1927 Royal Commission on the Moving Picture Industry in Australia
Cinema Art Films - Posters | Die Grosse Wette 1916 | Metropolis Film Archive | Pandora's Box 1929 | Royal Commission 1927 | Variety 1925
[page 395]
(Taken at Sydney.)
WEDNESDAY, 20TH JULY, 1927.
Present: MR. MARKS, Chairman; Senator Duncan Senator Grant. Mr. Forde. Leslie John Keast, Director and General Manager, Cinema Art Films Limited, Sydney, sworn and examined.
11908. By the Chairman. How long have you occupied your present position?
Since the inception of the company six months ago. It was registered on about 15th December.
11909. Are you an importing company?
Yes. The whole of the capital is Australian.
11910. With which films do you deal?
We are absolutely independent. We buy in every part of the world - Great Britain, the continent and America - whatever films suit us.
11911. Have you imported a large number within the last six months?
We have released, or we are releasing, this year about sixteen in all. I have been engaged in the business for the last seventeen years. The whole of that time has been spent in the industry in Australia in the distributing end, with, of course, the personal touch with the showmen in the various parts of the Commonwealth. Convinced that there was an opening for an independent company in Australia to selected films, particularly British and European productions and conduct this business with ideals that would appeal to Australian exhibitors, Mr. L. P. Hoskins, of the well-known family of Lithgow Hoskins, together with his brother, Mr. E. J. Hoskins, and myself, formed a company. On the 7th July, 1926. Mr. L. P. Hoskins and myself left for England and the continent via America. We succeeded in securing English, American and continental productions of real worth, and also the representation of the Ufa Company, the biggest motion picture producing concern in Europe. On returning to Australia we established a business here known as Cinema Art Films Limited, of which Mr. L. P. Hoskins is managing director, and I am a director and general manager, with a capital of £60,000 which is all Australian money, and all our employees are Australians. Our head office is in Sydney, we have a branch in Victoria and will open offices in all the capital cities of Australia. In New Zealand our representatives are Exhibitors Alliance Films (New Zealand) Limited, a company operating for five years, and formed with New Zealand capital and managed and staffed by New Zealanders. At this juncture I would like to mention that Cinema Art Films Limited is not a dumping ground for a large manufacturing concern, but is only taking our own selection of their output subjects we believe will elevate the industry and encourage the desire for films of an artistic nature, while of course, due regard will be given to popular pictures. Our contracts even with the Ufa Company in no way restrict our activities in furthering the releasing of British films in this country and as a matter of fact nearly 50 per cent. of our releases for the season 1927-28 will be British films, the balance being made up of continental and American subjects. We have entered into a long and satisfactory contract with Stolls, probably one of the biggest and most successful of British film manufacturers and have made several purchases of outstanding productions from Gaumont. Our company does not anticipate any difficulty in marketing our product, as we are relying solely on the quality of our product and the service we will give the exhibitors. We have no money in the theatre side of the business at all - we are distributors and we are laying ourselves out to supply what we believe to be a wholesome entertainment for the community, and I wish to emphasize on behalf of my firm that there is an ambition to further the Empire trade point of view. I have stated that we have bought British, continental and American films, and I want to be most emphatic that we are ready and willing to buy any Australian film and handle it in Australia for any company that can produce the goods, and I am further permitted to state that the Ufa Company will be only too pleased to handle and distribute throughout Europe any Australian production that we recommend. This will mean an altogether new market for Australian films that have an international appeal, for Europe only produces 50 per cent. of what they require. My company, with the desire to assist the exhibitors in booking Australian, British or other floater subjects that may be offered from time to time, are quite prepared and willing to allow a 10 per cent. rejection clause in our contracts.
11912. Do you anticipate any trouble in releasing your films in Australia by reason of the control which is held of picture houses by Union Theatres Limited and Hoyts Limited?
We have already released with Hoyts one picture a month, which is our output. The other four are floaters.
11913. Is the picture which is being screened at Adyar Hall one of yours?
It was made by our company, but it is not our picture. We do not anticipate any trouble. We started when there was a quota, but those who have been privileged to see our films and realized their attractions will, I feel certain, make provision next year to contract to take them.
11914. Mr. Gibson has stated that there is a very great over-supply of films. Mr. Doyle yesterday confirmed the fact that there is an over-supply, but said that it was in the poorer class of films. What are your views?
Those pictures that we have selected are above the programme class. The Ufa have been persuaded by us of the absurdity of endeavouring to get the whole of their films on the market, for the reason that a large number would probably not appeal to Australian audiences. Consequently, we are selecting only those that we believe will be suitable for, and acceptable to, this country. That company produced 40 films a year, but we are taking only sixteen. We can, of course, take as many more as we like.
11915. The Ufa Company are relying upon your discretion as to the suitability of any films for the Australian public?
Exactly.
11916. Is it a fact that the majority of programmes in England to-day are filled with German productions?
There is a great demand for European films in England; they are taking them as fast as they can secure them. The Ufa Company are collaborating with Wardours in the production of two pictures that will be half English and half German. Each will be responsible for 50 per cent. of the cost.
11917. Has the Ufa Company recently been reconstructed after a good deal of financial strain?
Yes. The capital of the Ufa Company was £2,250,000, with £750,000 of preferred bonds. It was reduced to £750,000, and on the same day was again raised to £2,250,000. When, in 1924, paper money was changed into gold, the Ufa Company exchanged for one gold share 25 paper shares. That quota was found to be too generous and, in 1924, a few months after the exchange was made, was responsible for difficulties which compelled the company to obtain enormous loans from the banks. Those loans were wiped out in April, 1927, by the reduction of the capital. When the capital was again raised to £2,250,000, the bank received shares in place of the loan. Mr. Hubert, foreign sales manager of the company, is now in Sydney. The company has spent a lot of money in production, and has had to pay as high as 18 per cent. for its money.
[page 396]
11918. What is your practice regarding the day bills, and the printing of the advertisements?
All the day bills are made in Australia. Two-thirds of the printing that we receive in regard to the Ufa product is done in England. The booklet, which we will publish shortly, will be produced wholly in Australia.
11919. Is it your intention to get as many British films as possible?
It is our present intention that 50 per cent of our next year's releases will be British pictures.
11920. Do you believe in a quota for the encouragement of the industry in Australia and Great Britain?
I believe in the encouragement of the industry, but I am not in favour of the quota.
11921. What are your objections to it?
I do not think it is the right way to handle the matter; you should first of all make provision for the exhibitors to find room for the supplies that are available.
11922. Is not that the way to do it?
I do not think so, you would be forcing them to take pictures to which they might object.
11923. Might not an appeal board be set up to decide whether any picture was up to the standard necessary for inclusion in the quota?
That is a very good idea.
11924. Do you think that six British pictures and four Australian pictures would be too many for exhibitors to screen in the first twelve months?
I do not think it is necessary to compel them by law to do so.
11925. Would it not assist your company if a quota were established, seeing that certain British and Australian pictures would have to be screened?
There is a danger. In the London trade magazines you will now see advertisements stating, "This is not a quota picture," the inference being that it has had to be included in the quota and has not been purchased on its merits. A quota might lead to poorer films coming in. I think it would be better to leave the matter in the hands of the exhibitor: I do not believe he should be forced to screen a film out of which he might not be able to make any money. We would prefer our clients to see the films for which they are contracting. I do not believe in selling "paper" pictures. I am entirely opposed to block-booking and blind-booking. There are, of course, difficulties in regard to country exhibitors, but it should be an easy matter for them to arrange with some reliable friend to select films on their behalf. Under existing conditions they are guided by the persuasive arguments of a clever traveller.
11926. Is it not a fact that the whole of the trade in England believes that the quota will give the industry a lift along?
It should; but I am against the use of force at any time. I believe in allowing the exhibitor to select what he likes.
11927. Could he not do that, even under a quota?
One way of getting over the difficulty would be to pass legislation providing that no person could sell any film other than that which they actually had on hand.
11928. In other words, place an embargo on booking on the blind?
Exactly.
11929. It has been suggested in England that no contract shall exceed six months. Would that meet the position?
I should be quite content with three. months. Such a term might present difficulties to some of the exchanges; but, so far as I know, the average American exchange releases pictures in Sydney simultaneously with their release in New York. It should not be legal to book any picture that has not been registered; it should be here and have passed the censor.
11920. Do you not think that the association of Union Theatres Limited with Australasian Films Limited, who are making their own pictures, will prevent your pictures from getting into their theatres?
I do not think so. So far as I know, Union Theatres Limited have adopted the system of buying every week one picture less than they require, the result being that they always have an opening for pictures that appeal to them. The class of product we are bringing out has had more or less a world-wide booking. For example, in America firms of such importance as Paramount and Metro-Goldwyn are handling ten of the pictures that we have brought out to Australia. That is an argument in favour of the contention that they must be particularly good pictures.
11931. By Senator Duncan - Would it not be due to the German law which provides that a certain number of German pictures must be taken in exchange for those which Germany takes from America?
That is right; but do not forget that they have a selection of 40 pictures, out of which they can pick whatever they like. It is but natural that they will take the best.
11932. By the Chairman. Do you think that a reciprocal arrangement between America and Australia might be workable, or would it do more harm to picture shows here?
The quota system or contingent in Germany was a splendid thing for Germany, but it must be remembered that Germany has always been a very big and successful producer of films, and the contingent was on the distributor and not the exhibitor. For the first two years the contingent was based on the quantity of films exported, but was only in operation with films established in Germany before 1919. When it was found that a great number of the films sold were not shown outside Germany, then the contingent was altered, and given to distributors only, namely, for every one German film censored and distributed in Germany, one film was allowed to be imported of, approximately, the same length, and as Germany requires 500 features per year, and only manufactures 250 features, this suited them admirably. It might be mentioned, by the way, that America makes 750 features per year. The contingent does not apply to two-reel comedies, educational or short subjects. We do not think this quota system would assist Australia, because Germany has a market of 3,500 cinemas, with a population of 70,000,000, with an assured market for at least up to 75 per cent. for their product in the following countries: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland,. Lithuania, Esthuania, Liveland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, Roumania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, France, England, Holland. Besides these countries German productions are very welcome in - Mexico, Cuba, Central America, Argentine, Uruguay, Paraguay, Chili, Peruvia, Bolivia, Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador, India. The European market has always been open for German films, and despite the interruption of the war, directly the frontiers were thrown open again in 1922, any film of international merit made in Germany had an immediate market again of 12,000 cinemas. Over- seas market would mean another 6,000 cinemas, and America would mean a further 20,000 cinemas. To build up this market and create a demand and a liking for the pictures, it took twenty years of hard work, enormous expenditure and a net of organizations all over the the world, employing, approximately, 10,000
[page 397]
people. Even the Ufa Company, which is the biggest motion picture producing concern in Europe, with the best-equipped studios in the world, find it impossible to exist even with their great hold on the European market, and owning and controlling over 150 theatres in Europe, without a market in England and America, therefore you will see Australia's position. Where is their market? What are their chances to sell their pictures to the rest of the world? What can they get out of their home market? To commence with, they must be absolutely equal to the average picture made in other parts of the world, and, above all, must have an international appeal. I would remind you that the Ufa of Company make 40 features per year; 50 per cent. of them would be suitable for Australia, but we only intend to put out sixteen per year until such time as there is a greater demand in this country for artistic productions. I have no wish to be unkind to the American importers, but I do say that the German films which we have selected are of an artistic nature, and certainly above the average picture that comes to Australia. American companies higher-grade films are probably equally as good.
11933. Would you place "Variety" in that class?
I should say that "Variety" compares favorably with any American production, with the exception, perhaps, of pictures like "Ben Hur." It was voted in America the best picture of the year. It was being screened in New York, whilst Mr. Hoskins and I were there, and the average takings amounted to 35,000,000 dollars a week in the height of the summer, when other theatres were empty. That sum is about three times the average for the summer season. It is recognized and admitted that the continental producer is the biggest opposition that America has. We are not in favour of the Commonwealth Government setting aside any money to assist in Australian productions, as it would be only natural that if they did, the bulk of the money would go to two firms here with more experience in Australian productions than others, namely, Australasian Films and the Carroll's. Both these firms, we understand, expressed their willingness to find their own money and get ahead. The latter firm was producing a very satisfactory class of picture which was getting even on overseas market, but so many mushroom companies sprang up and make rubbishing films as to even kill the good ones. If it is considered that the Commonwealth Government should assist in picture production in Australia, we are of the opinion that they would have to set aside at least £500,000. This should be given to a trust fund that should be operated by expert Australian men with wide and long film experience. The money would be used to build one or two studios, modernly equipped and staffed by expert technicians from Europe and America. These studios could then be loaned to local producing companies providing there was no doubt about the local producing companies being entirely composed of Australian capital, and the studios would only be loaned to them on their being able to find at least 75 per cent. of the anticipated cost of the production. If it was thought by the expert board that the scenario was worthy of consideration, and was satisfied that the 75 per cent. put up by the local producing company was sufficient to meet 75 per cent. of the cost of the production, the balance could be then taken out of the trust fund. By this means it would probably be possible to make about five pictures in the first year.
11934. Do you think that the £140,000 a year which is now collected from the imposition of a duty on imported films might be utilized in rewarding merit according to the adjudication of an appeal board?
It sounds very good; it might encourage producers to turn out better pictures.
11935. Would you rather leave the provision of a studio to private enterprise?
I should prefer to leave it to private enterprise. I think that Australasian Films Limited can manufacture all their requirements, for the time being at any rate. It will be a long while before we shall be able to make a great number of pictures. While we are passing through the embryo. stage, why not leave the matter in the hands of people who are prepared to carry it on at their own expense? The Government could keep its eye on things, and benefit by any mistakes that might be made.
11936. You have not been going long enough to have had much experience of the censorship yet?
No, but we are absolutely in favour of pre-censorship, particularly in the case of foreign films. In London, the authorities are much more lenient than they are here. The majority of the prints we receive have been passed by the London censor.
11937. Are many cuts made in them?
They are cut when they come here.
11938. Does that interfere much with your ability to rent them out?
In some instances it makes a big difference. That is one of the difficulties we have in selecting big pictures and paying big prices for them. By the time they have passed through the censor here, they may be reduced to the value of an ordinary programme picture, where previously they had outstanding merit on account of the little tit-bits they contained.
11939. Why are you keen on pre-censorship?
For the simple reason that we could probably cut out one or two scenes that in our opinion might offend public taste in Australia. Not having viewed them, the censor might have an altogether different idea of the picture.
11940. Would you be in favor of a censorship board with headquarters in Sydney?
No. We have no complaints to make against the present censor. I think he is conscientious to a degree. But I certainly think there should be a board of appeal.
11941. What constitution would you suggest for the board of appeal?
I think there should be on it a representative of the Government. A man like Professor Wallace would suit me, or a broad-minded Minister. There should also be on it a representative of the industry.
11942. Do you mean one man representing the renters, the producers, and the exhibitors?
I should say a representative of the exhibitors.
11943. Should he be selected by ballot throughout Australia?
Yes, you could do that.
11944. Would you have a woman on it?
I should prefer not to have a woman on it.
11945. Do you think that a woman might use the pruning knife too much?
I think the board I have suggested would provide all that was required.
11946. Do you think that an increase in the tariff might help Australian production?
I cannot see that it would help it at all.
11947. Do you think that if the entertainment tax were remitted in proportion to the number of British and Australian pictures screened, it might lead to an additional number being shown?
I do not think anything in the world would make an exhibitor put on any picture he did not want. I believe in every exhibitor having the right to choose his own programme, so that he may screen those films that he has found most suitable for his audience.
11948. The evidence we have had from every Australian producer is to the effect that they cannot get screenings for their films, and that the only way to bring it about is to establish a quota. What are your views?
I can speak only from the distributing end. We do not anticipate any difficulty in placing our films, because we do not come along with one film and say "You have to find a place for this." We tell them
[page 398]
well in advance, when they are contemplating the making of a contract for the year, the number of films that we are prepared to let them see, if they happen to be in Sydney.
11949. Do you agree with those who say that the system which leads to exhibitors being booked up almost 100 per cent, makes it impossible for others to get screenings?
I am against block-booking and blind-booking.
11950. Do you think that if the terms were reduced to three months it would help considerably to get Australian and British films screened?
Certainly. If you recommend the inclusion in every contract of a rejection clause up to 10 per cent.of which we approve it would give you an opportunity to ascertain whether exhibitors were desirous of taking advantage of the openings provided to screen Australian or other films.
11951. Do you think that if a film is up to a good standard, there will be no difficulty in getting it screened?
That is so.
11952. Have you seen many Australian productions?
I saw a number a good while ago.
11953. Were they up to a reasonable standard?
Some were, and others were not. I believe that the majority of Australian films have been screened out of sentiment. Had some of them been imported, it would have been difficult to persuade the exhibitors to book them. The films that come from the other side have to be up to a standard to secure booking.
11954. Do you agree with Captain Hurley and Mr. Stuart Doyle that to secure an international market, an ordinary programme feature must cost not less than from £15,000 to £20,000?
I do not think you could possibly produce one for less than £15,000. About the cheapest pictures I have seen produced are those known as the "Sunset" pictures, which are made in Los Angeles. They cost about £100,000. You have to remember, however, that at short notice they can procure anything they require, from a flea circus to a herd of elephants. You can realize the difficulties that face Australian producers. They would need to spend at least £15,000 or £20,000 to make a programme picture.
11055. Do you think that if films are well produced and have the necessary appeal there is a market for them in Germany and Great Britain, and that you would get screenings for them over there?
I am sure you would.
11956. Your company is quite prepared to deal with Australian pictures?
I am permitted to say that the Ufa Company will take any picture we recommend.
11957. Apart from any reciprocal arrangement?
Exactly. But in the interests of Australia we will be mighty careful to see that it is a good picture. It would be a bad advertisement if the first picture that went over there fell down.
11958. By Senator Duncan. How does that square with your assertion that there will be a tremendous difficulty in securing a good market overseas?
I am talking about the cost. The U.F.A. Company, even with their tremendous market, cannot make a profit unless they have the rest of the world in which to screen their pictures. The first thing is to get a good return for your product in your own country. After that, if your picture has an international interest, you will get a market because there is room for films, especially in Europe.
11959. By the Chairman. Would it interfere with your activities if all the positives were printed in Australia?
I do not think it is practicable. It would probably cost about £3,000 to make a negative. The insurance on the negative would be very heavy. Considering the few people for whom it would provide employment, I do not thing it would be warranted. As a matter of fact, I do not think the producing companies would adopt the practice. At the present time they probably take about twelve negatives of a big production.
11960. Is it not a fact that negatives are sent only to England and Germany at the present time?
The usual practice in Europe is to send a negative to London and another to New York. They are kept absolutely intact.
11961. By Senator Duncan - Was not the Hoskins firm afraid of German competition with their iron and steel industry?
I could not say; I do not know anything about their other interests.
11962. Would you not be in favour of greater duties on films for the protection of the Australian industry?
I do not think Australian production would thereby be assisted.
11963. Whilst abroad you became convinced that there was an opening in Australia for British and continental films?
We considered there was room for something to replace the poor American pictures that have been bringing the industry into disrepute - a lot of rubbishy films that do not mean anything. I admit that, perhaps, from 60 per cent. to 75 per cent. of the American films are all right; but there are a lot of inferior films that do not even give entertainment. We thought that if we brought films here to replace those, probably in twelve months or so we would be able to get a footing.
11964. Have you in recent years observed any improvement in the class of American films?
I think there is an improvement in all directions - photographic, story, acting.
11965. Do you consider that the high percentage of rubbish is being maintained to day?
A tremendous number of films is made by all companies just to keep the wheels turning. I do not think that any company, even in America, expects that more than 75 per cent. of its product will be up to standard. The Ufa Company will probably admit that 25 per cent. of its product is inferior to the remainder. It was that 25 per cent. that we hoped to replace in Australia with a higher quality. I think that eventually we will succeed.
11966. Why did Germany find it necessary to take such steps for the promotion of German industry as would enable it to compete with the American industry, if German films are so intrinsically superior to a great percentage of the American films?
Europe produces only 250 pictures a year, and requires 500.
11907. There must be a sentiment in Germany for German films?
Yes.
11968. Despite that, they found it necessary to compel German houses to screen 50 per cent. of German films?
No; the quota is on the distributor, not the exhibitor.
11969. Fifty per cent. of the films that were sent out by German distributing agencies must be of German manufacture?
Yes.
11970. So they did find it necessary to compel the German people to see 50 per cent. of German films?
For every picture a distributor brought into Germany, he had to send one out.
11971. Would you say that Variety is the highest class of German film?
From an artistic point of view, I would not. I say it has so many new angles and is such an entertaining story that it created records all over the world.
11972. How is it appealing in Sydney?
The business is quite good, considering the theatre it is in.
11973. Do you think that the story is one which will appeal to the Australian people?
I have not heard anything against it. The newspapers gave it a very fine write-up.
11974.
Did you select it?
Yes. We pre-censored it in New York.
[page 399]
11975. Why?
In order to get the picture through, we anticipated what the censor would do, but I think we were over-generous.
11976. Is not that likely to be the trouble with a great many continental films?
No. Take the picture Waltz Dream"; it is one of the most delightful ever produced, and had a bigger success in England than did Variety." It was also a big success in America.
11977. Was "Variety" censored to the same extent in England?
No. I would give anything to be able to show you the picture as it was shown in London. I say that it is still a wonderful picture. The photography is unique, the technique excellent. It was given in America a greater amount of eulogistic criticism than any other film received. The Hollywood Mercury, probably the most outspoken critic in the world, after having seen "Variety," said, "Let us make better pictures or give up making pictures, and leave the world to Germany, who can make them."
11978. Do you anticipate having any trouble with the other pictures you have selected?
We have fourteen dramas in bond, all of which have been passed. "Faust " was regarded in America as one of the most beautiful pictures ever seen. It was passed without a cut. It was edited and titled in England by Arnold Bennett.
11979. By the Chairman - What grade of picture is it?
A super-feature. Only about two or three roadshow films have come to Australia. The "Ten Commandments" was one, and "Ben Hur" is another.
11980. By Senator Duncan. Did you appeal against the cuts that were made in "Variety"?
We did. The censor has given us permission to bring out the original American copy, and he intends to go through it. It is quite possible that in a few weeks we shall have a new version. There is no doubt that we were over-generous with our cuts. There is no doubt a great deal that we cut out will be re-inserted.
11981. Would the Ufa Company object to having applied to German films a law similar to that which Germany applies to foreign films?
I should think they would. In a few years' time they might not. I think they take a very broad-minded view. They do not say, "We want you to take the whole of our stuff." They are prepared to leave it to our selection. We need not take them if we do not like them.
11982. Why should we be so generous as to permit them to send their films here whilst they will not take more than one or two of ours in a year?
They will take all that have any interest in other parts of the world. In Germany they have what is called the "Parufamet," an association of Paramount, Metro-Goldwyn, and the Ufa Company. It is a distributing company in which the Ufa Company hold 50 per cent, and the other two 25 per cent. each, for the purpose of distributing 20 Paramount, 20 Metro-Goldwyn, and 40 Ufa films a year.
11983. You have said that contracts should be permitted only in respect of films that are already in Australia. How would that apply to a company which did not turn out a sufficient number of films to meet Australian requirements; would it mean that Australia would see only those films that were twelve months old instead of getting them as quickly as they are made?
I do not see that there is much advantage in getting them as soon as they are made. What we object to is that many of the films which are contracted for in, say, July, 1927, have not been even started. We do not think that is fair. If the exhibitor knew exactly what he was getting, and could actually see the films, he would have an improved programme, and his business generally would be better. He would not then feel it necessary to apply for the cancellation of a number of films.
11894. By the Chairman - Do I gather that you would not enter into contracts for a period longer than six months?
Until there is any legislation against it. But we argue that a man should see the films he is buying.
11985. Would you suggest that a considerable percentage of films put out by exchanges is below the standard?
I would.
11986. What would you consider that percentage to be in a year?
About five in every 52.
11987. Would not a 10 per cent. rejection clause be sufficient without anything else?
I think it would.
11988. Would it not preserve the best side of the contract system by giving to the exhibitors an assured continuity of programme?
I should prefer a 10 per cent. rejection clause to booking a man thirteen pictures at a time. The percentage of poor pictures would be the same whether thirteen or 52 pictures were sold.
11989. If an exhibitor had a rejection clause, do you think he would be amply protected, and that there would be no need to interfere with the contract system?
The man in the country might find it difficult to be continually booking up programmes; he might prefer to book 52. I do not think the argument that shorter-term contracts would be more costly holds water. The exchanges employ the same number of travellers all the year round.
11990. If short-term contracts were in operation, and country exhibitors had to employ agents to view films, would their expenses not be considerably increased?
Any little difference would be justified by the fact that he would not have to purchase pictures he did not want.
11991. A 10 per cent. rejection clause would give him all the clearance he wanted?
My proposal would give him a double-barrelled chance. At the end of a year you would have felt the pulse of the exhibitors in regard to the screening of Australian pictures.
11992. By the Chairman. Do I gather that your argument is there should be no embargo on contracts between producers in America and importers in Australia, but that there should be a restriction to three months between the renter and the exhibitor?
Union Theatres buy weekly one feature less than they require. Therefore, they have room for various attractions that are offering from time to time.
11993. Are you aware that Australasian Films Limited have a three-year contract with First National?
That is all right.
11994. But you believe that contracts between Australasian Films Limited and exhibitors ought to be for not longer than three months?
Union Theatres Limited are in a position different from that of the average exhibitor. They have capital cities to look after. I can understand their buying First National, or any other service for three years. You could have an alternative scheme to the 10 per cent. rejection clause, and that is to compel exhibitors to leave room for one feature a week.
11995. By Senator Duncan. That would not suit small country exhibitors; they could not buy one feature a week?
They could buy six at the one time.
11996. You do not want legislation that will interfere with your right to make contracts overseas?
We will take only what we personally select. In order to be fair, I am proposing that those to whom we sell should be given the same privilege.
11997. Have you a contract with the Ufa Company?
Yes, for their yearly product.
11998. Is it a twelve months contract?
It is for longer than that.
11999. You do not want interference by the Government with your contract with the Ufa Company?
You could make us buy three months at a time, and it would not make difference.
[page 400]
12000. What steps do you take in selecting the pictures?
One of us goes over every year to select them. We see every picture.
12001. You intend to maintain that system?
Mr. Hoskins will probably be going this year. I would not buy "paper" pictures, exhibitors to do so.
12002. Would you be in favour of making some allowance to country exhibitors to enable them to come to the head-quarters of the various film exchanges to select their films?
That matter could be adjusted.
12003. Have you any contracts for British films?
Yes.
12004. Will they be selected in the same way?
Yes.
12005. Are they for any considerable period?
Yes.
12006. By Senator Grant - How many pictures a year are at present required for Australia?
The exhibitor would probably like twice as many as come here.
12007. But how many are screened?
Probably nine features a week are shown in Sydney.
12008. Can you say how many pictures have been made in Australia during the last twelve months?
I should say about six.
12009. How many firms are engaged in production in Australia?
I should think there are three or four.
12010. Do you think that 25 per cent. of American films can be correctly described as "rubbish "?
Ten films can be correctly described as to per cent. of the output of every firm is not up standard; they are poor subjects, and are not calculated to do the industry any good.
12011. Did you pay for the newspaper write-up of "Variety" as an advertisement?
No. If a newspaper does not like a picture, it will say so, even though you spend a million pounds in advertising it.
12012. Is that your experience?
Yes.
12013. Have you ever seen carefully written-up paragraphs printed in fairly large type with the word "Advertisement" in diamond type at the bottom?
Yes.
12014.
Does that ever occur in connexion with the writing up of films?
Not with any of ours.
12015. How do you expect Australia to compete with such an old-established place as Hollywood?
You have a jolly good trier in Australasian Films Ltd. The chances are that if "For the Term of His Natural Life" is successful, other big companies will work along similar lines.
12016. Would the establishment of a quota interfere with the business of Australasian Films Ltd. from the importing end?
I do not think so.
12017. How many hours a week does the average theatre keep open its doors?
Roughly, fifteen, I should think.
12018. Do you know what percentage of foreign made films is foisted upon Australian theatre-goers?
I should say about 95 per cent.
12019. If the Commonwealth Government legislated for the exhibition of Australian-made pictures for at least one hour each night, would not that interfere with the importation of foreign films?
I am opposed to compelling the exhibitor to do anything he does not wish to do. Any attempt to have Australian films shown must be done gradually. First of all, you have to find room.
12020. Do you not know that the policy of this country is one of compulsion; it is compulsory to pay wages?
Yes.
12021, Shops are closed compulsorily at a certain hour?
Yes.
12022. Heavy import duties are placed upon goods from low wage protectionist countries?
That is right. But you cannot make people go to see pictures they do not wish to see.
12023. Why should the importers of foreign made pictures be exempt when the importers of so many other articles are subject to heavy duties?
You do not force a person to buy any particular brand of goods. You might put a heavy duty on imported cigarettes, but it would not make be buy Australian cigarettes. You can make me pay more for the imported, and I am prepared to do that.
12024. Is it not a fact that to a very large extent goods which formerly were imported are now manufactured in Australia as a result of the tariff?
Yes.
12025. Would not the establishment of a quota necessarily involve the production of a greater number of Australian pictures?
Yes; but it might get you into serious trouble if the exhibitors lost money.
12026. But do you not believe that, physically, mentally, and in other ways, the people of Australia are at least equal to those of other countries; and do you not think they should be able to make their own pictures?
Not without a great deal of foreign help. America, which has the biggest market in the world to day, is encouraging the best producers, artists, and camera-men in Europe to go over and assist it.
12027. Is not the machinery industry in Australia protected?
You cannot make pictures by machinery. I do not think you can draw a parallel between pictures and other products. I could place in your hands a Bell and Howell camera, and you would not know what to do with it.
12028. Do you mean to say that an Australian would be incapable for all time of using such an instrument?
No. Until such time as films can be produced out of which an exhibitor can make a profit, you have no right to force him to screen them. I have suggested that provision be made in contracts for the rejection of a certain number of pictures, so that exhibitors will have a loop-hole which will enable them to screen Australian, British, or any other pictures.
12029. Can they not do that now?
Only with difficulty. The average exhibitor signs up with exchanges for the whole year. Consequently, when he is bargaining for an Australian production, he has to calculate what he will lose by shelving a picture for which he has already contracted.
12030. Mr. Stuart Doyle knows a thing or two about pictures?
He is a very clever man.
12031. Would you be surprised to learn that he has admitted that, even with a rejection clause, the aggregate amount which the exhibitors would be asked by distributors to pay would be not less than it is at present ; therefore, they would be no better off financially then they are to-day?
I still contend that they would be. The exhibitors know the price they can pay; they are as smart as the film salesmen. charged for the balance would not be increased!
12032. You are of the opinion that the prices charged for the balance would not be increased?
I think there is a limit to the amount which any exhibitor can pay for his film, and he has that in his mind when he buys. If he thinks that by cancelling five out of 52 and purchasing another five he can make more money, he will do so.
12033. But if the company who supplies him knows that five of their pictures will be cancelled, do you not think it will ask a higher price for the remainder?
Probably.
12034. Would it get that higher price?
Not necessarily.
12035. On that point you disagree with Mr. Doyle?
Yes.
12036. Would not the establishment of a quota under which exhibitors would be compelled to screen Australian pictures for a certain number of hours a week from low-wage foreign protectionist countries accelerate the production of films in Australia?
If they had to be shown they would have to be made; but we get back to the same point, that you are forcing the
[page 401]
exhibitor to show films that may be unprofitable to him. He might find it necessary to commence showing at an earlier hour in order to keep within the law.
12037. Surely the Australian people could manufacture films up to the required standard?
They will eventually.
19038. Have you ever taken any part in the production of films in Australia?
I made one or two many years ago.
12039. Have you heard that in the United States of America some film manufacturers are also theatre- owners.
Yes.
12040. Does that indicate to you that there is a likelihood of producers in Australia being also theatre- owners?
I do not think so. I believe the reason they became theatre-owners in America was that not more than 75 per cent. of their products was booked by anybody else.
12041. Is it not likely that the importing firms and the theatre-owners may have their interests so closely interwoven that they will import all their pictures without the intervention of any middleman?
They will not so far as we are concerned, for many years.
12042. When you import a number of pictures, you do not expect to have them screened in a month or two?
No.
12043. What length of time is likely to elapse before your 26 importations are screened?
The usual thing in this city is to commence selling your products about July or August for the ensuing year.
12044. As an importer, you do not fear that any combination of theatre-owners will gradually squeeze you out?
If we can continue to bring out real attractions, theatre-owners will always find room for them.
12045. They have always done so in the past?
Yes.
12046. You do not see any likelihood of your being squeezed out?
No.
12047. If long contracts such as that which has been entered into by Union Theatres Limited with First National became general, would not firms like yours be put out of business?
No. I have already said I can understand Union Theatres Limited entering into contracts with First National and Paramount for key pictures. I still think they will leave room to book special pictures.
12048. Am I to understand that with the exception of the inclusion of a rejection clause in contracts, you do not think that any interference with the industry is desirable?
Exactly.
12049. Why do you favour pre-censorship?
For the reason that we may see in a film an incident that might be distasteful to Australian audiences. A bedroom scene might give the censor an entirely wrong outlook on the picture as a whole; but its elimination would probably mean the passing of the whole film.
12050. Do you not think that the censor would be more proficient at that business than people like you?
I should not think so. In a way the censor is not interested in what becomes of the film after he has issued the certificate. We are. We know the effect of the cuts he makes and can calculate what it would be possible to do with the film if they were not made.
12051. How many pictures have you pre-censored?
I think it is three years since the privilege was withdrawn. The only film that I have pre-censored recently is "Variety."
12052. By Mr. Forde - Are you aware that the objection offered by the censor to pre-censorship by distributors is that certain parts that are cut out might subsequently be re-inserted?
I do not think any of the present day importers would do such a thing. Apart from the fact that we are all supposed to be straight-forward men, we are under a bond.
12053. You do not think there is any reason for that fear?
No. We would be prepared to lodge with him the portions we cut out.
12054. Have you found in Australia a prejudice against English pictures?
Yes, on account of the fact that they are not up to the standard of the American. The people have the impression that English pictures are uninteresting. That is an argument in favour of a special selection of any make of film.
12055. Would you say there is a prejudice against Australian pictures for a similar reason?
Yes.
12056. Is there any prejudice against German pictures?
There may be, but we have not noticed it. Mr. Stuart Doyle in evidence stated that he had had inserted in all his contracts a clause stating they would not accept any films wholly produced in Germany. I can understand that attitude, because some little time ago an American firm brought out one or two German films which were wholly unsuitable for this country. They were never intended for universal distribution, but the company in question probably procured them cheaply. The press report of Mr. Doyle's evidence make it appear as though he is opposed to the purchase of any German films. I do not think that is right. The London representative of Australasian Films Limited was in Berlin whilst Mr. Hoskins and I were there, and he bargained for the very contract that we ultimately secured.
12057. Probably they would have no objection to selecting special German pictures, but believe that generally the type is uninteresting?
I refer to films which were not selected. Mr. Doyle recently secured a German film from a great friend of his in Sydney, and screened it on his circuit. In fairness to our company this point should be cleared up.
12058. It has been frequently asserted in evidence that American films have created in Australia an American atmosphere. Do you think there is anything in that?
To a certain extent there is.
12059. Do you think it possible that German films might similarly create a German atmosphere?
It would probably be a long while before we are showing the same number of German films. I believe that the amusement loving public, those who go to pictures for entertainment and education, would be pleased to see depicted countries other than America.
12060. Are you cognizant of the importance of the film in regard to trade, and do you believe that from that point of view it would be to the advantage of Australia to have a large number of Australian pictures shown both here and abroad?
Yes.
12061. As a portion of the British Empire, is it not reasonable that we should show a large number of British pictures?
Yes. I have already said that probably 50 per cent. of our releases next year will be British pictures. That is our intention.
12062. Mr. Fenwick has advocated the establishment by the Commonwealth Government of an agency to distribute British and Australian productions. Do you think such an agency is necessary, or could existing agencies will handle the business.
12063. His objection to existing agencies is that they are more concerned about the products of the films they represent. Might that be so?
It might, where a country was a dumping ground for the products of huge manufacturing concerns. We are selecting the cream of the world's products, irrespective of where they are made. You may be surprised to know that quite a large number of the pictures that will be sent out here were turned down by us as absolutely unsuitable for our requirements.
12064. Are you a member of the Motion Picture Distributors of Australia?
Yes,
12065. How was your entry viewed by other distributors; were you received favorably?
Certainly. The importer believes that we will bring in a class of product that will help to raise the standard of the industry.
12066. Do you protect exhibitors when you sell them films?
That is a matter of negotiation, and I do not
[page 402]
see how it can be altered. Some exhibitors are prepared to pay a greater sum if they are protected. In the majority of cases the distributor agrees. The man who first receives the film has to spend in advertising a great deal of money, and he is entitled to some protection.
13067. It has been stated that practically all contracts include a clause stating that the approval of head office has to be obtained before they are binding. Do your contracts contain that clause?
It is necessary for all our contracts to be signed by two of the directors.
------------------------
12068. Your travellers cannot sign up a contract on behalf of your firm?
That is so. I think our contracts contain a clause stating that they must be accepted or rejected within fourteen days.
12069. Do you consider that the moral standard of the picture show entertainment is quite satisfactory, and compares favorably with the atmosphere created by the language and settings of many of the spoken plays and vaudeville entertainments?
I should say that it is much better than in the case of the majority of the spoken plays that we have had here lately.
The witness withdrew.
The commission adjourned.
------------------------
Cinema Art Films - Posters | Die Grosse Wette 1916 | Metropolis Film Archive | Pandora's Box 1929 | Royal Commission 1927 | Variety 1925
Last updated: 31 May 2023
Michael Organ
Comments
Post a Comment