British Empire Cinema of the 1950s and 1960s

[prm502]

Hi everyone, I'm a university student currently writing a piece assessing the impact the decline of empire had on representations of the 'gentleman hero' in British cinema, focusing in particular on the films Simba (1955), North West Frontier (1959), Lawrence of Arabia (1962), Zulu (1964) and the James Bond films. I was just wondering if anybody knew the whereabouts of contemporary film reviews for these films that are easily accessible - I couldn't find anything in "Sight and Sound" and am unsure about other film magazines of the period. Furthermore, if anyone has any insight into the question that could be of use, or any books that I should read, it would be much appreciated. I'm particularly interested in the impact the "New Wave" had on empire films and the fact that action was stripped of any substantial imperial significance (esp. Zulu) - so once again, any help would be appreciated.

[will.15]

The contemporary reviews from the New York Times of Zulu and Lawrence are online (I didn't check the other two).

[CaptainWaggett]

Surely your university library has access to online newspapers from the period? If not, see what your local public library can offer. And Monthly Film Bulletin must have reviewed them all.

[Rick C]

Postcolonial trends and British cinema is of great interest to me having occasion to meet work-wise media specialists from what are now former UK territories overseas; those trends now being highlighted due to the steady stream of 50-years anniversaries of independence from the West. Working for African and Caribbean organisations for many years now, I am preparing for to write papers myself on the half-century cinema, TV and radio viewpoint vis-a-vis Britain and separately Jamaica (and the wider Caribbean) and Kenya to coincide with events in those countries in 2012 and 2013 respectively using my own previous university degree study material on this subject.

Our thread-starter is welcome to PM me for more precision-targeted material; but forumers generally might be interested to bookshelf-watch on two publications in particular by James Chapman, Lecturer in Media Studies at Leicester University.

1. "Licence to Thrill" (Publ. I.B.Taurus 2007) which plots the course of the Bond phenomenon directly after those independence dates.

2. "Saints and Avengers" (Publ. I.B.Taurus 2002) which although primarily a study of British TV in the 1960's and 70's frequently reflects on the UK's global as opposed to previously a home-grown viewpoint.

[Moor Larkin]

James Bond as a gentleman....

Intriguing premise........

The googlemonster can be good for contemporary viewpoints:
The Vancouver Sun - Google News Archive Search

[prm502]

Many thanks for all your responses, I appreciate this is a rather ambiguous question!

Rick - many thanks for your offer. I can't unfortunately PM you, it claims that my access level isn't high enough for some reason - my primary interest however concerns any sources related to Zulu (1964), in particular the stripping of its imperial significance (as mentioned above) and the portrayal of 1960s values in a 1870s film (e.g. officers showing disgust at the horrors of battle). Hopefully this can be rectified (or I can stop being so dim...), and I look forward to hearing from you.

Many thanks will.15 for that information, it is of great use. CaptainWaggett, my university has access to the Times, the FT, the Guardian and the Mirror, as well as Screen and Sight & Sound, but other than that our archives are pretty hopeless, and even most of the above make little mention of these films. I fear a trip to Colindale may be on the cards, I was just hopeful that somebody might have a copy/photograph of other reviews (such as those in the Daily Mail/Spectator/Kinematograph Weekly etc.). But once again, many thanks.

[will.15]

Overview
New York Times Review
Cast, Credits & Awards
Movie Review
North West Frontier (1959)
April 30, 1960
Screen: 'Flame Over India' Arrives:British-Made Film in Bow at Paramount
HOWARD THOMPSON.
Published: April 30, 1960

THANKS to English sensibility and the behavior of our own Lauren Bacall and her fellow passengers on a tiny train chugging through dangerous rebel territory, the British-made "Flame Over India" provides an absorbing and picturesque, if unsurprising, film journey.

With Miss Bacall and Kenneth More heading a cast of turn-of-the-century colonials and turbaned natives, this adventure-drama, made partly on location, arrived yesterday at the Paramount. Twentieth Century-Fox has sponsored the J. Arthur Rank entry, produced in color by Marcel Hellman and piloted, ever so shrewdly, by scenarist-director J. Lee Thompson (of the recent "Tiger Bay").

Primarily because of Mr. Thompson, the picture emerges as a minor victory of mind over familiar matter—and a reasonably diverting and suspenseful trip over some unfamiliar, stunningly photographed Indian terrain.

The picture opens full throttle, with a bloody Moslem siege of a British provincial stronghold. An Army captain and a handful of civilians are assigned to spirit away to safety a baby Hindu prince. And off they go on the Victoria, the last train out—a rickety, one-coach vehicle headed toward a destination 300 miles away, with hordes of tribesmen waiting to pounce.

Will they make it? Guess. Do the stanch soldier, Mr. More, and the lovely American widow, Miss Bacall, get together? Guess again. And does some traitor, among the others, try to annihilate the little prince along the way? And will the sputtering Victoria plow ahead through the very teeth of the enemy?

Fortunately, Mr. Thompson hasn't let it go at that. With most of the trip unfolding in steady, second gear, his characters prove to be a hardy, plain-spoken lot. Their tart exchanges supply some ripe serious footnotes to the irony and tragedy of the country's conflicts and their own personal predicaments. During one attack, Herbert Lom comments on Miss Bacall's "traditional" American isolationism. The lady has already mentioned "traditional" British inactivity until "a cup of tea," when it's "too late."

Periodically, Mr. Thompson stages some really rousing blockbusters, as the horizon thickens with bloodthirsty chargers. Add to this a splendid sense of atmosphere, as the little train snakes across the parched flatlands and wedges through the mountainous canyons of the land where most of the exteriors were filmed, in first-rate color. We must insist, though, that one well-placed boulder on the track could have stopped the Victoria—and probably the picture.

The acting is consistently good and restrained. Mr. More, of course, is an old hand at bravery by now, and Miss Bacall is personable and workmanlike in her overseas debut. Mr. Lom, Wilfrid Hyde White, Ursula Jeans, Eugene Deckers, little Govind Raja Ross and a happy I. S. Johar all lend sturdy support.

The Victoria may seem like a Wild West stagecoach dodging arrows. But this British counterpart is as stylish and handsome as it is transparent. It's an all right ride.


The Cast
FLAME OVER INDIA, screen play by J. Lee Thompson; directed by Mr. Thompson and produced by Marcel Hellman for the J. Arthur Rank Organization; presented by Twentieth Century-Fox. At the Paramount, Broadway and Forty-third Street. Running time: 130 minutes.
Mrs. Wyatt . . . . . Lauren Bacall
Captain Scott . . . . . Kenneth More
Van Leyden . . . . . Herbert Lom
Mr. Bridie . . . . . Wilfrid Hyde White
Gupta . . . . . I. S. Johar
Lady Windham . . . . . Ursula Jeans
Mr. Peters . . . . . Eugene Deckers
Prince Kishan . . . . . Govind Raja Ross
Sir John Windham . . . . . Ian Hunter
Brigadier Ames . . . . . John Gwillim

[CaptainWaggett]

Many thanks for all your responses, I appreciate this is a rather ambiguous question!

Rick - many thanks for your offer. I can't unfortunately PM you, it claims that my access level isn't high enough for some reason - my primary interest however concerns any sources related to Zulu (1964), in particular the stripping of its imperial significance (as mentioned above) and the portrayal of 1960s values in a 1870s film (e.g. officers showing disgust at the horrors of battle). Hopefully this can be rectified (or I can stop being so dim...), and I look forward to hearing from you.

Many thanks will.15 for that information, it is of great use. CaptainWaggett, my university has access to the Times, the FT, the Guardian and the Mirror, as well as Screen and Sight & Sound, but other than that our archives are pretty hopeless, and even most of the above make little mention of these films. I fear a trip to Colindale may be on the cards, I was just hopeful that somebody might have a copy/photograph of other reviews (such as those in the Daily Mail/Spectator/Kinematograph Weekly etc.). But once again, many thanks.

Your university has access to most of what is available online (not sure any specialist film periodicals are available electronically) For anything else you will probably need hard copies. I'm sure these films will have been reviewed in all the major newspapers though. I suspect there are one or two threads about Zulu on these forums :

Slightly suprised that Google's new toy hasn't been mentioned on these forums - it's especially good for Canadian papers

Google News Timeline

[Rick C]

I think what Captain Waggett is referring to is what is called "COPAC" where universities have a network of all the missing journals each uni might not have (or in PRM's uni not even the subjects themselves)

I'm not sure how much time we have on this one? I'm all for 12 months on this sort of thing, but have a funny suspicion as in the case of previous students we only have 12 days)

In which case we may have to go for "Zulu" on its own. Google search seems to have racked up quite a plethora of references recently on the academic study of this celluloid epic-is it actually on the syllabus throughout the western hemisphere this year I wonder? When I did Film Studies at my uni many moons ago our IQ limit stretched only as far as "Guys and Dolls"

[CaptainWaggett]

To be honest, your best source is probably a university librarian. There's a big difference between knowing about films (as many of us here do) and knowing about magazine resources and their availability. There's also the BFI, of course, which will undoubtedly have lots of original source material.

But there aren't as many archive periodicals online as people often assume. There's a reason why libraries still need reserve stocks

[AdrianTurner]

As someone who has written a bit about this subject, I wouldn't honestly recommend you spend much time unearthing contemporary reviews unless you merely want them for context. Generally speaking, they don't cover the sort of thing you are studying as they are written for an instant impression. A few magazine articles are worth seeking out - for instance, Penelope Houston's essay on the Bond phenomenon published by Sight & Sound (and reprinted in my own book on the movie.) The author Edward Said had a fabulous book about western imperialism vs. Islam, with particular reference to Lawrence of Arabia. Jeffrey Richards is an author who has written extensively about this area and another is James Chapman who has a couple of books, both on Amazon, including Projecting Empire:Imperialism and Popular Cinema. I reckon there's lots to plagiarise there!

[Rick C]

Or you could really impress the management at your uni by referring to "Zulu and the limits of liberalism" Cineaste Vol XXV N.4 Sept.2000)
-historical distortions and political agendas in the film.

Or even Wide Angle vol.8 N.2 1986. Cinematic depictions of Boer-British-Zulu conflicts 1900-1923.

We do off-the-peg essays for a reasonable fee also

[Rick C]

Or you could really impress the management at your uni by referring to "Zulu and the limits of liberalism" Cineaste Vol XXV N.4 Sept.2000)
-historical distortions and political agendas in the film.

Or even Wide Angle vol.8 N.2 1986. Cinematic depictions of Boer-British-Zulu conflicts 1900-1923.

We do off-the-peg essays for a reasonable fee also

[prm502]

ah the Christopher Sharrett article! i know this has caused a lot of controversy - i spoke to Sheldon Hall yesterday and he roundly attacked it all this is very interesting, and don't worry, i have more than 12 days and have no intention of plagiarism ^^! thanks for suggesting the James Chapman material, i've just read his book on "National Identity and the British Historical Film" which has a lengthy section on Zulu, well worth a read. I also went to the British Library at Boston Spa today, found a couple of interesting reviews in the Monthly Film Bulletin but unfortunately most of the books are covered in asbestos and cannot be reached

[prm502]

Also, i only have access to the 1995-1999 copies of Wide Angle, may have to travel to London ha

[Moor Larkin]

As someone who has written a bit about this subject, I wouldn't honestly recommend you spend much time unearthing contemporary reviews unless you merely want them for context. Generally speaking, they don't cover the sort of thing you are studying as they are written for an instant impression. A few magazine articles are worth seeking out - for instance, Penelope Houston's essay on the Bond phenomenon published by Sight & Sound (and reprinted in my own book on the movie.) The author Edward Said had a fabulous book about western imperialism vs. Islam, with particular reference to Lawrence of Arabia. Jeffrey Richards is an author who has written extensively about this area and another is James Chapman who has a couple of books, both on Amazon, including Projecting Empire:Imperialism and Popular Cinema. I reckon there's lots to plagiarise there!

Surely all this does is lead everyone to think the same things and become academically anaesthetised, or do I mean agreeable? I would have thought contemporary articles are crucial to understanding a film in it's truest cultural context. The film was made for *that* audience *then*, not whatever revisionist audience exists thirty or forty years later. The most important thing is probably to watch the film itself - yourself. Once you have formed your own impression, then I would say it is very important to see how that film was seen by those in the past and weigh up any differences that you find. People who watch old movies often complain about their pacing/language; they would get far more from the experience of that movie by steeping themself in the cultural times it sprang from first, or second.

That review of Simba I referenced in my earlier post is quite striking, both in it's own language, and the language it uses in interpreting the film. It's also interesting to see what the makers/actors had to say at the time too, before any film gets a *reputation* or is *interpreted* by the amorphous blob of *public opinion*.

I guess *impressing* the Uni management is far more important than any of that however - in this contemporary world of pieces of paper to wave at the next set of management.