Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University of Wellington Student's Newspaper. Volume 31, Number 4. March 26 1968

Film Charges — The accuser. The accused

Film Charges

The accuser. The accused.

• Morton ... finds Dans views on film-making 'naive', 'arrogant'.

Morton ... finds Dans views on film-making 'naive', 'arrogant'.

• Bradshaw ... recommended that the film be abandoned.

Bradshaw ... recommended that the film be abandoned.

The former Public Relations Officer, now acting President of the Students' Association, Dan Bradshaw, has been accused of "arrogance" and "naivete" in his handling of the University film project.

The accusations have been made by Mr. Derek Morton, the professional film-maker who offered his services and production facilities free to the Association four years ago after an Executive decision to begin work on such a film.

Mr. Morton is an employee of the NZBC, where he is engaged in making the programme "Looking at New Zealand".

It was hoped that the proposed 20-minute black-and-white sound film would be suitable for national distribution.

"But," Mr. Morion said, "the Executive seemed to lose interest in the project quickly."

Though they accepted an estimate of $546 for the production costs, no money was forthcoming; so Mr. Morton found himself increasingly out of pocket.

He finally did receive $268 in early 1966, but he still has more than $100 to collect from the Association.

A lot of small bills were still to come in, he said.

Because Mr. Morton was running out of his own money, he was forced to curtail and finally stop work on the film.

About three-quarters of the footage had been shot and some of the soundtrack had been recorded by professional musicians whose services Mr. Morton had been able to obtain at no cost.

When he became Public Relations Officer in June of last year, Dan Bradshaw asked Mr Morton to show to members of the Executive as much of the film as was available.

This was done in September. At its last meeting in November, the outgoing Executive, on Dan's advice, decided to abandon the film.

"In particular," Dan said, "the film largely showed what people were already aware of about the University or were being told by such things as tours of schools and open days."

"A University film," Dan told Salient, "should perhaps take a subjective rather than an objective approach to University life. It should explain what it's like to be a student."

One possibility, Dan said, "was to trace the experiences of one or two students through Orientation and Capping; to show them working, in the library, exercising their social and poitical responsibilities, speaking (or heckling) at Forum.

The film could show "the joys and the loneliness of student life".

He pointed out that the Students' Association owned the film already shot and was thus free to use it in any future production.

Mr. Morton said that despite what Dan thought, the film was utterly subjective.

"It does look at the University through the eyes of students and it does communicate a feeling of what it is like to be there."

It also contained full sequences on Orientation, Capping, the library, and Forum—but not on Executive (of which Dan is a member).

To suggest following people around or making a picture of their thoughts in this type of production was ludicrous.

Actors of the standard required were not even available in New Zealand for a venture like the University film.

Mr. Morton said Executive members saw only a "work-print" of the film. To judge the finished product from it was appalling arrogance.

A "work-print" consists of all the film which has been made.

The film was unfinished, poorly processed, completely unedited, and without sound.

In this case the quantity of film shown was more than three times as long as it would have been when completed.

To condemn his work on this basis alone demonstrated ridiculous effrontery on the part of people who had never had anything to do with film-making in their lives.

"As for Dan's views on film-making, they are naive and arrogant," he said.

"Moreover, he never communicated them to me."

"He never even told me he thought the film not worth continuing.

"Indeed, I have at no stage heard any expression of opinion from the Executive or any member of it as to the content of the film.

Mr. Morton said he had no idea what Dan was talking about when he said people were in conflict over the film. The Students' Association had never really got involved with it.

He emphasised what an opportunity the Association was throwing away.

The cost of cameras and ancillary equipment was fantastic. It might take $10,000 to produce commercially what he was making for $546.

Throughout this project, he said, the Students' Association's attitude had been one of "couldn't care less".

"I have been involved with a number of films financed by a number of organisations, and I've never run up against anything like it," Mr. Morton said. "I am sick of the whole thing."

Even at this stage he would be willing to finish the film, but only on the most stringent conditions.

"Give me $200, and I'll make a film with it." he said.