## POOL PUBLICATIONS

CLOSE UP. A British review, the first to approach films from the angles of art, experiment and progress. Much valuable information and comment from famous writers and thinkers throughout the world.

1st of every month, price 1/-, 14/- per year by post.

POOL REFLECTION. A novel by Kenneth Macpherson. "This is the true Renaissance. Phrase after phrase of penetrating psychic power." Price 7/6
Principal Agent, J. & E. Bumpus, 350 Oxford St., London

## POOL

announces two new interesting publications.

1. CLOSE UP. The first magazine (all British) to approach films from the artistic, psychological and educational points of view.

A searchlight on all original and experimental work in every country. Valuable information and comment from famous writers and thinkers throughout the world. On sale at J. & E. BUMPUS, 350, Oxford Street, London, W.1. First of every month. Price 1/.

2. POOL REFLECTION. A novel by KENNETH MACPHERSON. "This is the true Renaissance. ... Phrase after phrase of penetrating psychic power." Price 7/6

POOL, RIANT CHATEAU, TERRITET, SWITZERLAND.

## Films as Art

A NEW European magazine to approach films from the angles of art, experiment, and development. A searchlight on all progressive and experimental forms. The only publication of its kind, representing the views of distinguished thinkers and writers. Among its contributors are Gertrude Stein, H. D., Dorothy Richardson, etc., and shortly, Havelock Ellis, Osbert Sitwell, André Gide, etc., etc. News of all countries, technical problems discussed. Invaluable to all interested in films as art.

## CLOSE UP

1st of every month, price 25 cents.
3 dollars 50 cents per year by post
from the publishers or any POOL agent

Send for lists of POOL books

POOL, Riant Chateau
Territet, Switzerland

### London Agent

J. & E. Bumpus, 350 Oxford Street, London, W. 1.

### Paris

Shakespeare & Co., 12 rue de l'Odeon.

## Films as Art

## CLOSE UP

Send for lists of POOL books

### London Agent

### Paris

## WRITING AND THE FILMS.

### A BRITISH PUBLICATION.

A new magazine on sale, 1st of every month, to approach films from the angles of art, experiment, and possibility. A searchlight on all progressive and developmental forms. This is the only publication of its kind, and numbers among its contributors Gertrude Stein, H. D., Dorothy Richardson, and (shortly) Osbert Sitwell, Havelock Ellis, Andre Gide, etc.

“CLOSE UP.” (Price 1/-)

14s. per year by post from agents.

Published by POOL, Riant Chateau, Territet, Switzerland. Principal agent: J. & E. Bumpus, 350, Oxford Street, London, W.1.

L'ART
CINEMATOGRAPHIQUE

A partir du
1er JUILLET

CLOSE UP

Revue Mensuelle

TEXTES ANGLAIS & FRANÇAIS

Le N°: 5 Francs

EN DÉPOT :

LIBRAIRIE GALLIMARD

LIBRAIRIE FLAMMARION

et chez S. BEACH, 12, rue de l'Odéon

I have met a good many charming personalities in the business since I began, but I don't remember meeting many quite so captivating as G. W. Pabst, with whom I had a dry martini or two in the Piccadilly the other evening. G. W. P. was over on a flying visit, and asked me along to meet him, an initial experience for me.

Now the man who made "Joyless Street," "Secrets of the Soul," "Jeanne Ney," and "Crisis" is surely one of the two or three greatest directors the film has ever evolved. You might realise this from Pabst's brilliant glittering conversation, from his matter.

But from his manner you would think him a delightful exuberant fellow, the sort of unassuming spirit with whom a navvy or a caulker would feel as happy and as at home as the most sophisticated reader of "Close Up."

Speaking exceptionally good and accurate English he was able to express himself with an astonishing vividness and power. And he did not hesitate to do so on censorship and commercialism, on the "talkies" and the future of the cinema in general!

He has suffered at the hands of the censor in nearly every European country, not because he is indecent or obscene—he is as crystal clean as a bubbling stream—but because he has a passion from which none will move him for painting life as he sees it. And he sees it with an eye more penetrating than most of us.

"What will they do with my next film!" he laughed. "It is a plea for a more reasonable consideration of the prostitution problem." And one of his rippling laughs went ringing through the lounge. "They seem to get hold of the wrong end of my ideas every time."

"In 'Crisis' they thought I was dealing with a woman's mentality, and all the time I was tackling the problem of a civilisation which takes a man from his uxorial ties. That is the crisis I had in mind."

"You see I am between two stools. My stuff seems to be too high for the usual European market. In England and France it is cut to ribbons because it is too tough. In Germany, on the other hand, they say it does not go far enough. And in Russia it is considered mere bourgeois dilletantism," and again he slapped my knee and his burbling laugh went ringing around the so neatly proper people in the eunge.

"I am going to make talking pictures. They can't be dodged now," he confessed. "The stage and the spoken drama can express reality in a way the film, which is an illusion, can never do. How can we blink that fact? Sound, and the realism it affords, has made the silent film almost a dead factor."

Maybe G. W. P. will make a film in this country. He has seen some

of the sound studios and is impressed. In any case, he is coming back for a longer trip in a week or two. I hope by then some of the really big people on this side will have found out that there is such a person, and that he is not a trivial phenomenon. On the other hand I hope they don't, for I like to hear G. W. P. laugh.

22 Nous venons de recevoir « Close up » une revue indépendante d'art cinématographique. La revue, très neuve par son inspiration, contient des articles intéressants en français et en anglais sur toutes les questions qui touchent le cinéma-art. Des nombreuses photos inédites augmentent l'intérêt qu'on doit porter à cette revue internationale.

Mirandéeani

1-6-18

BIBLIOGRAPHIE

« Close Up », revue d'art cinématographique

Voici le sommaire de mai de cette revue internationale d'art cinématographique que représente à Genève M. Freddy Chevalier :

As is, Kenneth Macpherson; Critical Youth, Hugues Mearns; The Waning of the stars, Clifford Howard; What can I do, Bryher; Expiation (Dura Lex), H. D.; London Letter, Robert Herring; Continuous Performance, Dorothy Richardson; Vieux Colombier à Genève, Freddy Chevalley; The Russian Film Industry, Hellmund-Waldow.

Illustrations des films: Jeanne d'Arc, Tragédie de la rue, l'Auberge en folie, Samba, Trois dans un sous-soit; Etoiles de mer; Le joueur de dominos de Montmartre.

Genevres

8-6-1928

Foreign Notes

An Epocal New Book on Visual Education

OSWELL BLAKESTON

BRYHER'S "Film Problems Of Soviet Russia" is not a book of the month; it is a book of the year. It sets out to show how modern Russia is teaching the peasants through the films how to find happiness; is courageously urging men and women to accept the new solutions of sociological problems which will make for saner conditions. For instance women are cautioned in film after film to learn an economic job; then, and only then, will they be free from the brutalities of their men-folk; then, and only then, will villages cease to be what they ever have been (except to those who are retrogressive and refuse to face facts) hot-beds of gossip and vicious tyranny from the old to the young.

Bryher welcomes the improvements that have come with psychological study; there is nothing reactionary about her. Morever, she has an extraordinary breadth of vision.

Every sentence in the book is stimulating. Here it is possible to review shortly only the chap-

ter on educational pictures.

The author realizes that the way to secure universal peace is through educational reform. She relates her own experiences of the folly and muddle of conventional schooling; the account of the language class is such a gem that I cannot resist quotation;—

"They worked two hours daily at a foreign language, but it was taught in so meaningless a manner that the class resembled a band of Eskimos wondering if that queer noise in the wind was a wireless signal, an approaching snowstorm or the growl of a hungry bear.

In short the usual curriculum leaves the pupil totally unfit for life, all that he can do is to become a so-called respectable citizen having a little villa in a sururb and going to a business office every day in the city in a runabout car.

The reforms of yesterday may become the fetters of to-day. Also, though I know this will shock many people, I believe education will makes its greatest stride forward when the personal element is negated in favour of the use of the machine.

Bryher points out how easily an uninteresting teacher may blight a subject, or distort it from

(Concluded on page 155)

Foreign Notes

(Concluded from page 140)

psychological or national prejudice. Fool-proof text books and films would insure a general level of attainment; all children would benefit from modern developments. With her traveling cinemas Russia has been the first to profit, although America has made experiments; but in America, as in England, "nothing must be shown that is linked to the vital facts of life, or if these are mentioned they must be rigidly in accordance with an obsolete hypocritical tradition...In Russia everything is begun, if possible, from a fundamental basis—birth, death, actual events of life—and, as far as possible, all medical and scientific knowledge is presented in the films so that everybody who wishes may keep in touch with new discoveries."

Education is the ability to profit by the new, the ability to discriminate.

Finally Bryher quotes conclusively the case of Professor Bear who bound that a novice could learn to pack boxes of chocolates more efficiently in four days of training than someone who had moddled on with old methods for six months.

THE

Na

The

The daily cinema news, published weekly on the top of the startled plans of new film reviews, in the leading films to be out in syndromes, moors, and the like. This week, in addition to the British films, there is a complete German film, "GERMAN FILMS," observed at the cinema ordered by the German film society, "BACHS Amts," to be shown next week. This shall, as to this in this film, be the last time that this society will meet with such a film again, except for the time being occupied by other films, and the next time that this society will meet with such a film will be when they come to the cinema to buy it. This speedier service, and the earlier their appearance, will be gratefully received by the cinema audience. BACHS

JUSTIFICATIF

NOUVELLE EQUIPE (troisième année, n°2, Printemps 1929).

277

## MEMENTO

Le P. Bérard, dans le n° de mai de *La Vie Spirituelle*, examine les rapports entre l'action et la contemplation et ce qu'il faut entendre par vie active, vie contemplative, vie mixte. « Ce n'est pas l'union matérielle de l'action et de la contemplation qui constitue la vie mixte ; la supériorité de celle-ci ne vient pas seulement de ce mélange, mais de ce qu'elle est une vie contemplative débordante, où l'action naît de l'abondance de la contemplation ». Formule heu-reuse, qui rappelle les idées développées tout récemment dans cette même revue (n° de janvier), par le P. Garrigou-Lagrange, sous le titre : « Unité et élévation de la vie apostolique, synthèse de la contemplation et de l'action ».

Nous sommes heureux de signaler à nos lecteurs l'intér-essante petite revue cinégraphique anglaise *Close Up*, la seule — comme l'indique le sous-titre — qui soit entièremen-t consacrée au cinéma en tant qu'art (Only Magazine devoted to Films as an art). Elle s'attache principalement à suivre les tentatives les plus hardies et les plus révélatrices des temps nouveaux.

Nous trouvons dans son numéro d'avril un article de H. A. Potamkin sur l'avenir du cinéma où il étudie les ressources que peuvent fournir aux films sonores la technique du théâtre japonais, tel que le fameux théâtre classique « Le Kabouki » sorti du Japon pour la première fois depuis trois siècles d'existence pour entreprendre une tour-née mondiale.

Ce théâtre — l'un des plus curieux et des plus intéressants qui soient — joue des Nôs et des Tankas chers à Paul Claudel.

Certaines scènes parmi les pièces de ce théâtre sont d'un procédé purement cinématographique et avec l'aide du cinéma sonore on pourra arriver à combiner comme ils le faut les images visuelles et phonétiques, « réduire, comme dit Eisenstein, au même dénominateur les conceptions visuelles et phonétiques », car d'après l'auteur du *Cuirassé*.

*Potemkine* « le cinéma est la phase actuelle du théâtre qui, dans ses anciennes formes, est déjà mort et n'existe plus qu'à la façon d'un automate».

Ce qui est tout à fait curieux dans le théâtre Kabouki c'est que chez eux « sons, mouvements, espaces, voix, n'ac-compagnent pas les acteurs japonais, ne fonctionnent même pas parallèlement, mais sont traités comme des éléments équivalents » (Eisenstein : *Monde*, n° 15).

Le même numéro de *Close Up* contient un article fort intéressant mais difficile à résumer sur le développement et l'avenir du cinéma en Angleterre, signé Hugh Castle, et des notes fort nombreuses sur la production cinématographique mondiale. Egalement à signaler l'analyse de *La Boîte à Pandore*, le dernier film du grand metteur en scène Pabst.

PERIODICAL REVIEWS

CLOSE UP. *Edited by Kenneth Macpherson. Number 1. July,*
1927.

*Close Up* is a magazine of the Movies, published by Pool at Ter-
ritet, Switzerland. It is perhaps the only magazine which is whol-
ly devoted to criticism of the screen as a potentially artistic medium.
The editor, Kenneth Macpherson, writes a summary of the first
fifty years of the industry, and commences as follows: "Fifty odd
years hasn't done so badly in getting an art into the world that fifty
more will probably turn into THE art. . . ." In spite of his slight-
ly irritating pontificalities, his views are generally sound and stim-
ulating.

There is a good analysis of the “War from Three Angles,” which
discusses “The Big Parade” (America); “Mons” (England); and
“The Emden” (Germany). Laurels are given to “The Big Pa-
rade”; and in the discussion of the British film is summed up the
real reason for the failure of so many foreign pictures.

H. D. in "The Cinema and the Classics" discusses Beauty, and in
particular the beauty of Greta Garbo. Her rhapsody, although in a
manner not unlike H. T. P. of the *Transcript's*, goes his "questing
lambent flame" one better. "Helen who ruined Troy seems to have
taken shape, but this time it is Troy by some fantastic readjustment
who is about to ruin Helen."

There is quite a funny picture of H. D. in "Wing Beat," a Pool
"film of telepathy" shortly to be released.

E. L. Black contributes a very suggestive article concerning the
potentialities of animals in the movies, and Jean Prevost reviews
the Gide Congo film, and satisfactorily comments on the admirable
sub-titling.

The following notice by the editor is illuminating:

"The first two numbers of 'Close Up' will deal with the film problem as a whole. After that we propose in each issue to deal with special conditions in Europe and the States with numbers on the Negro attitude and on the Far East in their relation to the Cinema."

Future contributions will be from Osbert Sitwell, André Gide,
Havelock Ellis and Dorothy Richardson.

( 66 )

BRIEFER MENTION

445

*POOLREFLEXION*, by Kenneth Macpherson (10mo, 244 pages; Pool, Territet, Switzerland: $2). A useful specimen of the "stream of consciousness" method, in the novel, gone wrong. The style is an unhappy blending of the prose of Mr Joyce and the verse of H. D.: over-intense, over-precious, disastrously self-conscious. The analysis of motive is sometimes acute, the sequences of mood are sometimes convincing; but as a whole the book is a forced hot-house hybrid, and a little repellent. An example will suffice: "Crouched and waiting, aureate, mustered with perceptibly potent forces, intense and sibylline, she glowered from ectoplasmic eyes, wondering. Lex, stealing up to her, knew himself being drawn, perhaps into some subtle context of apprehension. . . . Irritation came lolloping after him, a nigger with a rope around his neck."

*WHY DO THEY LIKE IT?* by E. L. Black, with foreword by Dorothy Richardson (12mo, 199 pages; Pool, Territet, Switzerland: $1.25). The author —about fifteen years old—protests in this book, against "games he hated, played by fellows he hated, of a school he hated": against unsanitary food, pseudo-instruction, and "this fagging business worse than anything" he "had ever dreamed of." Injustice to children has not the effect of making children just, and Mr Black's condemnation of teachers and parents is a very sweeping one. But aesthetic justice is sometimes to be met with in these pages—certain specimens of conversation having even to the jaded eye of maturity, verisimilitude and charm as exhibiting masculine juvenile psychology.

Dial. November 1929.

THREE NOVELS BY ADOLESCENTS

*J'Adore*, by Jean Desbordes (chez Bernard Grasset, Paris, 12 fr.).

*Race*, by Mary Grace Ashton (Frederick A. Stokes Co., $2.50).

*Why Do They Like It*, by E. L. Black (Pool Press, Territet, Switz.).

*Why Do They Like It*—assuming that they do—is indeed the question with Mr. Black, the fifteen-and-a-half-year-old schoolboy-author, who attempts most earnestly and ineffectively here to arraign the English public-school system. Obviously overcome with boredom himself, the young Black projects his state into situations about him, with the result that school-uniforms are a "nuisance," lunches are "lovely" or too often "awful," prefects are temporarily "wonderful" or "horrible" or "nuisances" again. The Note to the book asserts that this is the first to be written about the English public-school "by a boy, from a boy's point of view and with a boy's use of language."

450

COMMENT

burst into feeling so to speak, and praise an art through a medium other than its own, without having mastered the terms of the auxiliary art is surely an experiment; but zeal, liberty, and beauty are allied phenomena and apart from oddity there are in Close Up to reward us, besides certain other items, a poem about light by H. D.; a report of Kopf Hoch Charley that holds the attention; a contribution entitled Mrs. Emerson by Miss Stein; and a letter to the editor: "*About cinemas. I do not care for them, but I do not know why I don't . . . . . . . .* I think my prejudice is hardly justified. But I couldn't write about it. I've nothing to say. I'm so sorry." We like the letter and we like the movies. We have said something about the theatre's undeserved, sanctified background as compared with the reluctantly accepted celluloid permanence of the movies ¹ and we feel, with Close Up, that intelligence is " 'sadly lacking' " in the films' critics as in the film world. In producing films, "brains and education" ought not to be "dead weights against you" and often "one wants to see films one has missed."

We are not sure that Close Up is in the strict sense informing though it tells us that "all Americans in France, Switzerland, England, are printing their books at the shop of the master printer, Maurice Darantière, Dijon." We read advertisements as we read the body of a magazine and like the impression of energy and ability conveyed by the announcement that the firm of John and Edward Bumpus is to the reader what the camera is to the film.

Perquisites are of secondary importance; motive is the lively factor, and we find here a zeal for enjoyment and for not keeping that enjoyment to one's self. Despite stock phrases, ambiguities, italics, capital type, superlatives, and certainties so sanguine as somehow to seem like uncertainties, there is friendliness here. "By mixing more in the world," "a healthy enjoyment of the business of life is imparted" as Mr Larkyns, the rector, was able to convince Mr Verdant Green's father. It is incumbent upon us occasionally to consent to be lured into the society of others who have, like ourselves, a special fondness for art.

¹ THE DIAL, February 1927, page 178.

A roseate blush has coloured the
cheeks of us all this morning.
Close Up has arrived, and here is
what it says about us.

"Most excellent of papers is THE
CINEMA. The tone of our voice is
whole-hearted, because if you look
carefully you will see in our eye the
expression with which one child
regards the other's bag of candy.

"This time, like the last time, it
is another borrowed plume, and to

go on mixing metaphors, how
thorough (if you come to look at it)
is THE CINEMA's survey of the All
Man's Land of the film.

"It is like an industrious rodent burrowing under the somewhat Grimm's Forest Oak of cinematic development, dwelling in the roots, and often bringing to light the subterranean pests that try to devour them. A recent issue disinterred this wriggling centipede."

And the centipede in question is
the Rev. Tyler Lane, my little rhap-
sody on whom Close Up thereupon
quotes verbatim. Again the roseate
blush.
Cinema 8-3

- 66F -

CAVIARE

In your Christmas list there will be at least one friend who is a professed bookworm; his present you are leaving to the last because your choice is difficult and limited. He has probably read every outstanding publication of the year, and yet you are anxious to give him a book whose literary value will at least interest him. For these gourmets I suggest the foreign publishers—Shakespeare of Paris, who has just produced James Joyce's *Pomes Penyeach* at a shilling—a very original little present—and Pool, of Riant Chateau, Territet, in Switzerland, who are the publishers of *Close-up*, the new monthly on the art of films. Kenneth Macpherson, who is the editor of *Close-up*, has just brought out his second novel, *Gaunt Island*, the study of

two brothers in a lonely
part of the Highlands.
Apart from his subject
and his treatment of it,
both of which will a-
rouse discussion, Mr.
Macpherson is an
original writer. He
uses words as an im-
pressionist painter uses
colours; shreds of
sentences are flung
together with an in-
sane wildness that at a
distance achieves an
effect of surprising
vigour and beauty.
Grammar and con-
struction have no con-
trol over him; he
cares nothing for con-
ventions in spelling or
proprieties, he writes
for preference on in-
troverts and lunatics;
and in spite of these
deliberate handicaps he
has produced a book
that is readable and
not easily forgotten.
Your friend may not
approve of Mr. Mac-
pherson, but he cannot

fail to be interested in his work and to thank you
for the introduction.
Y. M. R.

Mr. Howard devotes a short chapter to the films, but he does not claim expert knowledge of the subject. Those who like to keep abreast of the latest theories and developments of the screen world will be interested by Close Up, a little illustrated monthly published at Territet. The sixth number (December) is the first I have seen, and it is excellent—a trifle highbrow, perhaps, but that is the fashion nowadays in a profession which still suffers from artistic vulgarity and ignorance. Close Up is illustrated, and sufficiently technical to be impressive without being unintelligible. It has a distinguished list of contributors, and costs a shilling. If you want it, your bookseller can get it from Messrs. Bumpus, 350, Oxford Street.

 sphere 1-1-28.

Cherwell: Oxford. 11 February 1928

REVIEW.

*Close Up.* (Book Publishing Co. and Messrs. John E. Bumpers. Monthly, 1s.)

No art (to beg the question) is so much in need of a standard of criticism as the cinema. Everybody expects about the same thing of a play, and almost anyone could say why a certain play was good. Either the acting, dialogue, plot, staging, or a combination of all four might make a good stage production. But there is no standard by which to judge a film, nor could many people say why a film had succeeded or failed. The different functions of director, camera-man, lighting-expert, art-director, and editor are not appreciated. It is for this reason that *Close Up* is so important. It is unbiased either by financial or national interests; and expert criticism has a chance to near itself speak, and to establish some sort of continuity. It is published in Lausanne because Switzerland is the country in Europe which is best served with films. The articles represent many shades of opinion. The "Stills" with which it is illustrated are well selected, chiefly from European films which will probably not appear in England for some time. But its principal merit lies in the fact that its point of view is educated, and that it can see Hollywood in its correct perspective.

F.K.M.C.

мінолій секції лікар. плаукового 1 - ва.

УКРАЇНСЬКЕ КІНО ЗАКОРДОНОМ

♦ Англійський часопис передового кінематографа «Клоз ап» друкує в травневому числі велику статю про раданський фільм. Значне місце відведено в ній інформаціям про ВУФКУ.

♦ Фільм ВУФКУ «Ін ін» й «Звенигора» куплені на Фраццію та Бельтію кінематографаційним робітником товариством «Пістаратехнічний інвентар» Парижі після кусів. Обидві кіртины підуть в Парижі після літних вакацій в «Казіно» де Гротель».

♦ Празький часопис «Ізгоджені» по-дає в своїй фільмовій кинотехнічній і 27 травня фото «Вільмів «Звенигора»» та «Два дні» ній заголовком — «Українське кіно - мистецтво».

♦ В одному з найблизчих чисел найбільший по тіражу ілюстрований часопис Парижжа «Вю» принесе низку фото з останніх фільмів ВУФКУ та статю про українську кінематографію.

♦ Фільм ВУФКУ «Тарас Шевченко» демонструється зараз по ріжних містах Канади. Зацікавлення до його настільки велике, що квитки розбіраються за кільки тиждень наперед.

ншими контр- рево-
ми елементами, які
пинаються своїх «ота-
б здержати людей від
організацію, дурять не-
лах, тим, що влашто-
вечерю та те й паску
всі товарищі гуртка
на тяжких роботах і
більшої кількості сві-
нізаційна праця гурт-

«свідомих людей для
та організаційної пра-
ці лицензії неппєвменні.
к можна частіпе дер-
вети з УСРР, що спри-
розвитку гуртка.

Каракчун

ЧОГО ЖИТТЯ

ЧИХИ ШТАТАХ

ттям, ціни на працю зме
йший кількості підпри-

ка українських
ред» на 1928 І
кою 14 франків

Звертатися з
дуючій адресі:

po

КНИГАРН
ЖАЛА З

ПО

Ш
Ф
Р
Л
Е
Л
Е

На складі кні-
сучасних укр.

VIAȚA CINEMATOGRÁFICĂ,

O revistă de studii cinematografice

„Close Up“ e termenul ce se întrebuințează în studio-urile en- gleze și americane pentru a de- numi prim-planul. Aceste două cuvinte au fost puse în fruntea unei publicații pe care un grup de intelectuali cinefili și de artiști au făcut-o să apară dela 1 iulie urmînd o tipăire lunară.

In această revistă, care se ti-
părește în limbile franceză și en-
gleză se vor publica numai studii
asupra artei cinematografice, Iață

cîteva titluri: cinematograful și poezia, psychologia și cinematograful, educația prin cinema, etc. etc. Această revistă care va marca o epocă în ziaristica cinematografică și-a asigurat colaborarea marilor scriitori europeni.

Nu va lipsi nici poetul Paul Valery și nici criticul Paul Souday cari vor publica cîteva articole de rară însemnălate.

Imediat ce ne vom procura un
„Close Up“, vom reveni pe larg.

*Films of the Year 1927-8.* Edited by ROBERT HERRING. Studio L.A., 44 Leicester Sq. 5s.

This is an entirely new production, issued by the *Studio Magazine*, which hopes to make it an annual review of the cinema. It includes a short article written by the editor on the newest developments in the art, and thirty-two full-page plates, representing "stills" selected from the best films of the year, with a short footnote to each, pointing out the technical devices and principles of grouping used. It is, taken all round, the best effort of its kind I have seen; it is designed for a public with less specialized knowledge of technique than is, for instance, a paper like *Close-Up*, but it is exceedingly comprehensive: it contains illustrations of "Emah Bakia" and "The Way," and discusses the theory of time-ordered psychological movement as opposed to the usual notion of film story-telling. That it should treat impartially two such diverse films as "Emah Bakia" and "Beau Geste" is evidence enough that it is a legitimate and bona fide survey of the year's pictures; and we can recommend it without hesitation to all those who are interested in cinematographical development, and wish to help their own judgment with a good critical summary of the past year.

Chorvall Oxford

## THE CINEMA.

The growing popularity of the Cinema is undeniable. Moreover, the new cinema public—if we may make an inference from the throng that attended on Mr. Anthony Asquith in Somerville—shows signs of incipient wisdom. It has not yet developed a corporate spirit, although rumour is again busy with the possibility of a Film Society being started here in the near future, and the few who are already acquainted with the periodical *Close Up* will forgive my mentioning it for the benefit of a greater number who are not. It is hardly likely—for the moment, at any rate—to find its way into College J.C.R.'s, because its claim to be ‘the only magazine devoted to films as an art’ is justified, and it lacks the venial attraction of most of its contemporaries. It is international in its outlook, with a certain bias in favour of all things Russian—a bias which we in England are not given the opportunity of sharing or denying. The ‘stills’ it publishes from contemporary work by Einstein or Pudowkin fill one with impotent rage against the system of censorship under which we suffer. But it is something of a consolation to know that Elstree is at least not following a tradition set by the rest of Europe.

*Close Up* costs one shilling a month, and is published by Pool, 24 Devonshire Street, London, W.C.I.

ANTHONY GISHFORD.

["PERIODICALS.", "The latest art coterie is the Emotionists, who some time ago held an exhibition of paintings and drawings in London. Apparently the group's activities are not confined to the plastic arts, for the first number of a new periodical, Emotionism (Hurricane Lamp Gallery, 2s 6d), contains prose and poetry; in addition to reproductions of Emotionist pictures.", "\"Emotionist\" art is defined—surely not well—as an expression of \"exactly and definitely the inner significant creation of life,\" and apparently the bulk of the pictures and writings in \"Emotionism\" are designed on this by no means precise assumption. The few literary items that are intelligible to normal intelligences— chiefly an instalment of a novel by E. W. Ashcroft and a short story by Edith Rowe— are commonplace enough and surely did not need a new art movement to sponsor them. The April issue of \"Close Up\" (Pool, 1s), the film review, contains among other noteworthy articles, an article on Eric Von Stroheim by Clifford Howard and an account of \"The End of St Petersburg,\" an outstanding Russian film directed by Pudowin. \"Stills\" from \"The End of St Petersburg\" are among the magazine's well-chosen illustrations.", "MOTION PICTURE ART.", "Tel.", "Though so young, the art of the cinema has grown on such an enormous rate that the data pertaining to its development, scattered over at least two continents, stands in sore need of careful assembling and sifting by qualified research students before a really comprehensive and scientific survey of screen art can be made. There is a vast amount of work to be done by such as Mr Eric Elliott, whose \"Anatomy of Motion Picture Art\" is one of the most important books of its kind yet published.", "Mr Elliott does not seek to point out why \"The Last Laugh\" is a superior film to \"The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse\"; in this respect he is no more concerned with film art than the dictionary-maker is with Shakespeare; his aim, rather, is scientific, namely, to trace and describe the root principles and potential values of dramatic expression in the medium of the cinema. This aim, be it said, he most successfully achieves.", "\"Dramaturgy, Histrionism, and Pictorial Craft,\" says Mr Elliott, \"are the established foundations of screen technique. The film drama is, in the main, constructed according to the recognised laws of dramatic relationship in plot, whatever liberties it may take with time and place throughout the narrative; and its means of expression is divided roughly into pantomime and pictures.\"", "Mr Elliott's succeeding pages analyse the precise parts played by these three fundamentals—drama, acting and pictures—in the making of a film, and consider at some length the real cinematic possibilities of the major innovations, such as the \"close-up,\" that have marked the history of the film industry. One would be hard put to suggest how the manner in which story, photography, acting and scenic art combine to make an entirely new art could be better described.", "Unless in a final rhapsody and one or two passing references to other arts, the author's attitude and exposition are alike always praiseworthy. His book ought to clear away not a few popular misimpressions.", "\"Anatomy of Motion Picture Art,\" By Eric Elliott. (Pool, 7s 6d.)", "WE welcome the first issue of *Close Up* which, despite its name, does appear to examine and think about the theory of films. The examination is somewhat tentative owing to the smallness of the paper, and in this first number there is a certain air of propounding with every circumstance of intellect what turn out to be quite low-brow suggestions—as, for instance, that terminals should be used more intelligently on the screen. There is an article by H. D. on *The Cinema and the Classics*, and *The War from Three Angles* reviews *The Big Parade*, *Mons* and *The Emden*, with comments on them as national productions; but perhaps the most stimulating feature is the Editorial by Kenneth Macpherson, who believes that \"somehow something must be done to give films their due.\" The way of doing it, we would suggest, is not, as is beginning to be learnt, to point proudly to the recent past, but to point out the direction for the future. That is what an increasing number of serious people, as well as film producers themselves, want to know. *Close Up* is published by Pool at Riant Chateau, Territet, Switzerland (where they are lucky enough to have *Joyless Street* publicly shown) and the very low subscription is 14s. a year. We look forward to seeing the next issue of the magazine, and hope it will be bigger and with better illustrations. Those of *Voyage to the Congo* might be from post-cards.", "London Mercury August 927", "", "die\ngem.\n, an\ngem.\n, es\ngem.\ngem.\ngem.\ngem.\ng

*Anatomy of Motion Picture Art.* By ERIC ELLIOT.
Pool, Territet, Switzerland.

It is something of an event when a serious critical work on the cinema appears; but when the work is in English, the situation becomes unique. For this reason Mr. Elliot has set himself an unusually hard task, for he has to say things which have never been said before. Nor has he the raw material at hand in which to express his thoughts, for the art, as opposed to the craft, of the cinema is notably lacking in technical terms. Studio jargon there is in plenty, but it is not of much use when it becomes necessary to classify the devices used to obtain various results, not according to their technique, but according to their effect on the witness. Mr. Elliot does not examine the details of technique so much as determine the relative values of technical processes as part of the stock-in-trade of the artist who intends to achieve a certain effect.

That the best judge of a dinner is the man who has to eat it presupposes that he has a comparative knowledge of the methods of preparing the dishes, that he is a gourmet of some experience. The average picture-goer is usually a bad critic because he is quite unused to comparing or evaluating the fare provided for him. Even if he knows what he likes, he is unable to express his feelings in words, for they flatly refuse to describe adequately a purely pictorial sensation. Mr. Elliot has attempted to overcome the difficulty, and to provide a language for the exchange of critical ideas on the cinema. Whether he has succeeded or failed rests with the public to decide, for it remains to be seen whether they will adopt or reject his technology. But in all event she has gone boldly to the heart of the matter, and has grappled with the problem which is at the base of all the ignorance and confusion about the art

of the cinema. Where one has blazed a trail, others will be sure to follow, and we can only hope that they will respect the work of a pioneer.

We cannot but marvel that in spite of the double difficulty of trying to discuss pictures in terms of words which want to twist round and mean something else, Mr. Elliot has written in a good and clear style. We remember Lutz and L'Estrange Fawcett, and are grateful. What has to be said is clearly set out, and is so well arranged that it is easy to turn up any reference. He has wisely confined himself to 150 pages, instead of the 150 volumes which he might justifiably have occupied, thus avoiding the morass of psychology that must be so attractive if one knows anything about it.

Finally the book is an important step in forwarding the union of all who are interested in the art of the cinema. At present they are a scattered multitude, but provided with a common tongue they will one day be a power in the land. Curiously enough it is only words which can set the movies free; for though we can think in pictures we can only exchange thoughts and knowledge in words. All honour to Eric Elliot for being one of the first to unsheath his fountain-pen in a great cause. Incidentally it is one of a score of pens which are doing such good work between the covers of "Close Up."

F.K.M.C.

Far longer and more solemn, but not more complete, Mr. Eric Elliott's *Anatomy of Motion Picture Art* is an attempt to sum up the past and the prospects of moving pictures. "Motion picture art" (three substantives joined together, two of them presumably meant to do the work of adjectives the author is too lazy to look for), strikes me as a horrible expression. Moreover, it illustrates

the author's principal weakness—lack of detachment. Very little detachment is needed to see that the title of the book is slovenly. But Mr. Elliott is too full of the cinematograph and its history even for that. He has any amount of ideas, but they are still a trifle messy; and his final chapter,

entitled "Conclusions," merely emphasises their shapelessness. Nevertheless, he will one day write a good book on the subject, for he has knowledge and enthusiasm, and in the meantime his present work is well worth reading as one of the few serious contributions to the study of a new medium.

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT!

AT LAST! You can keep in touch closely with world developments in motion pictures by reading—

CLOSE-UP

An International Monthly Magazine Published in Switzerland

—approaching films from the angles of art, experiment and development;

—not highbrow, but progressive;

—reporting the major achievements;

—search light on new film-forms;

—distinguished thinkers and writers as contributors—Havelock Ellis, Andre Guide, Arnold Bennett;

—news of all countries with correspondents in Paris, London, Berlin, Moscow, Rome, Hollywood, etc.

Annual Subscription, $3.50.
Single Copies, 35c
Vol. 1, July-Dec. 1927—$5.00 Bound

Hollywood Representative: MARTIN SACKIN, 6206 Temple Hill Drive
Hollywood, California

Special Announcement

AT LAST!

You can keep in close touch with world developments in motion pictures by reading

Close Up

—approaching films from the angles of art, experiment and development.

—not highbrow, but progressive.

—reporting the major achievements.

—a searchlight on new film-forms.

—distinguished thinkers and writers as contributors—Havelock Ellis, Andre Gide, Arnold Bennett.

Annual Subscription, $3.50—Single Copies 35c.
Vol. 1, July-Dec., 1927—$5.00 bound

AMERICAN REPRESENTATIVES
FILM ARTS GUILD

SYMON GOULD, Director

500 Fifth Avenue, Dept. 200, New York

HOLLYWOOD REPRESENTATIVE
MARTIN SACKIN

6206 Temple Hill Drive, Hollywood

Phone GRanite 1702

PUBLICATIONS

FILMS: FACTS AND FORECASTS. By L'ESTRANGE FAWCETT. Bles. 215.

ANATOMY OF MOTION PICTURE ART. By ERIC ELLIOT. Pool. 6s.

THE MOTION PICTURE CAMERAMAN. By E. G. LUTZ. Scribner's. 10s. 6d.

LILIAN GISH. By EDWARD WAGENKNECHT. University of Washington Chapbooks. 65c.

THERE are too few books of constructive criticism on the cinema in English. Ours appears to be a mentality best able to give sudden glints of perception through clouds of confused thinking. Mr. Fawcett's book is a good example of this type, and the perception is more conscious than usual. There are a good many over-familiar photographs, and much starry gossip—as this, of a visit to Chaplin's studio “—in came the teapot. Everyone partook of it” (surely a rash custom) “and ate sandwiches and cake. But only the two Londoners took milk in their tea.” Which may send a thrill of illicit intimacy down our spines, but is hardly what we pay a guinea for. What make us more likely to pay it are the frankness with which the author discusses studio methods and the knowledge he shows in the discussion. Details of blind booking, of profit and loss, and all kinds of inside information are given, which will interest everybody anxious to see how the industry is organised. And this is a matter very much to the fore just now. Mr. Fawcett is better on this side of the cinema than he is in dealing with it as an art, where he is uncertain as to what it is he wants, and what he ought to want. When so few films are dealt with in detail, it is surely a pity that one of them should be *Flesh and the Devil*; there must be other things to say of Greta Garbo than that “she is an alluring person,” and the casual comment on Von Stroheim as “one of the more adventurous directors

THE MOVIES

705

in Hollywood,” seems curiously naive. Indeed, the book would have had a greater appeal had it not sought so much, in phrase and illustration, to be popular. It must therefore be regarded as a careful but unequal compilation, definitely to be included in anyone’s film library for the sake of the insight it gives into industry and studio—the whole business from casting to distribution.

I should have liked the prices of this and Mr. Elliot's book to be interchanged; one would willingly pay a guinea for *Anatomy of Motion Picture Art*. Mr. Elliot avoids any of the emotional rhetoric which mediocrity seems to bring to a consideration of the movies. He concerns himself instead with examining Pictorial Composition, Beginnings of Photoplay Technique, The Value of Motion, and Principles of Continuity, and the examination is thorough because the enthusiasm is vital enough to be controlled and used. Without setting out to be striking, nearly everything he says makes one pause to think. It is no bad plan to take one of his sentences, such as "The principles of drawing craft are in effect the principles to be observed in the arrangements of a motion scene," or, of a sub-title, "It rests the eye and smooths out the sequences of light," and consider it during the day. Much would then be learnt, and a great deal of *cul-de-sac* argument saved. An orderly, stimulating and serious book, *Anatomy of Motion Picture Art* should be read by everybody at all connected with life as it is.

I have left myself little space in which to review the last two books. Lilian Gish may be dismissed as gush. Mr. Lutz's book is of value because the place of the cameraman is at last being realised. He has received little public credit in the past, but his importance can scarcely be exaggerated. He can ruin a good picture, and lend interest to a mediocre one, *Sunrise*, for instance. Anyone who wishes to see the camera brilliantly employed has only to see *The Student Prince*. This book is useful, therefore, to those who want to see just how much a cameraman must do and know. It is not technically advanced, but that should not debar it from finding many readers who are themselves only in the first stages. It should be of benefit to those just beginning to make their own films, and should add interest to films even to those who only sit and watch.

ROBERT HERRING

CLOSE UP, Pool, Riant Château, Territet
(Suisse) — décembre 1928.

Photos des Films : The Forty First, de
Protosanoff — Ombres Blanches — Films ja-
ponais, de J. Snige Sudzuky — La boîte de
Pandore de PABST — La Marche des Ma-
chines, de Eugène Deslaw, etc.

Etudes remarquables sur l'art cinématograp-
graphique et sur l'activité mondiale du film
(particulièrement les Russes).

Close Up sous son aspect discret est la
revue qui défend les idées les plus avancées
du cinématographe et ce qui est extraordi-
naire par ces temps de business, en toute
indépendance. C'est véritablement la revue
de ceux qui ont la plus grande foi dans le
cinéma. Nous la recommandons très vive-
ment,
Club de Cinema Osleuwe

26-12-28

Les aimables confrères

Nous lisons les lignes suivantes dans
« Close-Up », sous la signature de M.
Freddy Chevalley :

« Un nouveau journal vient d'être lancé
à Genève : *La Lorgnette* et c'est avec
grand plaisir que nous en signalons l'appa-
ition. Consacrant ses colonnes aux sujets
aimables et souriants, il peut être considé-
ré, de ce fait, comme indispensable au pu-
blic genevois ! Le cinéma y a sa large part
et la rédaction de cette rubrique a été con-
fiée à M. Arnold Kohler, de Ciné-Club.
Les vues personnelles de M. Kohler, en
matière d'art cinématographique, valent
par leur originalité, leur sincérité et leur
absolue indépendance. Les lecteurs de *La
Lorgnette* auront donc le privilège de lire,
deux fois par mois, une chronique fort
 interestante des films. »

Merci !

Courrier

d'Intransigeance

18-1-29

Close-Up, la revue Internationale
du cinéma, qui est éditée en anglais,
consacrer a son prochain numéro (fe-
vrier) à une vigoureuse campagne cor-
tre la censure cinématographique un
versele.

La Revue du Roy, le plus jeune des
pensateurs de films américains, à vi-

Bibliographie. — Close-Up. Je remer-
cie mon confrère de trop aimables lignes
qu'il consacre à la chronique cinégraphi-
que de La Lorgnette; dans un tel organe
elles me sont précieuses.

Numéro de décembre : As Is (Kenneth Macpherson). An Early Work (Oswell Blakiston). The Cinema in Paris (Jean Lenauer). Film Imagery : Eisenstein (Robert Herring). The Cinema in Retrospect — II (Clifford Howard). A Museum of the Movies (K. M.). How to rent a Film (Bryher). A Fairy Tale Film (A. Kraszna Krausz). Apôtres et Multitude (Freddy Chevalley). Two Film Snags (P. A. Le Neve Foster). Comment and Review.

Parmi les très riches illustrations, à si-
gnaler deux images de la *Marche des Ma-
chines* et deux merveilleuses photographies
(contre-jour, angle de prise, mouvement)
du film sur les *Sparta Kiades*.

Numéro de janvier 1929 : As Is (Ken-
eth Mac Pherson). Haven't See Any Pictu-
res (Ernest Betts). Film Imagery : Sea-
strom (Robert Herring). Propaganda (Hay
Chowl). The Compound Cinema. H. A.
Potamkin. Storm over Asia, and Berlin !
(K. M.). Préjudices (Jean Lenauer). Con-
tinous Performance (Dorothy Richardson).
Interview with Carl Freund (Oswell Bla-
keston). Une poignée de Films nouveaux
(Freddy Chevalley). The Cinema in Paris
(Jean Lenauer). Comment and Review.

On remarquera les photographies des
films japonais, entre autres de *Flame in
the Fog* et un portrait de Deslaw. Pe.

Cinéma, a succédant.

Close Up (Riaux, Château-Territet, Suisse). — Volei le sommaire du numéro de janvier de l'intéressante revue anglo-française « Close Up » : « As Is », Kenneth Macpherson ; « Haven't Seen Any Photographres », Ernest Betts ; « Film Imagery ; Strom », Robert Herring ; « Propaganda », Hay Chowl ; « The Compound Cinema », H. A. Potamkin ; « Storm Over Asia-and Berlin ! », K. M. ; « Préjudices », Jean Lenauer ; « Continuous Performance », Dorothy Richardson ; « Interview with Carl Freund », Oswell Blakeston ; « Une Polignée de Films nouveaux », Freddy Chevalley ; « The Cinema in Paris », Jean Lenauer ; « Comment and Review », Au surplus, un portrait d'Eissenstein et desyches de fragments de la « Bolte de Panore », de Pabst; de « Free Trip », de Erno Metzer; de « La Ligne générale, d'Eissenstein; de « L'Argent », de L'Herbier; des « Nouveaux Messieurs », de Feyder, c

Propagande soviétique

Le journal russe « Vozrojdenie », qui paraît à Paris contient, en première page de son numéro du 16 janvier, le télégramme suivant :

« Londres, le 15 janvier.

« Les journaux de Londres communiquent qu'il s'est créé à Territet en Suisse, une organisation spéciale ayant pour but d'obtenir l'autorisation d'importer en Angleterre, aux fins de leur projection sur l'écran, 40 films bolchévistes interdits par la censure anglaise.

De nombreux et éminents Anglais, appartenant au monde de la littérature, des arts et du théâtre ont reçu des lettres de protestation contre l'interdiction des films en question; les correspondants anonymes, au nom de « la liberté intellectuelle », les prient de leur aider à faire lever l'interdiction qui frappe ces films. Les lettres ajoutent que, selon toute probabilité, il sera possible, après les élections prochaines, d'introduire ces films en Angleterre.

Les films en question, pour la plupart, ont un caractère marqué de propagande; mais plusieurs d'entre eux sont interdits pour des considérations purement morales. Les défenseurs, bénévoles ou payés de l'art cinégraphique moscovite, s'efforcent de démontrer au monde littéraire et théâtral anglais que certains de ces films sont exceptionnels dans leur réalisation. Ils recommandent tout particulièrement « La tempête au-dessus de l'Asie », affirmant que c'est le film le plus étonnant qu'on ait jamais donné à l'écran. Les Anglais ont interdit ce film parce qu'il est dirigé contre l'Angleterre. »

Cette nouvelle, dont on ne saurait contester l'importance vu qu'elle est donnée par un journal connu pour le sérieux de ses informations, a peiné bon nombre de Russes fixés chez nous. Comme on les comprend !

Il est en effet inadmissible que la propagande pour les ordures bolchévis-tes parte de chez nous. La réputation de notre pays en souffrirait. Mercantis ou agents secrets des Soviets, il faut que ces gens-là soient empêchés de nous nuire.

Espérons que le Département de Police auquel nous avons signalé la chose, les invitera à aller exercer ailleurs leur sale et nauséabonde industrie.

Feuilles d'Avis Montreux Hy C. 19-27

produceurs in general is mainly screen hysteria.

You can never get Sovkino enthusiasts in this country to understand that the quality which they admire in Soviet films is precisely the quality which ordinary, sane persons call hysteria.

The films are clever, especially in mass groupings and incisive editorial work, but it is impossible to overlook the broad streak of insanity running through them, insanity that rises to a kind of pictorial scream.

Max Nordau, who formulated a theory about the insanity of art, would have powerfully aided his case could he have seen a few Russian films.

Such is my opinion of the Soviet film movement, but there are others.

I have a letter from one of the contributors to "Close Up," an English-printed film magazine which has its headquarters in Switzerland, and circularises people in this country on behalf of Mr. Pudovkin's anti-British films.

My correspondent types his signature and gives a monomark address, so I will leave him anonymous, but he writes well and with authority.

He quotes first of all what he calls a "particularly brilliant" review of "Storm Over Asia," but omits to add that the reviewer is a Soviet enthusiast.

"Russian films," he says, "owe their vitality to the fact that they deal with the problems of the people. The super in the crowd has been through what he is asked to play. The problems of the picture are his problems, and in consequence the sincerity of the acting is overwhelming."

What happens to Soviet supers when they are not sincere? One would like to know.

"We ought to be glad," continues my monomark correspondent, "that the Russians show us what they believe because they are showing us how to make pictures. England's answer should not be the negative one of banning the picture, but of making a film of her own convictions.

"Seeing the other person's point of view does not seduce the spectator unless there is something very wrong with his own beliefs. It is the director's fault if the picture is not interesting, but our fault if we cannot put ourselves temporarily in the position of the characters."

All of which is true, but do we want to put ourselves in the position of Mr. Pudovkin, anxious to prove that the best way of overthrowing constitutional government in Britain is to start an anti-British crusade in Asia?

## SOVIET FILM SCENE.

### Attention of L.C.C. Called To It: No Further Action.

—The Home Secretary.

Sir Herbert Thomas (Liberal, Anglesey), in the House, of Commons this afternoon, mentioned again the film "The End of St. Petersburg," shown at the New Gallery Cinema, Regent-street, on Sunday. He suggested it was commissioned for propaganda purposes. During the presentation, he said, the words "All power to the Soviet" appeared and were cheered. The National Anthem was hissed.

Sir Robert asked what action the Home Secretary proposed to take.

The Home Secretary said that he was aware there was some demonstration. A colleague in the House who was present assured him that the National Anthem was properly received by those present.

The film was authorised by the L.C.C. to be shown to members of the Society and their friends on the usual conditions. He had called the attention of the L.C.C. to it, and he did not propose to take any further action.

Commander Kenworthy.—Are we to understand that while this film was being shown the Home Secretary left this city for the week-end and allowed his information regarding it to come from the honourable baronet?

To this the Home Secretary made no reply.

That highest of the highbrows, Ivor Brown, has been casting his pearls of wisdom before the people who read the *Saturday Review*. He went to see "The End of St. Petersburg," and came out annoyed. His annoyance may be traced to the fact that Pudovkine's film was vital enough to prevent him from going off into the sleep which, he confesses, is a regular feature of his cinema attendances.

There are many things about the film which annoyed Brother Brown. One of these was its propaganda. Now I have no kites to fly for Pudovkine's political point of view. I am interested in his art. But if the learned one is going to dismiss all art that presents the artist's point of view, what is going to be left?

## 'Asie

neureux et confiant qui exprime « toute la courtoisie de l'Est ». Il lui offre une cigarette. Bair ne peut la prendre à cause de ses mains attachées et il est incapable d'expliquer qu'il ne fume pas. Le soldat frotte une allumette et lui met la cigarette dans la bouche. Bair secoue la tête, la cigarette tombe. Le soldat le regarde avec surprise et pense alors qu'il a été fou en voulant être bon avec un Mongol. Il pousse Bair devant lui. Il pleut. La campagne est déserte. Le soldat commande à Bair d'avancer, l'ajuste et tire. Bair se retourne, blessé, avec une expression d'indicible éton-

nement. Une seconde balle le touche; il tombe, tête baissée, sur un escarpement boueux...

Pendant ce temps, les soldats laissés au poste ont fouillé dans les paquets de Bair et trouvé l'amulette que sa mère lui avait donnée, cette amulette tombée de la poche d'un autre Mongol, après la querelle.

A l'intérieur, ils découvrent un parchemin prouvant que le possesseur de l'amulette est le descendant de Gengis Khan, l'héritier du trône de la plus grande Mongolie. Les chefs anglais ont immédiatement l'idée de restaurer une monarchie mongole pour la dresser contre l'influence soviétique.

Mais l'assassinat de Bair a déjà été accompli. Ils sortent en courant et trouvent dans la rue

### Le soldat exécuteur retardait le plus possible le meurtre commandé

Le soldat exécuteur rattachant sa bande molletière. On ramène le corps de Bair. Il n'est pas mort. Des chirurgiens essaient de le sauver. Cette scène est l'une des plus atroces et des plus amèrement ironiques qui aient jamais été tournées.

Bair revient à la vie. Le peuple s'assemble autour de lui et le contemple. On couvre le nouveau prince d'extraordinaires vêtements de soie. Le soir, les Anglais lui font endosser un habit européen et le présentent à une énorme assemblée comme « le Prince des Mongols ». Parmi les invitées, une jeune femme porte la fameuse fourrure de renard. Bair furieux la lui arrache. La jeune femme a une crise de nerfs. Tumulte. Scène d'une irrite consommée : le Mongol qui avait perdu l'amulette, pourchassé, se réfugie dans la maison de Bair. Des femmes en robes légères sont en train de l'habiller. Un soldat tire sur l'autre Mongol réfugié dans un coin et le tue comme un rat. Bair redevient alors furieux, déchire ses vêtements, saisit une épée et, comme un possédé, brisant tout, se fraie un passage. Quand l'assemblée ahurie essaie de le poursuivre, il se jette sur elle avec la même fureur démonique et se sauve par la fenêtre.

Les insurgés attaquent. Bair est à leur tête. Alors s'élève la tempête et avec elle commence le symbolismisme qui domine toute la fin de l'œuvre.

La tempête gronde, devient cyclone. L'armée étrangère est refoulée. Hommes, arbres et canons sont renversés comme des fétus. Bair et ses Mongols avancent, triomphants. Le film se termine ainsi sur un crescendo sauvage de la tempête et de la charge mongole.

Cette conclusion n'est pas heureuse. Le scénario se terminait par la chevauchée de Bair dans les steppes lointains. Fin bien meilletteure car le problème qui fait le sujet du film ne peut pas être résolu par un ouragan. Le problème demeure entier, ce qu'eut parfaiteusement indiqué la chevauchée de Bair dans les steppes.

Et M. Kenneth Macpherson conclut : Mais la Tempête sur l'Asie n'est pas un film à critiquer en détail. C'est une œuvre que les amateurs fervents de cinéma dévoreront avec avidité et reconnaissance.

Kenneth Macpherson.

The World Of
Films

Everpool bar 28-1-29
Makers

In And Out Of The
Studio

FROM OUR CINEMA CORRESPONDENT

There is, I find, an impression about
that film studios are places of rare
excitement. Iجد, idle persons are
apt to ask me plausibly for a personally
conquered talent if a studio "next time
you go." After they have been on the
studio floor, and watched the repetition
of an apparently meaningless series of
gestures, first with the awe and then
with a puzzled boredom, they usually
remark in a tone of astonishment upon
the apparent blotches which the mercury
vapour lamps seem to show up on
their neighbour's faces. Then they trip
fearfully over a bundle of electric cables
on their way out, and do not usually ask
to come again. After all, they can now
entertain their friends with technical
terms picked up, and misunderstood,
remark knowingly that they saw "The
Stolen Son-In-Law" (or whatever it was)
being made. But, whatever they may
in future pretend, and however polite
their gratitude, they go back confessing
in their hearts that film studios are very
dull and uninteresting. I quite agree;
I have not been near a studio for over
three months now.

Once you are used to the queer things
the lights do, and even a little chilled
at the horrible appearance of grease
paint away from the lamps or of natural
skin under their glare, the studio as a
studio is merely a bleak barn over-
crowded in places. The interest of a
visit lies in the occasional remarks that
a director or actor will make to explain
what is in his mind, where it is this
little piece of action fits in, how he is
contriving to make this eternal cabaret
scene differ from all other cabaret
scenes. Not all directors and actors can
think of anything to say.

***

Well, I am now to some extent
acquitted of a friendly duty to conduct
film-worshippers to the scene of the
initial rites. A little book has been
issued called "Through a Yellow
Glass" (Pool, 7s. 6d), which chats about
film production with as much detail
and accuracy as anyone would be likely
to do after a first visit, so there is no
need for the worshipper to go at all.
Mr. Owell Blakeston, the author, has a
habit of buttonholing his public with
such words as "O facetious reader,"
and entering into a series of dialogues
in a singularly familiar way. This is
rather objectionable, though amateur
cinematographers and other enthusiasts
may appreciate the intimacy, but a

more positive fault lies in his hasty
and inaccurate generalisations. The
equation, for instance, of the assistant
director (who is the director's aide-de-
camp and deputy), with the assistant
producer (a kind of apprentice whose
mission in life it is to have things
thrown at him). Some studios have
both, some confuse them, but it is a
mistake.

Still, there is a fairly up-to-date
account of the mechanics of the cinema.
Sometimes the author writes as if he
were addressing a chorus of ignorant
"fans," sometimes he gives useful but
rather lengthy and fulsome advice to
would-be camera-men and directors—
amateurs, presumably, who want to
learn more about their weapons. On
names and spellings he is often a little
hazy, and the would-be scenarist is to
be warned off the method of script
writing he suggests, if it is intended to
submit stories to studios.

22-Jun.

No Outside Stories, Yorkshire Post

He mentions that the leading American
companies, tired of the trouble of handling
tons of users manuscript and of meeting
constant accusations of plagiarism, have
virtually refused to consider any outside
stories at all. The British companies have
not yet gone so far as this, but among all
the British films trade-shown during the
past year, how many were based on
original stories by unknown writers? Very
few indeed.

The ground covered by Mr. Jackson is
also covered, more briefly, in Mr. Owell
Blakeston's "Through a Yellow Glass"
(Pool, 7s. 6d). This is a remarkably com-
prehensive, condensed little handbook on
almost every aspect of studio technique
from "make up" to modern Russian
"cutting" methods. It includes technical
details of camera management, numerous
terse comments on current production
methods—especially British methods—and
practical advice to amateur film producers.
There is a useful glossary of film terms and
two appendices—one on modern scenario
construction and one on the work of Pabst.

Mr. Blakeston has a lively style and a
sense of humour; he combines extensive
technical knowledge with an unusual appre-
ciation of aesthetic possibilities. I am not
qualified to vouch for the accuracy of every
detail in his book, or for the soundness of
all his opinions, but his book is packed with
information, is not too long, and never
dull. "Through a Yellow Glass" should
be useful to many professionals, and film-
goers who want to know "how the wheels
are ready to face frequent disillusion—answers
to nearly all the questions they could
think of asking.

FLASHES
FROM THE
SCREEN

By HERMES.

Daily Dispatch
Manchester

7-1-29

Disclosures of Film Secrets—Rise of British Producers—Out-of-Date Plots—A Real Thriller.

OSWELL BLAKESTON has disclosed the secrets of the studio in a light enough manner for everyone to read and understand. Hardly a technical treatise, and yet sufficiently informative to be of value, his book "Through a Yellow Glass," published by Pool at 7s. 6d., will provide for the uninitiated a field of information which they will be able to appreciate and understand.

Blakeston is at heart a highbrow, and, being young, naturally takes himself and the screen seriously. Those desiring an insight into studio ways and means will find in this book just that kind of information which will give a sense of profound knowledge when confidentially imparted to the uninformed over the coffee. You may learn of the use of grease paint, and its possible abandonment; how to prepare a script, and in what form to write a scenario. You may even gather the limitations of art direction and the immense importance of illumination.

DARK SECRETS.

Without a blush our young writer gives us the secrets of the property room, many of them as old as the hills and long realised by the public. Although there is a tendency to relate the obvious book is exhaustive, for in satirical manner we learn much of the tragedy which lies behind the ambitions of screen-struck maidens and the difficulty every aspirant has to obtain recognition. If this is not enough, you may read of cameras, how they are set up and used, of lenses, developing, printing, and even projection. It is a gay and interesting little volume, and one which cinema fans will find to their hearts, but it must not be judged either by its size or price, for at 7s. 6d., which is something of a prohibitive price, 140 pages seems expensive, but as it is a popular subject the book deserves a popular edition. "The Yellow Glass" is not an ideal title, for it gives no information as to the contents, excepting to those who are aware of the importance of the yellow glass within the studio

Being interested to see the reactions of others to "Love's Sacrifice," I took along two colleagues to the Capitol last night. One was Hay Chowl, of "Close Up." The other was the cinema critic on a national newspaper. Both were eloquent about the simplicity and naive charm of Alpha's film, both admitted its restraint and intelligence, and both fell for the fascinating personality of Katy Von Nagy.

THROUGH A YELLOW GLASS. By Oswell Blakeston. (Pool, 7/6.) 9s 20-2-29.

By looking through a yellow glass, a film producer is enabled to judge the photographic effects of the colours he is using in his set. That explains the title of what is, in fact, an extremely competent text book about the cinema. It comes at the right time, for there is a growing public whose interest is not confined to consideration of the relative qualities of the one-and-tenpennies and the two-and-fourpennies. But how many of them have any accurate or clear idea as to the way in which films are made? They conjure up vague mental pictures of the studios, large barn-like buildings filled with tangled wires and electric lights and bits of scenery and men in shirt-sleeves and underfed 'supers,' for some of them have seen 'The Last Command,' or 'Shooting Stars.' But how it all happens, they have not got the remotest idea. Dr. Blakeston will tell them, his book is clear, terse and work-manlike; the chapters are systematically arranged; there is an index and even a glossary of technical terms. There is no important phase of the process on which he does not touch, and except in two appendices (one of which is a reprint from 'Close Up') he concerns himself exclusively with facts. The appendices in question have to do with future possibilities in the 'subjectioning' of the camera, which is becoming mobile, with its moving shots and shots taken from above and shots taken from below, and so on. They are well calculated to whet the appetite of the thoughtful reader for information of a less purely technical nature, now that he has some ground-work to go on.

ANTHONY GISHFORD.

Oswell

Thought I knew my Soho pretty well, but I hold out the palm for really intimate gastronomic knowledge of the neighbourhood to my young friend Oswell Blakiston, who periodically turns up about lunchtime and hales me forth to some obscure Czecho-Slovakian or Mongolian restaurant, where dishes of equally obscure origin and unpro-nuncable name are served in an atmosphere of sanjaks and samovars.

Oswell has written a book about films, and yesterday, when I met him, he had a bulky MS. under his arm which was destined, I understand, for some enterprising publisher. So look out, British producers!

Danning v.

James Maxton, of The NEW Office.

February 5, 1929.
Joynson-Hicks,

which is the labour Party, in private show some or one reason oferto.

now "Potemkin," a company owningices, Ltd. They are quite prepared showing, provided for it, as they before even a pri-

 invite to the show, prominent literary generally inter-

win the support noval of the pro-been banned for to make it quite be in no sense

ou will be good ing Offices, Ltd., for private exhi-

d of Directors.

Office was as

February 20, 1929.
Directors, The NEW

ter of the 5th may be granted add., to lend you a private exhibition, I of State to say with your applica- servant,

HAROLD SCOTT.
but it?

# Wieder Streitigkeiten mit der Film-Arts-Guild?

Film-Kurier

16 March 1928

Die Bedeutung der Film-Arts-Guild in New York ist befanntlich stark umkämpft. Von Deutschland her betrachtet, nimmt sich die Kulturpropaganda der Film-Arts-Guild wesentlich anders aus als es in New York ausliegt. Vor allem in Punkt zu Rentabilität. Die deutschen Produzenten, deren Filme gespielt wurden, haben bisher finanziell nicht allzu Erfreuliches zu berichten, und der propagandistische Wert der New Vorker Aufführungen ist immerhin nicht unbekannt.

Im „Film-Kurier“ ist wiederholt der Standpunkt eingenommen worden, daß der deutsche Film es nicht nötig hat, seinen Einzug in Amerika über die Hintertrappe zu halten.

Es gibt gute deutsche Filme in genügender Anzahl, die einen Anspruch darauf machen können in ersten Theatern unter finanziell günstigen Bedingungen anzulaufen.

Wie wir hören, hat es in letzter Zeit zwischen Film-Arts-Guild und einer deutschen Firma wieder Differenzen gegeben, die sogar zu einer gerichtlichen Auseinandersetzung führen sollen.

Wie wir ferner hören, befindet sich zurzeit einer der leitenden Herzen der Film-Arts-Guild in Berlin.

Es märe zu wünschen, daß die Film-Arts-Guild nummehr in aller Offentlichkeit diskutiert und nach Möglichkeit beigelegt würden.

## Zum dritten Male

26-5-28

### Volks-Film-Kunst.

Die dritte Veranstaltung des Volks-Vortrags für Filmkunst im Deutsch-Amerikanischen Theater brachte einen Vortrag G. W. Habits über „Filmkunst und Filmzenjahr“. Einen Vortrag ohne große Worte.

Vortrag wandte sich vor allem gegen die Zensur des — Fabrikanten, der auf Geschäft und billige Massenerfolge sieht, statt Kunst und Gesinnungs-filme zu wollen.

Vortrag vertritt den Standpunkt, daß Masse nicht immer gleichbedeutend mit Masse ist, daß es innerhalb der Masse einen Teil Menschen gibt, der etwas anderes haben will.

Für ihn gibt es zwei Möglichkeiten: entweder den Fabrikanten zu überzeugen, daß es sich rentiert, für diesen einen Teil der Masse gute Filme zu schaffen oder diese andersgesinnten Verbraucher selber zu Fabrikanten zu machen.

Nach dieser Einleitung folgte die schon an anderer Stelle gelegte historische Reminiscenz von Mag. Stlabalowski „Die Erfindung der Cinematographie im Jahre 1895“ als primitiver Ausgangspunkt.

Dann an Stelle der „Liebe der Jean Rey“, gegen deren Vorführung die Theaterbezieher naturgemäß proteziert haben, weiß sie noch nicht abgespielt ist, der herrliche Chang-Film.

EISENSTEIN’S “The General Line” has caused a furore in Moscow. But it has been somewhat stilled by a sensational new film from Trauberg and Kosintzoff. This is “The New Babylon,” which does for the Paris Commune what “Ten Days” and “The End of St. Petersburg” have done for the Bolshevik Revolution. It is said to be more powerful than “The General Line.” Having some idea of the pastoral magnificence and social power of the latter I am holding my breath.

## Truth About Studio Life

OSWELL BLAKESTON, who is an occasional contributor to FILM WEEKLY, has just written a book entitled "The Extra-Passenger," which Pool is to publish shortly.

A film studio is the background for the story, and Mr. Blakeston promises us that no one has been spared. The director, cameraman and the artists are said to be shown as they really are. I don't know what sort of revelations Mr. Blakeston is going to make, but personally I have always found directors, cameramen and artists very ordinary people, going about their business in a very ordinary way.

Mr. Blakeston is also the author of a little book on cinematography which recently appeared under the title "Through a Yellow Glass."

“Close Up”, Zeitschrift. Verlag: Pool, Riant Chateau, Territet [Schweiz].

“Close Up” („Großaufnahme“) nennt sich diese Monatschrift, die sich als das einzige Magazin bezeichnet, das den Film als Kunst behandelt. Sie erzählt in englischer Sprache und ist mit guten Photographien ausgefaltet. Neuhörer Korrespondent des Blattes ist Symon Gould von der „Film-Arts Guild“. Eisenstein, Pudowkin und Merandross außern sich zu der letzten Nummer über den Vorteil. Ueberhaupt scheint der russische Film bevorzugt zu werden, doch finden wir auch einen längst notwendigen Hinweis auf den vor Jahren mit der Nazimoja von Amerikanern gebrechten Salome-Film. Dieser eingartige künstlerfilm ist leider nie nach Deutschland gekommen. Hoffentlich erzielt noch das Negativ.

Erwin Gepard.

Der Deutsche

OSWELL BLAKESTON has written a new novel with the title of "The Extra Passenger," in which the background is a film studio. It attempts to show the disillusion, hard work and petty jealousies which make up studio life. OSWELL Blakeston recently published a book on kinematography called "Through a Yellow Glass." Both are published by Pool. 16-5-27 Kino Welsky

CEN

## The "Gang"

The Home Secretary of very old gentlemen for some time and for my fellows from opening the private author to his agent; it got to the Art of go to make the Art of after themselves. While this is his business of course, the experts in the city people go to the city people of these working classes discovered the pic- nses of the Powers in a rigorous censorship for exhibition.

The Board of Film censors by the film pool for by the constantly to obtain that seems quite legal, seems to act as if it were the only thing which is Political.

1. Subjects which are not fit for circulation in other countries, or which are thought to be harmful to the public are forbidden.

FIL

One of the greatest films has to be the film of the week, ship, and the British cinema. It is the artistic development of the cinema, to say natural political films, as many films are shown also in other countries. All the rest, except the great art films of the week, are shown in the cinema. Of the loves of the great national of the life of the cinema before

Fortuna, showing

SHAFTESBURY AVENUE PAVILION—II

We said something last week of commercialism in the cinema, and of the manner in which its development is hindered by the narrowness of exhibitors. We wish now to pay tribute to Mr. Leslie Ogilvie, the manager of Shaftesbury Avenue Pavilion, and to describe some of the difficulties which he has to encounter in his endeavour to show more intelligent films. The first and principal of these is the Censor. This gentleman seems to be as ignorant as he is misguided, and it is largely his fault that the cinema is superficial and trashy. Says “Close Up”: “He passes films which guide vice and make it appear a pleasant means of surrounding oneself with luxurious comforts, though I am sure that I should never be happy in one of those vast marble bath-rooms. Whereas any films that show vice in its natural sordid colours are promptly suppressed.” Take “Tragedies of the Street,” which has been running for three months at the Ursulines, and which has been banned by the Censor. It is the story of a prostitute, no longer young, in a small, mid-European town, who is really touched by the gratitude of a rich boy whom she has befriended while he is rendered homeless by a quarrel with his parents. They plan to marry, and with her savings she buys a little confectionery shop. But her dreams are shattered, for youth has turned to youth, and the young man has been stolen by her friend, a girl with all the charm and freshness that she has lost. The acting of Anna Nilsson is a marvel of sympathy, and brings out admirably the philosophy of the story that there can be beauty of character in apparently utterly sordid circumstances. There is nothing “suggestive,” nothing that could appeal to a prurient mind. And yet “The Loves of Carmen,” which made me feel physically sick, has been passed, while this has been banned !

But Mr. Ogilvie's troubles do not end with the Censor. The duty on imported films has helped to make the British film industry a success, but it has cut it off from the free artistic growth of the Continent. Furthermore, European distributors are unwilling to send films into England, unless

they are sure that they will be booked for a general release at a large number of theatres. If the films have any artistic value, they will certainly not be so booked, so that the single exhibitor who would give them a showing cannot do so. If the film ever does get into England, it is set upon and rent in pieces by the Censor. It would be interesting to let him loose in the National Gallery with a pair of scissors. Imagine the wail of horror, when it was found that some of our choicest masterpieces showed gaping rents where he had exercised his prerogative of insulting the public intelligence and of proving his ignorant vandalism.

At present the Avenue Pavilion is running a series of revivals; a work of great value, for one of the tragedies of the cinema is its ephemeral character. Celluloid and emulsion perish, so that films mysteriously disappear. Also, when a good picture does come to England, it has a comparatively short life. It has a pre-release run in London, and is then shown at the first-class provincial cinemas. But after it has been shown by the little cinemas, it disappears. It has no commercial value, and no one exerts themselves to see that it is not lost. So that Mr. Ogilvie's rescue work has a double importance, for through it we are given an opportunity of judging the artistic development of the cinema; while for but him the films would literally disappear. No trace can be found in England of "Dr. Mabuse" or "Dr. Caligari," though a badly-worn copy of the latter was being shown at the Pavillon du Cinéma at Easter. The negative has been accidentally burnt, so every copy is of unique interest.

The reels which make their appearance in Mr. Ogilvie's office are often in a terrible condition. They have usually been through the projector three times a day for months on end, and have passed through the hands of operators of every shade of incompetence. Some there are who put the film carelessly into the machine, so that it jams in the gate, and the sprockets tear inches at a time off the edge. (The gate, incidentally, is the

June 1926

THE CHERWELL

211

mechanism which holds the picture in place while it is being actually thrown on to the screen; and if it is adjusted too tight, the result is wear on the film, and torrents of rain on the screen). In course of time films shrink and become brittle. Mr. Ogilvie first cuts out all the torn portions, and then has what is left carefully cleaned. Afterwards it is treated with emulsion, which gives it a new surface, and, to some extent, fills in the scratches. When he has finished with them, the films have been given a new lease of life.

The revivals are put on for a week, but if they are successful, the run is extended to a fortnight. This occurred in the case of "Vaudeville," and of "The Street" which is being shown at present.

It will be followed by "The Nibelungs," "Warning Shadows," and "Kean." It will be remembered that Mr. Ogilvie showed the "Love of Jeanne Ney," and also "The Postmaster." It is comforting to feel that there is one exhibitor in London who is really interested in showing movies of some artistic value. Mr. Ogilvie is already receiving the support of the public, and his efforts should be of the greatest interest to those who are interested in the art of the cinema. To the Gaumont British Picture Corporation must go the credit of allowing Mr. Ogilvie to develop his policy.

F.K.M.C.

"THROUGH A YELLOW GLASS. By *Oswell* Blakeston. (Pool.)

This is an admirable little book of one hundred and thirty-eight pages, and no-one interested in Films should let it pass by.

It is written in a very light and intelligible style; it is even amusing in parts, but at the same time it explains lucidly every small detail from "Making Up" to the most intricate portion of a "Movie Camera."

Helpful advice is given to all who wish to become "Film Stars," and among many other subjects skilfully handled are—Scenario Writing, Casting, Advice to Amateurs, Lighting, and Properties.

This book is especially recommended for those who want to learn all about the Technicalities of the Cinema-Camera, but this should not discourage the uninitiated, since the whole work is an excellent survey of the Film World. M. G.

Critic March 1929

Les Problèmes du film en Russie soviétique

Par BRYHER

L'auteur des *Bourgeois, du Développement, des Deux Individus et Occident*.

Cet ouvrage, de langue anglaise, est une profonde, et ardente étude des conditions imposées à la fabrication des films en U. R. S. S. Ce livre est d'une grande valeur, non seulement au sujet de l'étude du film russe, mais aussi bien de l'étude de la Russie moderne.

Une richesse d'informations, une connaissance, pénétrante et acerbe, des choses, une critique et une comparaison vives sont réunies dans ce livre en un style succinct et aisé.

La naissance, le progrès et le développement du cinéma soviétique, sa fonction en Russie, ses problèmes à l'étranger, la méthode et l'histoire de ses dirigeants: Kuleshof, Eisenstein, Room, Pudovkine, Préobrajkowska, les écoles cinématographiques de l'Etat, l'éducation du cinéma, voilà quelques-uns des sujets qu'il traite.

En plus de cela, des photographies de grands films russes soigneusement choisies, sélectionnées, pour donner une idée aussi complète que possible de l'extraordinaire beauté visuelle du film soviétique, Pool, éditeur, «Riant-Château» à Territet (Suisse) ou 24, Devonshire street London W. C. 1. Prix: 5 shillings.

19-4 Gudrunke Belge

Close Up (no d'avril). Au sommaire de cette fort intéressante revue anglo-française: As is (Kenneth Macpherson); The Compound Cinema; Further Notes (H. A. Potamkin); The Sound Film: Salvation of Cinema (Jean Lenauer); Why Talkies are Unsound (Ernest Betts); G. W. Pahts's «Lulu» (A. Kraszna Krausz); Would You Believe it? (A. W.); The Future of the English Cinema (Hugh Castle); The Stuttgart Exhibition; In The Dark (O. Blakeston); A New Cinema, Magic and the Avant-Garde (Robert Herring).

***

Films Problems of Soviet Russia, par Bryker (Pool, 24, Devonshire Street, Londres). Voilà une profonde et sérieuse étude de l'atmosphère, des conditions dans lesquelles s'est développé en Russie la production cinégraphique, l'auteur, qui s'est entouré d'une grande documentation littéraire et photographique venue des meilleures sources, après avoir exposé les circonstances et les idées qui présidèrent à la naissance des organisations de productions de films dans la Russie nouvelle, et le problème de l'exportation, étudie les personnalités, l'œuvre et la manière des réalisateurs Kuleskop, Eisenstein, Pudovkin, Room.

Il parle ensuite du film social et éducatifs, de l'activité de la Wufkre, des genres cinégraphiques et termine par un aperçu général du problème du cinéma en Russie.

L'ouvrage de Bryter est illustré de nombreuses photographies de scènes des meilleurs films russes. En annexe, il comprend un paragraphe intitulé « Suggestions », où il énumère les cinémas classiques ou d'avant-garde. Au paragraphe «Belgiques», il parle du Club d'Ostende et d'un club organisé par «Variétés» à la Lever House? Mais il ne signale pas l'activité du Club du Cinéma et du Studio du Palais des Beaux-Arts. C'est un oubli qu'il convient de signaler.

C. V.

THE EDUCATIONAL WORKER.

EDUCATION BY FILM IN THE
U.S.S.R. March 1929

That the film in Russia is used more widely,
and with greater effect than any other medium,
for educative purposes is more or less known.
The nature of its educative work, and its prob-
lems are, however, not so fully realised. I would
like to repeat a few facts from a former article
to explain them a little.

Russia is inhabited by one hundred and forty-seven nationalities, different in tradition, convention and speech, banded, as we know, in the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. We know also the vastness of the country, and it is easy to realise that there are isolated villages, groups and individuals virtually cut off from any inter-communication. Taking this into account it is not surprising to learn that until the new educative methods were introduced complete illiteracy prevailed with the following exceptions: 22.9 per cent. literates in Siberia; 12.3 per cent. in the Caucasus; 30.5 per cent. in Poland; 71 to 80 per cent. in the Baltic Provinces; 40 per cent. in Moscow; and 43 to 53 per cent. in St. Petersburg. The abysmal ignorance of the peasants was and, in a very much lesser degree, still is, one of the great problems with which the Republic is confronted. Reading is a slow process, and the cultural development of Soviet ideals could obviously not be retarded while over 50 per cent. of the population learnt to read. Therefore, the cinema was chosen.

Travelling Cinemas.

Here pictures would explain and convince

more rapidly and more lucidly than words. The chief drawback to the cinema was that though the towns could be served, thousands of villages could not. To meet this difficulty travelling cinemas were instituted. In 1926 these numbered 976. To-day they amount to over 2,000. Each travelling cinema takes a monthly route, visiting about 20 villages. When it has completed its circuit it starts out again with a new programme. The fixed price for peasants varies according to the district from one penny to two-pence admission. In some instances admission is free. Special low rental rates are given to these cinemas, determined by the economic standard of the districts toured.

It is the custom to precede the film shown
with an explanation, and to follow it with a dis-
cussion. The titles and sub-titles are read aloud
by one of the educated peasants.

35,000,000 Cinema Fans.

In addition to the travelling cinemas there are the permanent cinemas in the larger villages devoted to more highly-developed cultural work. They have increased since 1925 from 50 to over 500. For workers and soldiers of the Red Army there exist in the R.S.F.S.R. in all 2,562 cinemas, worked on the same principle as the village cinemas. The film public numbers over 35,000,000 persons, including town and country workers. It will be seen from these figures how intensively the cinema is being developed there, and how by these methods it is able to instil modern ideas of development into town and country alike.

Continued on page 11.

Exclusive to Close-Up.

A STILL FROM "THE STORY OF THE KRASSIN,"

*Continued from page 5.*

The films can be divided roughly into three classes:

(a) Purely scientific, as Pudovkin's " Mechanics of the Brain."

(b) Socialogical, as "The Peasant Women of Riazanj."

(c) Historical, as "Ten Days That Shook The World."

Cinema Topics.

Contrary to what is printed throughout the greater part of Europe, they are not inflammatory, unless improving social conditions by science and hygiene is inflammatory. "Fatigue and How to Fight It" is a wonderful film for workers. The other side of physical culture is glorified in "The Workers Spartakiada." Eisenstein's new film, "The General Line," is a constructive plan to develop the vast rich land of Russia with modern agricultural methods. It is also, as are all their films, a work of great art and dynamic beauty. Films like "The Peasant Woman of Riazanj" and "The Son" explain the benificent principles of the Soviet provision for protecting motherhood, and the advantage to mother and child alike of nursery schools. Medicine, psychology, the dangers of irregular abortion, the principle of sex in nature, the purpose and meaning of Sovietism, the necessity for learning (reading lessons are given by cinema and radio), history and geography are but a fractional indication of the ground covered.

KENNETH MACPHERSON.

FILMS AS AN ART.

*Education*

*Workers*

*March 1979*

Readers who are interested in the Films—
and want something better than the society
drama and cowboys—are recommended to
make the acquaintance of the monthly review,
"Close-up" (price one shilling), published at
24 Devonshire Street, W.C.I.

Bryher: Film Problems of Soviet Russia. (Verlag: Pool, Trier, Schweiz.)

Es geht in diesem Buch nicht um die „Filmprobleme von Sowjetrusslands", wie etwa in dem „Cinema Sovietique" von Leon Moussinac. Sondern in Wirklichkeit um das Problem des künstlerischen russischen Films in England.

Rußland—England: zwei staatspolitische Pole, die sich durch hohe Mauern gegeneinander abschließen. Eine dieser Mauern ist die Zensur, die den größten Teil der russischen Filme in England verboten hat.

Filme in England verboten hat.
Tatsachen, geistige Werke: Filme lassen sich aber nicht aus der Welt leugnen, auch wenn sie „von oben herab, nicht gern gesehen werden. Eine Gruppe jung-geistiger Englander beginnt den Angriff gegen diese unwurdige Bevormundung. Die ersten Sturmeszeichen, die es gibt, sind die ersten Sturmschläge, die sich in der Mitte der Nacht der Verfasserin Meining tragende Mittelschicht, von der nach der Verfasserin Meinung die kommenden Umwälzungen und Reformen ausgehen werden, und es zieht das Fazit: England hat aus formal-künstlerischen, weltanschaulichen und die Einzelerziehung betreffenden Interessen kein Recht, seinen Bürgern die Vorführung der russischen Filmwerke vorzuenthalten.

Filmwerke vorzuenthalten.
Da aber der russische Film in England noch so gut wie
unbekannt ist, verbindet das Buch in geschickter Weise neben
seinem aktiven agitatorischen Ziel gleichzeitig die Aufgabe,
an Hand von Lebensbeschreibungen der russischen Filmkünstler
und Inhaltsbeschungen ihrer Hauptwerke den englischen
und es zieht das Fazit: England nach einem Besuch Russlands
fasserin erst im nächsten Jahre nach einem Besuch Russlands
filmkunst einzuführen. Grundlegend will sich die Ver-
Leser somit in gewisser Weise auch in die Problematik der russi-
schen Filmwörter und in die Problematik der russischen
fasserin erst im nächsten Jahre nach einem Besuch Russlands
filmkunst einzuführen.

Dieses Buch soll erst den Auftakt, die orientierende Ein-
führung darstellen.

L. H.

Film Technik 13-4-79

THE CINEMA IN
RUSSIA

INTENSIVE TRAINING FOR
FILM DIRECTORS

ARTISTIC LEAD TO THE
WORLD
The Morning Post

4th April 1979
4-5 29

In "Film Problems of Soviet Russia" (Pool, 6s.) Mr. Bryher has written a book of topical importance. Few keen observers of the world film industry doubt that the Russians have succeeded in evolving an art of the cinema which is much in advance of other nations, and which, when they are able to distribute their films throughout the world, may well have a profound effect on all future film production.

But Mr. Bryher the artist, influenced by
the fine art from Russia he has seen, is,
obviously a very different person from
Mr. Bryher the politician, who has
been equally influenced by the political
thought he has found in Russian films.

This to a great extent discounts the value
of his book. All that he has to say about
Russian films and their method of produc-
tion is interesting, but when he seeks to
enunciate his own philosophy he is less
convincing.

The Soviet Government, early on, recognised that, for political, educational, and hygienic reasons, the cinema was their most useful ally, and, to give them their due, they appear to have used their opportunities with cleverness and vision.

They seem to have imposed no limits on
the artists working for them after the first
conception was agreed upon, and so they
have always received value for their
money.

EDUCATIONAL CINEMAS

Politically, one feels, all the producers
are obsessed by the revolution of 1905, but
they have another obsession which may be
of the greatest use in the long run in a
country so ill educated and illiterate as
Russia—nearly all their films insist on the
necessity of children being brought up
under healthy conditions.

The whole system of educational films
and travelling educational cinemas for re-
mote villages—there were 1,824 such
cinemas in Russia a last year—night with
advantage he adopted in this country.

Not the least interesting fact revealed in Mr. Bryher's book is the youth of the Russian directors responsible for this new art of the cinema. Kuleshof, Eisenstein (who made "Potemkin"), Pudovkin (who made the anti-British film, "Storm over Asia"), Room and Cherviakoff are all only about 30 years of age, while most of them have not yet directed more than five films each.

They have all, however, had the advan-
tage of a three years' intensive course at
either the State School of Cinematography
at Moscow or in the Ukraine. In these
schools they are obliged to study psycho-
logy, the history of art, costume, dramatic
literature, anatomy, make-up, rhythms,
acrobatics, acting, sociology and the
science of photography, and they must also
put in a period of actual work in studios.

The illustrations, which have been
chosen by Mr. Kenneth Macpherson, are
all taken from films described in the book
and certainly support Mr. Bryher's high
opinion of Russian films.

Through a Yellow Glass. By Oswald Blakeston, (Pool, 24 Devonshire Street, W.C.I. 7s. 6d.)

Mr. Oswald Blakeston, whose contributions to *Close Up* are among the features of that provocative monthly, has made a notable addition to the literature of the screen. He has explained the technique of the studio and of film photography with most admirable conciseness and not a little sly humour. This book so fills a real want, that of teaching the intelligent public just how a screen play is made, that I hope it may eventually be re-issued at a price more within the reach of film-goers of moderate means.

DAVID OCKHAM.

In the January issue of that unique little monthly magazine, *Close Up*, which caters for the intelligensia of the Film World and anyone interested in the artistic development of cinematography, there are several sound articles on pressing questions, in addition to a considerable amount of constructive criticism. The excellence of the photographs reproduced is always, also, a striking feature of the magazine.

Mr. K. Macpherson, in a bright and slightly cynical New Year Editorial, reviews the panorama of the immediate film situation: throws his eye over the future and sees stereoscopy, colour and television looming above the horizon, looks at the present, and—to quote his own words—“God said let there be muddle, and there was talkies.”

Hollywouldn't
Film Problems of Soviet Russia,

by BRYHER. (Pool, 0/-)

I HAVE only one thing to say against this book, and that is that the questions raised by its title are hardly dealt with at all. Apart from the matter of foreign markets for Russian films, and a brief discussion as to whether foreign releases would cause deterioration, the subject of film problems in a more technical sense is hardly mentioned. The book is, however, so extremely important that this omission counts for far less than it should. For Mr. Bryher gives a remarkably detailed *resumé* of the growth of the Russian film, from the *Marriage of the Bear* and Kuleshof period up to the most recent productions of the nine large cinema organizations of Soviet Russia to-day.

It is extremely refreshing to find descriptions of famous films like *Potemkin*, *Oktober*, *Mother*, and so on, which are full of admiration and enthusiasm, but are free from the nauseating hysteria which is so apt to arise when such films come under discussion. In the same way Mr. Bryher deals with the Censorship question merely from the commonsense point of view (and, incidentally, makes out the best case against it I have yet read). He describes every Russian film of note, nearly always from first-hand evidence, and interspersed with these descriptions are

interesting sidelights on problems of education and social welfare; and the chapters on sociological and educational films are among the most interesting.

The book is full of the most exciting stills which alone would make it worth the price. In fact, it will interest the curious, and will be indispensable to the student of modern film art. D.C.W.

FILM PROBLEMS OF SOVIET RUSSIA. By BRYHER. Photographs Chosen and Titled by KENNETH MACPHERSON, 74×53, 140 pp. Pool Publications. 6s. n. (New Age, Literature 5.)

The title of this book is rather misleading, since its main purpose is merely to describe the themes and stories of Russian films, of which the author has seen a great many. The information thus presented is interesting, supported as it is by biographical details of the great Russian film producers like Eisenstein, Pudovkin, Room, and others. "Bryher's" enthusiasm for Russian film art is easily understandable, but it is a pity she is not content with straightforward description. In the first place, her excursions into sociological fields are apt to be annoying; she disclaims any desire to embark on controversial matters, but actually she lays down the law with an irritating air of finality. In the second place, her writing is unnecessarily slovenly. This having been said, the book may be recommended to those people who are interested in what is best in the art of the cinema and who have not had the opportunity of seeing for themselves what the Russians have accomplished. It is illustrated by a large number of photographs, most of them admirably chosen for their purely pictorial effectiveness. They support the author's arguments in favour of a non-political attitude to films far better than his somewhat feverish diatribes against officialdom and narrow-mindedness.

FILM NOTES.

Author
April 1929

It will be of interest to members to know that a discussion of the New Problems of the Film has been proposed at this year's General Meeting of the Society. A number of prominent producers and authors connected with the cinema will be invited to attend and join in the debate.

Mr. K. Macpherson, in a bright and slightly cynical New Year Editorial, reviews the panorama of the immediate film situation: throws his eye over the future and sees stereoscopy, colour and television looming above the horizon, looks at the present, and—to quote his own words—“God said let there be muddle, and there was talkies.” It is suggested at the beginning of “Writing for the Screen,” by Arrar Jackson, A. & C. Black, 5s. net, that “this book will teach you all about the technique—the mechanics, one might say—of screen writing, and it is essential to your success. . . .”

If this were true it would, indeed, be a magnificent five-shillingsworth. Unfortunately, its author, whatever his own knowledge of film craft, lacks the capacity of imparting any appreciable quantity of that knowledge to his “dear friend,” as he affectionately terms his reader.

Dupli cate

THE WEEK
SCREEN
Russia and