Movie Monday

Yesterday, I probably spent too much time reading online about the Hollywood Production Code which dictated how movies could handle social and moral issues from 1930 to 1967.

Looking at the Code as a rational human, I can’t believe that movies buckled under to this for so many years. However, it makes perfect business sense.

A little background:

1. In 1915, the U.S. Supreme Court in Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, 236 U.S. 230 voted unanimously that the state of Ohio could censor movies since movies were a business and not an art form; therefore not protected by the first amendment. “The exhibition of moving pictures is a business, pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit....” (Wikepedia) This decision would finally be overturned in the early 1950s.

2. Early on, the movie studios gained control of distribution rights and owned the movie theaters. You could say that this monopoly controlled the movie from “cradle to grave.” Studios decided what the public saw, and when and where. This monopoly was not broken up on anti-trust grounds until middle of the 20th century.

3. During the 1920s, movies were much more realistic in dealing with sexual, moral and social issues. Local and state governments around the country protested and there was piecemeal censorship throughout the country. (Remember that our fundamentalists today did not originally succeed on the national level until they began to win local and state elections thus building a base to establish their take of morality on a national level.)

4. During the 1920s not only were the movies “freer” but silent stars were involved in some major scandals which made national headlines. For a look at pre-Code movies and these Hollywood scandals, go to;

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view.php?journalid=9615

This contains “Katie Threads Archive.” Scroll down to Katie Presents: Pre-Code Film at:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=449933

for a comprehensive look at these films. In fact, go back and start reading Katie’s other threads. That’s what kept me busy yesterday.

5. Roman Catholic clergy were incensed about the “immorality” in films and were demanding federal censorship. In the business sense, this threat had legs since movies made their money in the big cities which were filled with a Roman Catholic population.

So, you have lucrative business monopolies, grass roots moral fundamentalism, risque movies and movie stars' real-life scandals: The perfect storm.

Enter ex- Postmaster General Will Hays. Hays arrived on the scene in 1922 when he became President of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) at a $100,000 a year salary. He was the head of the draconian Hollywood censorship arm.

Studio heads were especially concerned about the local censorship of their movies (if Wikepedia is correct, the studios had to pay by the foot for the film removed from the picture by censors) and by the impact of scandals such as the infamous Fatty Arbuckle rape case. The last thing they wanted was federal government censorship.

If you get a chance, go to Internet Archives:

http://www.archive.org/details/feature_films

and take a look at Rain from 1932 and Reefer Madness from 1938. Though Rain is not the best example of pre-Code movies (it was on the cusp) the difference is obvious.

I’ll leave you with The Code. This is a excellent site for reading it completely:

http://productioncode.dhwritings.com/multipleframes_productioncode.php

Read the directions for using this site in the right column and use the “R” and “E” buttons on the left for reasons and examples.

I haven’t forgotten my original hypothesis last week: movies in the 1930s, the rich, and preventing revolution, but this side trip to the Hollywood Production Code will be worthwhile.

Next week: Hollywood as Art; Hollywood as Business.