EDITH CAVELL FILM

Hokitika Guardian, 13 February 1928, Page 2

EDITH CAVELL FILM

ADVERSE CRITICISM

.Australian it N.Z. Cable Association.) LONDON. Feb. 11. The first official British comment on j the Edith Cavell film "Dawn,” the subject of much controversy, is contained in Sir Austen Chamberlain's, letter, declining an invitation to see it;—“The story of Nurse Cavell is a. noble one Her memory will be reverenced not only in friendly but in e-x-enemy countries tor Iter noble selfless devotion to duty, and serenity at the hour of trial. It may be possible to present the story without loss, of its beauty, or danger of controversy, when the lapse of years makes it history Personally 1 feel it is more beautiful in the mind than any picture . could make it. 1 in no circumstance. ftherefore, care to sec “Dawn” however the story is treated. If as I prcsume7\ the press accounts of the picture ai:e correct, 1 am even less willing to attend a performance. 1 ; llfiiow ot no. authority to justify certain incidents, presented therein, and their representation can only provoke controversy over the grave of a woman who has become one of the world’s heroines. There are war films which, whilst recalling heroic deeds oi endurance by Britishers, call forth no bitter feelings. elsewhere, only serving to unite all. men in admiration of heroism and. fortitude, but "Dawn" is of an entiiely different character. I must say I feel the strongest repugnance to its, production.” NO OFFICIAL ACTION TO BE TAKEN. LONDON, Feb. 11. Mr Wilcox, replying to Sir Austen Chamberlain, said: "1 feel strongly that -Miss Edith Cavell’s selfless devotion is eminently suitable for a British film, enabling the bringing home of the nobility and beauty of her actions, and her lesson of duty, so wonderfully done, to those to whom- 1 — her name is only a memory. 1 cannot too strongly repudiate the suggestion that I have endeavoured to capitalise her suffering. My sineerity of purpose will be undoubted when this picture is shown to tho public, who are unerring judges as to whether tho subject is in good taste.” He adds: ‘‘The film is definitely anti-war. The danger of criticising from newspaper reports has novel been more apparent than in your condemnation I keenly regret your unqualified refusal.” The “Daily Telegraph” says that official circles emphatically deity the report that the Government at the quest of Germany has taken action with a view to preventing the showing of “Dawn.” The German Ambassador was unofficially informed that the British Government was not empowered to prohibit or amend films on diplomatic or political grounds, nevertheless British diplomatic and political quarters feet that the film would prejudice the present excellent Anglo-German relations,, and European pacification and reconciliation. Sir Austen Chamberlain is acting personally. In addition to the letter. Mr W ileox has written to Air T. P. O _ nor. President of the Board of Film Censors, pointing out the film’s deplorable effect. The “Daily Chronicle,” in an oditonal. describes the filming of the-Ca-vell story as an outrage against her • memory for money-making. No dei cent person ought- to approve of it in I a world seeking to bury hatred aud ! build for peace.