BRITISH AND AMERICAN FILMS

New Zealand Listener, Volume 13, Issue 333, 9 November 1945, Page 5

BRITISH AND AMERICAN FILMS

Sir,-R. Evans’s letter on British and American films is little short of ludicrous. To accuse G.M. of "slavishly bestowing eulogy on .the poorest of British films," etc., is nonsense, for he has indeed unfavourably criticised these -unnecessarily at times:’for instance, "Mill on the Floss’ which was in my opinion stiperior to many favourably teviewed American films. Nor does G.M. "time and time again make below-the-belt hits af American films." I think R. Evans would be surprised if he (or she) counted up the number of such films that G.M. has praised. However, G.M. has a clarity of vision that does, on the whole, see right through the bogus sentimentality and overwhelming egotism of numbers of American films. Because the Americans aided us (and incidentally themselves) in this war, does _ it mean that we are to allow this huge influx of rubbishy films that inundates us to pass ufcriticised and uncommented on? Because we have seen little but American films for many years and consequently some of us have had our taste spoiled and blunted, does this mean that American films are superior to British? Of course not! R. Evans contradicts himself when he accuses the British of melodrama and then self-consciousness. The two qual-" itjes don’t go together. The "introverted" nature of the British is in reality a controlled one-which is eminently right in an adult nation. Consequently their films contain a sincerity lacking in American films. In fact sincerity is the key-note of British films, and so we are not wearied with an artificial atmosphere of applied glamour, counterfeit emotion and such things as cloy the palate and try the patience.

PARNASSUS

(Auckland).