u may know , came a b o u t w h i l s t f,' r • w as s c r e e n in g y o u r f il m s a t h i s T h e a t r e a n d y o u r c o m p a ny c h e c k e d h i s f i g u r e s , a n d he c l a i m s , u n j u s t l y a c c u s e d him In m a t t e r s r e l a t i n g t o B o x O f f i c e D o c k e t s .

T h e r e f o r e , In s u b s e q u e n t y e a r s he h a s b ee n l o a t h t o d o a n y b u s i n e s s w it h y o u r c o m p a n y .

Dear Set, 7ou w ill be well aware of the fact that I have been operating the . _ . , i(on the past years.

You one also cuoare that when I iS-c/ut commenced operations, Tlwas associated with a group 05 independent drlve-ln theatres which later became ¡mown as the Unfortunately, as time went on, all the other independent datue-.cn theatres In wene fallen oven by one 0|j the major drlve-ln theatre circuits. This was mainly brought about by a shortage of, commercial film. Since the _ _ ceaaed to openate, I haue been gunning my theatre with ¿zcond run films.

Throughout the yeana, I have zndea.voun.ed to remain an Interested member of the motion picture industry and not to se ll out to other theatre operators, as T am vitally Interested In the operation of the drlve-ln theatre and I t is part of my life .

Over the past fete years, I t has become Increasingly difficu lt for me to obtain programmes that are going to be successful at the box office. I have been abte to manage relatively ¡veil and to make a reaosnable living and profit from the theatre, but recently, the expenses of operating the drlve-ln theatre have Increased considerably.

Urges look like Increasing continually which of course, m il make my wagea b lit extremely high and I have just been advised by my accountants that the rates and land taxes for this one theatre will Increase to $ ,000 yearly.

A f t e r d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h y o u a n d w it h M r. o n se p a ra te o c c a s io n s , I w as u n d e r t h e Im p r e s s i o n t h a t y o u w e re p r e p a r e d t o t e k e my w ord t h a t a l l b o x o f f i c e d o c k e t s e t c . , In f u t u r e , w o u ld be 1 0 0 t co rre c t.

We u n d e r s t a n d t h a t y o u h a v e e v e r y r i g h t t o d o s p o t c h e c k s , b u t y o u r I n d i c a t i o n t o me w a s t h a t t h i s w o u ld p r o b a b l y n o t be n e c e s s a r y and c e r t a i n l y t h e r e w o u ld be n o c a u s e f o r a n y a rg u m e n ts o r d is c u s s i o n s o v e r th e m a t t e r.

• I t w a s w it h g r e a t a l a r m t h a t I l e a r n t t h a t y o u had d e c l d . d t o c e ck M r. t h e a t r e n o t w it h o n e c h e c k e r b u t w it h t h r e e .

O b v i o u s l y , y o u d e c id e d n o t t o a b id e b y y o u r o r i g i n a l d e c i s i o n , he f a c t t h a t y o u r c h e c k e r s n o t o n l y c o u n t e d t h e c a r s c o m in g In b u t a l s o w ent a m o n g s t t h e c a r s c o u n t i n g t h e p e o p le In t h « s d id n o t make M r, a n y h a p p i e r and a s y o u kn o w , h e d e c id e d o n th e

-

s p o t a t 7 : 0 0 pm l a s t n i g h t t o t a k e t h e f i l m o f f b e c a u s e 1t, w as a p p a r e n t y o u r co m p a ny d i d n o t w is h t o o p e r a t e In a n o rm a l b u s i n e s s l i k e m anner.

I t h a s n o t b e e n t h e p r a c t i c e o f o t h e r c o m p a n ie s t o c h e c k t h i s t h e a t r e f o r q u i t e som e y e a r s a p a r t fro m t h e o c c a s i o n a l s p o t c h e c k w h ic h I s common t h r o u g h o u t t h e In d u s try .

I have endeavoured to run this drlve-ln theatre as an Independent, without bothering other companies In the motion picture Industry.

However, I now find myself a t a crisis-point where In order to survive, I must demand to be placed on an even and equal footing with major circuits operating in . . I n other words, I muaf demand simultaneous release with either or drlve-ln theatres. I am not asking for release before my opposition companies, but I w ilt not accept In futurt, release after them. AU I am asking for Is an equal opportunity to stay In business.

I am prepared to offer any film company the same film hire terms as paid by the major circu its, to contribute an equal share for the advertising of any film released in my theatre, and to fully co-operate with either or drlve-ln theatres In promoting a film that we would screen on a simultaneous basis.

If this simultaneous release necessitates switching of the film, J am prepared to pay the same rate that Is paid by the other theatres participtting .

I am aune this déicrimiiwtion against my drlve-ln theatre by film companies In favour of major theatre circuits can be discussed by us in a very businesslike manner, as I consider that this Is . a straight business transaction and should be dealt with directly between our two companies. I do not want to be forced Into a position where 1 must seek kelp from an outside aounce and I sincerely ask you to give this matter your utmost and urgent consideration and to contact me at your earliest convenience, In order that we may di **<«■ this matter.

A similar letter Is being sent to other major film distributors and I am asking them also for co-operation at an Industry levU .

Yours faithfully,

I r e m a in , Y o u rs

e .c .

s in c e r e ly ,

»

The

General Manager,

The General Manager,

Appendix E

Two letters concerning allegedly restrictive practices by a distributor.

..

M a rc h

February 27, 197

2 ..

1°7

Mr, M a n a g in g D i r e c t o r ,

Dear

I f I s the I n t e n t i o n o f t h e e x h i b i t o r s t o g o n e x t M e e k w it h a d e n u t a t i o n t o s e e f i l m c o m p a n ie s In S y d n e y a n d a l t o t h e R e s t r i c t i v e T r a d e P r a c t i c e s C o m m is s io n e r M r . Ban n e rm e n In C a n b e rra .

,

A t a m e e t in g o f In d e p e n d e n t '. t h i b l t o r s h e l d In t h is w e e k, I w as a s k e d t o w r i t e t o y o u r co m p anv t o make a fo rm a l c o m p la in t a r j t o b r i n g t o y o u r a t t e n t i o n t h a t In d e p e n d e n t E x h ib i t o r s ^ n a v e had l e o a l o p i n i o n a n d h a v e b een a d v i s e d t h a t y o u r co m p a ny c o u l d be c o n t r a v e n in g t h e R e s t r i c t i v e T r a d e P r a c t i c e s A c t I n w i t h h o l d i n g fro m e x h i b i t o r s In p r in t s o f the f ilm

B e f o r e t ^ e s e e x h i b i t o r s t a k e t h e s e d e s p e r a t e s t e p s , I w ou ld a s k yo u t o o I * e t h i s m a t t e r y o u r Im m e d ia te a t t e n t i o n an d t o r e p l y t o me a s t h e sp o k e sm a n f o r t h e s e e x h i b i t o r s .

Y o u rs s in c e r e ly , I t w as b r o u g h t t o t h e m e e t i n g 's a t t e n t i o n t h a t t h i s f i l m h a s a p p a r e n t l y b een s o t d (to) who a s yo u know I s a su b s id ia r y o f who In t u r n I s a s u b s i d i a r y o f t h e and t h a t a re 100? A u s t r a lia n o vxie d.

I t I s s e v e r e l y e f f e c t i n g t h e 11 w i I h ood o f some e x h i b i t o r s t o h ^ ve t h e e s t a b l i s h e d p r a c t i c e o f s c h o o l s c r e e n i n g s t a k e n aw ay fro m them, p a r t i c u l a r l y s m a ll e x h i b i t o r s w ho r e l y h e a v i l y o n s c h o o l s c r e e n in g s to keep t h e ir t h e a t r e op e n . fh e r r r a c t ic e o f s e l l i n g a f i l m t o a t h e a t r e c h a i n f o r t h e e f f e c t i v e s c h o o l p e r i o d I s n o t o n l y r e s t r i c t i n g t h e t r a d e o f In d e p e n d e n t c in e m a s , b u t I t I s a l v ~ h e a v i l y I n c r e a s i n g t h e c o s t o f e a c h f i l m p e r s t u d e n t a n d In m any c a s e s , d o u b l i n g a n d t r e b l i n g t h e t r a n s p o r t c o s t s f o r s t u d e n t s w h e re t h e y a r e u n a b l e t o g o t o a l o c a l In d e p e n d e n t t h e a t r e , b u t h a ve t o t r a v e l, manv n l t e s t o r e a c 1' o n e o f the o u tle ts .

T h i s s i t u a t i o n i s a l s o e f f e c t i n g t r a v e l l i n g e x h i b i t o r s n a m e ly Me s s r s . who h a ve b u i l t up .* c i r c u i t o v e r th e y e a r s a n d a r e e n d e a v o u r i n g t o m a i n t a i n t h e i r l iv r f l h o o d .

•

.

92 — Cinema Papers, March-April

'

../:

re :

and o t h e r s c h o o l f il m s

It has been b ro u g h t to my a t t e n t io n by a number o f V i c t o r i a n Ind e pe n de n t e x h i b i t o r s and o u r owo s t a f f t h a t y o u r company has s o ld the e x c l u s i v e r l q h t s o f the f i l m ‘ to Are you aw are t h a t t h i s I s c o n t r a v e n in g the R e s t r i c t i v e T ra d e P r a c t i c e s A c t 7 T h is m a tt e r h a s been r e f e r r e d f o r le g a l o p i n io n and we belie ve t h a t b o th y o u r s e l v e s and a re p a r t i e s to t h is re s t ric t io n .

I t I s a gra ve ly s e r i o u s m a tt e r a l s o because I t i n t e r f e r e s with the education o f school c h i l d r e n .

c .c .

M r.

M r.

M r. R „ J.

, E x h ib it o r s A s s o c ia t io n , M o tio n P ic t u r e D i s t r i b u t o r s A s s o c i a t i o n Haw ke.

We have on f i l e s c h o o l s who have reported that they have to t r a v e l some 2° m i le s t o a V illa g e Theatre. The c o st o f t r a n s p o r t and t h e a t r e a d m is s io n fo r some of these schools makes th e e x c u r s i o n qu ite Im possible .

In our own theetres we c h a r g e A0 e - 5 0 * per head fo r adm ission to t h is film .

four up w it h th e ir h a n d s,

O ffic e Manager, Hr. has taken t h is and they have refused to a llo w the p r in t out o f

B e fo re t h i s I s y o u r o p i n io n .

ta k e n t o th e F e d e r a l G overnm ent, I would lik e

»nst w ish es,

Colorfilm Pty Ltd 35 Missenden Rd., Camperdown, NSW Also at 2 Clarendon St, Artarmon NSW. Phone 51 61066. Telex: Sydney AA 24545

JOHN BRINKS j ANCHOR

Specialising exclusively in negative matching

NEGATIVE CUTTING

P O O K JH O P First Floor, Crystal Palace Building, 590 George Street, Sydney, 2000.

Phone 61 2569 or 61 2604.

FAMED SPECIALISTS IN FILM BOOKS AND MAGAZINES (for Fans and Professionals)

OUR VAST STOCK NOW INCLUDES INTERNATIONAL FILM GUIDE 1975. $3.95 THE HOLLYWOOD PROFESSIONALS, Vol. 3: Hawks, Borzage and Ulmer, $2.95

FILM 73/74. (paperback) $5.95 THE CRITICAL INDEX, a bibliography of articles on film in English 1946-1973. $8.25 DEVELOPMENT OF THE FILM. An interpretive history. By Alan

FEATURE FILMS TELEVISION SERIES SHORT SUBJECTS DOCUMENTARIES COMMERCIALS

Casty, $8.20

AND IN THE SCREEN TEXTBOOK SERIES: PHOTOGRAPHIC THEORY FOR THE MOTION PICTURE CAMERAMAN. Ed. Russell Campbell, $3.65 PRACTICAL MOTION PICTURE PHOTOGRAPHY. Ed. R. Campbell, $3.65

FILM DESIGN. Ed. T. St. John Marner, $4.35 DIRECTING MOTION PICTURES. Ed. T. St. John Marner, $3.65

Write for our full stocklist.

All mail ordersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; postage extra.

NEGATIVE CUTTING SERVICES PTY LIMITED 13-15 Myrtle Street, Crows Nest, NSW, 2065 Telephone (02) 922 3607

ASK FOR MARILYN OR RON DELANEY 0

Film Review Inform ation Service

th e kiwi film com pany pty. ltd.

post production specialists film editing editing rooms sound recording preview theatre 8 3 millerstreet north Sydney. 2060 telephone 9294111 a.n. 9493228

The George Lugg Library welcomes en­ quiries on local and overseas films. On request, photostat copies of synopses, articles, reviews will be forwarded.

Please detail specific information re­ quired and send S.A.E. plus 50 cents ser­ vice fee to: The George Lugg Library P.O. Box 357 Carlton South Vic. 3053 The Library is operated with assistance from the Film and Television Board.

HOYTS THEATRES FILMMAKERS FELLOWSHIP

CINEACTION DISTRIBUTES Avant-Garde, Third World, Radical, Feminist and good films of all types on 16mm and 35mm.

Some of our films include:

Hoyts Theatres Limited sponsor annually a Fellowship to encourage the standard of quality of production of Australian motion pictures.

The Fellowship is for a training period of six months in the Twentieth Century Fox Los Angeles Studios.

Enquiries for the 1975 Fellowship are being specifically called from those people in the Motion Picture or Television Industry who have had experience in “ Special Effects” and who wish to gain further knowledge in this field.

Applicants should be permanent residents of Australia.

Marco Leto’s LA VILLEGGIATURA (16mm & 35mm) Satyajit Ray’s DiSTANT THUNDER (16mm) Godard’s LETTER TO JANE & TOUT VA BIEN (16mm) Peter Robinson’s ASYLUM (16mm) Remundo Gleyzer’s THE TRAITORS (16mm) Mireille Dansereau’s DREAM LIFE (16mm) Miriam Weinstein’s LIVING WITH PETER (16mm) Claude Faraldo’s BOF! (16mm) and shortly: Agnes Varda’s LION’S LOVE (16mm)

Write or ring for our catalogue

Enquiries should be directed to:—

The Assistant Director, Film and Television School, P.O. Box 245, CHATSWOOD, N.S.W. 2067.

79-81 Cardigan Street, Carlton P.O. Box 350 Carlton South, Victoria, 3053 Phone: 347 5902 & 347 6295

AUSTRALIAN FILMS from the VINCENT LIBRARY Australian Film Institute 1975 Catalogue Available ($2) 79-81 CARDIGAN STREET, CARLTON SOUTH, 3053.

TELEPHONE: 347 6888 TELEGRAMS: FILMINSTITUTE/MELBOURNE

365A PITT STREET, SYDNEY, 2000 TELEPHONE: 61 2743 TELEGRAMS: FILMINSTITUTE/SYDNEY

r u u u u u -^ ASSOCIATION OF TEACHERS OF FILM AND VIDEO .

"packed with useful material.’’

Colin Bennett

1975 GREATER UNIO N AWARDS FOR AUSTRALIAN SHORT FILMS Prize for Best Film in DOCUMENTARY Category: $1,000 Prize for Best Film in FICTION Category: $1,000 Prize for Best Film in GENERAL Category: $1,000

Presented in association with the

SYDNEY FILM FESTIVAL on June 1st, 1975

SUBSCRIBE Three issues of the magazine plus screenings, workshops, conferences.

Membership $8.00 ($10.00 for schools). Tax deductable.

ENTRY FORMS NOW AVAILABLE Eligible films must be under 1 hour in length, must be in­ dependently made, produced in Australia and completed since April 18th, 1974.

Last date for entries: April 17.

BOX 4934 GPO SYDNEY NSW 2001

Name ..

Address

TELEPHONE 660 3909 TELEGRAMS SYDFEST SYDNEY

Association of Teachers of Film and Video, C/o W. Levy, 11 Mercer Road, Armadale, Vic. 3143

FILM & TV COURSE at The Film and Television School Sydney

A pplications are invited for the 1976 three-year course of the School’s Full-time Program.

24 PLACES ARE OFFERED The School is interested in attracting applicants who wish to work professionally in creative areas of ...........................

FILM & TELEVISION and in EDUCATION The Full-tim e Program offers intensive practically oriented training in production, direction, w riting, editing, cinematography, sound recording and production management.

The training qualifies people to work in the Film and Television Industry.

It also qualifies people to work in EDUCATION— as teachers of film, TV or media, or in the production of educational films.

All students undertake a common first year course in all the craft bases of film and television technique. The second and third years are devoted to increasing specialisation and to extending the students’ professional and cultural knowledge and awareness.

Living allowances are paid.

Training is conducted at the School’s premises at North Ryde, Sydney. There are no rigid rules about age or educational qualifications, but people around 18 to 23 and with the Higher School Certificate have an advantage.

Supporting material as evidence of creative ability is required. Applications must be made on the School’s official application form. Application forms and brochures (containing detailed information) can be obtained by sending the coupon below to: The Enrolments Officer P.O. Box 245, Chatswood, N.S.W. 2067 or by phoning: The Enrolments Officer Sydney 412 1077.

----------------- APPLICATIONS CLOSE AT 5.00 PM, FRIDAY 30 MAY 1975 ----------------To: The Film and Television School, P.O. Box 245, Chatswood, N.S.W., 2067

Please send me complete details about your 3-year, full-time course, and an official application form. I understand it may be 10 days before this is posted to me.

PRINT IN BLOCK LETTERS

T

Philip Morris Arts Grant film division lends award winning shorts, no charge, to recognised film societies.

John Dixon: Ballads of Men and Horses. '■ II mins.

Bileoek and Copping: Count Basie in Australia.

13 mins.

Orson lifeiles narrates: The Last of The Wild Mustangs. II mins.

And others.

Enquiries: Corporate Affairs Department.

Philip Morris Ltd. P.O. Box 03 Moorabbin Vie. 3180

FT25

Name.............................................................. ......................................................

Age..............................

Occupation at present.

Address.......................

Postcode

AUCTION

SOUTH MELBOURNE THURSDAY, 24TH APRIL at 3.00 pm.

23 UNION STREET

Two Story Brick Building With Character.

SHOWCAST Actors Directory — 1975 Edition now available. 1500 entries $15.00

VARIETY Entertainers Directory — 1975 Edition available July.

Com prehensive listing of all known variety ar­ tists $10.00

L A N D : 30’ x 50’. ROW a t side.

B U I L D IN G : 3 ,0 0 0 sq . ft. ap p ro x .

E x c e lle n t l o c a t io n c lo s e C lare n d o n S tree t.

R E N T A L : $4,680 p.a.

CONTACTS Information Directory — 1974 Edition now available, 3000 entries of who Is who and where In the Entertain­ ment industry $5.00

T E R M S : 10% d ep o sit, bal. 60 days.

B A R R IE M . G R IF F IT H S & C O P T Y L T D 545 K IN G S T R E E T , M E L B O U R N E . 329 8011

Showcast Publications

Box 141 Spit Junction 2088.

TELEPHONE­ (02) 969 8500

^NEIGHBOURS EURASIAN SERIES TEN III US RRCUUCEBEy I 11>4 Al M i l l IA

OUR ASIAN NEIGHBOURS is a programme of films which aims to convey everyday life in Asia. The first of the series, covered Thailand. This series is devoted to Indonesia and brings to life its people, customs and their music.

Each film captures the lifestyle of the people in their own environment and vividly identifies with the viewer.

These films are made so as to stimulate interest in and to promote a greater understanding of our asian neighbours.

The stories are told with visual impact and the music is, in most cases, the actual sounds recorded on location; the actors are the people themselves who live, work and play in this absorbing and fascinating region.

FILM AUSTRALIA Eton Road Lindfield (PO Box 46 Lindfield) NSW 2070 Australia Telephone 463241 Telegrams Tilmaust' Sydney Telex 22734

British and U.S. enquiries through Australian Government Film Representatives: Canberra House, 10-16 Maltravers Street, The Strand, London. WC2R 3EH. Australian Information Service, 636 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10020, and at all Australian official posts abroad.

DEPARTMENT OF THE MEDIA

,/~ -

ra os ravourire premium CARLTON

wttHijaget 7

TUI IT