FRENCH INVASION OF ENGLAND

Radio Record, 5 August 1938, Page 15

FRENCH INVASION OF ENGLAND

Where Napoleon Failed Parisian Film Producers To-day Are Succeeding

Special to the "Record" by

GORDON

MIRAMS

ECENTLY, an enterprising reporter on 4 London newspaper noticed that two ordinary | "popular" cinema theatres in the metropolis were screening a French language film, "Un Carnet de Bal." This impressed the reporter so much that he made inquiries from the managers. He discovered that in both theatres the film had been screening to crowded, satisfied English audiences. Surprising ? Apparently the reporter’s newspaper thought it was, for the "story" was featured boldly in the next edition. And it seems surprising also to us out here in New Zealand, where all we see from year’s end to year’s end are the films of Hollywood and Histree. But as it happens that enterprising reporter was a little behind the times in springing the news that French films are popular in London. Quietly, steadily, for months and months past the French have been invading England. Where Napoleon failed, the French film producers are succeeding. To-day, in London, there are at least half a dozen theatres that screen nothing but foreign films, most of them French. These are "special" theatres;. but.more and more French productions are finding a place in "ordinary" theatres previously sacred tn tha nroadnat nf Wrnoland

e vv Ste tet ee or America. It is signifieant also that a "popular" magazine like "The British Tilm Weekly" now reviews French films with as much prominence as it gives to America and British productions. in the provinces, too, the invaders are gaining territory. A few months back I heard a talk on shortwave from Daventry in which the speaker said that there was hardly a town of any size in England today in whieh you did not come across a theatre showing a French film. And they do good business. Less spectacular than the recent visit of King George to Paris, the growing popu-

larity of the French cinema in England is nevertheless a welcome sign of greater accord between the two countries. i 7 . But it goes much deeper than that. The French invasion is not succeeding on:sentiment, but on merit. DON’T run away with the idea that these Gallic pictures are mainly of the "arty-crafty" type which appeal to the intellectuals who despise Hollywood and all its works. Naturally, with its huge population, London contains plenty such people, as it also contains a ' great number of people who can understand French; but the general widespread popularity of the Continental product shows that the language difficulty is by no means serious. It is, in fact, largely overcome by subtitles in English; while the outstanding quality of most French films compensates for the slight oO handicap that remains.

Nor are French films proving popular because of the old British idea that anything French is necessarily "spicy." They are popular because they are good entertainment. ~ While Hollywood. frantic. ally searches for ways to make its pictures pay; while the British industry just keeps on its feet with injections of patriotism and the quota system; and while the German industry is submerged more and more in propaganda, the French industry is striding vigorously forward, winning prizes at international exhibitions, securing the praise of critics on both sides of the Atlantic, and -most important-it is making money! There may be | some (Continued on page 38.)

French Invasion

~ FILMS INTO ENGLAND

(Continued from page 15.) aesthetic persons who will regret this last achievement; and yet without it the others would hardly count. Be.€ause French pictures pay, capita] for expansion is flowing in a steadily increasing stream into-the industry. The French themselves are wi'dly proud of the reputation their films are acquiring. Every novelist, playwright and noted journalist in France is said to be trying to cash in on the vogue for French films, HAT is the secret of the French vs success? The answer, says a noted English critic, igs really quite simple. The French are sensible enough to realise that in its own line Hollywood is, and likely to remain, supreme. It is useless to construct a rival star system or to compete with million-dollar productions for the amorphous Hnglishspeaking public. So they concentrate on the home market ang on originality. And because they succeed in producing original and distinctive entertainments, there is an increasing outside market. as well. , The maximum expenditure on a French production is £30,000, and. the minimum as low as £5000. Those figures leave no room for serious loss, while the receipts of @ suceess can reach the handsome figure of £100,000. .The French, in fact, have learned what Hollywood apparently will not learn-that a vast e¢xpenditure of money alone cannot make a good picture. Do you doubt the truth of that statement? From kindness of heart I shall name no names, but there has been released in New Zealand this week an American picture which cost more than 2,000,000 dollars, and which is, to my mind, a classic example of Hollywood’s squandermania, WITH a clarity of thought that is truly Gallic, the Parisian producers have gone straight -to the inner secret of successful film production. Realising the impossibility of producing stars to equal Garbo, Taylor or Cooper, the Freneh--have consistently "starred" their directors, so that by now the whole overseas cinema. world knows the names.of Rene Clair, Julien Duvivier, Jean Rensir, and Sacha Guitry." There are French _ starring, players, of course, like Jean Gabin, Raimu, Michele Morgan and othersbut the directors, the men behind the guns, are the men who count in this new French invasion-perhaps the most | successful since the days of William the Conqueror. Because the French pay so much attention to their directors, their films have an individuality never encountered in American or Bri- ' tish productions, except possibly in the case of those made by Alfred Hitcheock. "The more we see of the average English and American film, the more pleasurably we await the latest importation from Paris," says another leading English critic, "It may. net be good, though the chances are it will be; but‘at least one can rely on its being informed with a definite philosophy,

documented with innumerable little touches revealing a shrewd and honest observation. Good or bad, it deals with life; it is aimed. at the adult intelligence instead of the mental age of 13 — which is the avowed target of the British and American producer. Above all, it has style. © Only an imbecile could confuse the work of. Rene Clair, Sacha Guitry and Julien Duvivier, ... Three out of the four new films I have ‘seen this week are French. They are all expertly made, all brilliantly directed and acted, all scrupulously borest." One might detect in such enthusiasm as this the odour of literary "highbrowism"’ and snobbish reverence for anything "foreign," were it not for the fact that most French films make band‘some profits. Purely highbrow pictures don’t do that. {[t is significant that Hollywood no longer adopts a patronising attitude toward France’s film industry. Hollywood, indeed, is almost on its knees begging for the services of some of the greatest French directors. Yet it is not likely that they will be seriously tempted. For the French studios consistently do something that Hol'swood seldom does -they give their dir- ectors practically a free hand. With nothing much to lose, French directors are continually experimenting Already they have evolved a technique of praduction that is as typically French as that opening shot of the Hiffel Tower whieh Hollywood sticks into every film with qa Parisian locale. French technique, however, is not static. Sacha Guitry, says a writer, has achieved the most remarknble series of innovations in technique; and in almost any production you will no |

tice some ingenious twist that compels ‘admiration. For instanee;there-is -a~ film, "La Belle Equipe," which In it-_ self is not much more than'a pleasant little comedy in the manner of "The Good Companions."’. But Julien. Duviyier’s direction makes: it seem ~ some ~ thing greater. Particularly impressive is a new device fo’ showing au exit, The story has reached a puvint where only two survive >of the five unemployed men who set out to build g restaurant with the proceeds of a winning lottery ticket; and these two are quarfrelling over a scheming woman. Aft last they face her together . One fs in danger of succumbing to he: charms, but suddenly a certain determination shows. itself on his face, Now comes the device. The woman remains out of sight of the camera, and her departure is indicated only by the men's eyes following her invisible form across the room There is the sound of 4 door slamming, and the audience is left with the vivid Impression of the victory of male comradeship over feminine wiles. . [z {s difficult to particularise about films one has not seen. As it hap pens I can remember having seen only one French production-""Le -Million," a Rene Clair musical-comedy which — the Christchurch Film Society brought out several years ago, But [ still re member that as one of the most genuinely amusing films I have ever encountered. ob Still, "Le Million" is an old tlm. iere are just a few titles of comparatively new ones which, according to overseas reports, will be well worth noting should a kindly Providence eyer put you in the way of seeing them: "Un Carnet de Bal" (a dunce programme) ; "Pepe Le Moko" (Hollywood is making a version of this French Raffiles story and’ calling it "Ajgiers"), "Gribouille’ (a story of middle-«lass simplicity and kindliness rather similar in atmosphere to the films of Will Rogers) ; "Mayerling’ (starring Danielle Darrieux and Charles Boyer) ; "La Grande Illusion" (Jean Renoir’s prize film about a prison camp in war-time Germany). ; But why go ont Most of us aren’t ever likely to have the chanve to see these French films. Our population, the theatre people would say, is.far too small to make it anything but a losing proposition to imnort them to this coun. . try. I suppose thev’re quite right. "Buc it’s a darned shame! eel