THE PICTURES

Hokitika Guardian, 9 August 1930, Page 3

THE PICTURES

THE CENSOR AND TiiiJv PUBLIC

Once, at a crilical moment in the history of manumd, a- Roman governor asked “Wluir is the truthC’ The ■ New Zealand censor’s ban upon the film “All Quiet Upon The Wculer.i Front” has been lifted. . Grave and reverend seignoms have sa.t upon tne siiLject, and, with certain excisions, the production is. now decreed lit for l.ome consumption. Whether or not the public will say “For this release much thanks,” its neither here nor there. Pei haps there is more temptation to ponder the a-tii R ale of the- censor—the measure of sonsistency which be finds possible in endeavouring to shelter this island community against the worst concomitants of the kinema invasion. If, as it was reasonable, to conclude, “All Quiet On The Western Front” was censored in the lirst .place as, bein ’; more objectionable than a

great deal of the film matter which is office-'ly sanctioned, then we might find proyica-iion to make the same inquiry 'as the Roman governor. Mr, R. J. Whitley, an English film critic )uis 'written; “Screen master piece" are .few and far 'between, but after mature.c/'nside’" , t ! ""i f am of opinion that ‘AM Quiet On The Western Front’ .is the (rrerites.t of. the nr all.” r ! imr follows the writer’s testimony that “the stark realism of tie war' scenes nirs + . be seen to he believed” and his declaration that the picture reveals war as it was and as lie saw it lor himself. Possibly in the first instance the New Zealand censor was of opinion that what the Ens'ish critic regarded ns: “battle .episodes bv far the most snectacular and convincing the camera has yet shown us” were not desirable fare for the New Zealand palate. But if the critic who has been quoted is right—which of course he may not l>e—the film might he assumed to carry no danger tfr the- stark morals -of the public, ’white, rn war is Stark and horrible, tfm etffect of its realistic pro--sentatioii might H>e said to'be in a ’ degree at’ least educational. ' “ A commentator who witnessed' a private screening •of -this particular film in Wel’ington observed: “Seeing' ‘AH Quiet’ struck the writer as ’■ like having a tooth filled; It’s not nice to have done, but necessary, and all sensible . people take.-, that, precaution • leist worse befall.” The analogy is. n,ot quite convincing, for if people choose- to go to a picture palace..in the same spirit, inwhich they make a call, upon tlic-v dentist- that is their own affair. There/ is no compulsion upon' anybody to. go and be harrowed at a place of entertainment, ~--but. neither i,s • there any accounting, for. tastes in tin’s vale of teal's'; ■-

That; the- opinion of the condor in regard to the scitaUifity of a film for public exhibition would invariably coincide with the opinion of the tnajority, it is not, of course, •necessary to suppose. The- opinion of the majority is not necessarily better than that of: an individual, while the censor is, ;by virtue of his office, supou'sed to be particularly nyetl“cjiia.i'ifiecl to exercise judgment and discretion in the interests of others. But when to the prjV.ie, which is not neoessarlv attracted to the sordid in entertainment, he says, “This is not g,ood ’or you,” it is open to the public to retfirt, at least upon occasion, that it is being treated in a rather childish way. Xu the cane of films which, aie deemed fit for exhibition in other parts of the. Empire the peop’e of Vow Zealand naturally enough do not altogether appreciate 4 an implied official suggestion that they are more in need. of shelter and protection," and Pro ' loss capable of ■ contemplating “realism” without suffering mental injury, tiffin arc the people of more sophisticated ■ communities; < ' There might he'no end to a" discussion of the subject of the differences of opinion expressed by people who claim to' have knowledge about that of] which they • "speak;"- There • nerver was an age in which there was so 'active and far-reaching a dissemination of opinion on almost every topic Under the sun. That this is an un,mixed blessing cannot be suggested. The opportunities for the assimilation of superficial or • erroneous knowledge are not less numerous than those which can be turned to more advantageous account. But so far as the old search for truth is concerned the desire of the individual to do a little of the searching for himself is not to be discouraged. The film censor is no doubt unfortunately necessary, and liis task is not a very enviable one, but there is also ' the consideration of the. highly interrogatory tendencies of the ago in which •we live, and the' futility, in some circumstances, of suppression.