862.4061 Motion Pictures/67
The Ambassador in Germany (Sackett) to the
Secretary of State
Berlin, December 22, 1932.
[Received
January 5, 1933.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the
Department’s instruction No. 708 of September 17, 1932, concerning
the complaint of American film interests against certain provisions
of the German regulations with regard to the importation and
exhibition of foreign films in Germany.
Upon receipt of this instruction, the Embassy took the matter up with
the Foreign Office and advanced at considerable length arguments in
support of the American objections to the German regulations. On
three subsequent occasions the Embassy impressed upon the Foreign
Office the desirability of an equitable solution in the premises and
finally, under date of November 28, a note was received from the
Foreign Office, copy and translation of which are enclosed.
[Page 372]
On the face of it this note appears to be somewhat evasive and
unsatisfactory. It seems, however, that the official attitude of the
German Government as expressed therein was dependent upon, and
represented the progress made in, current negotiations between the
German (in this connection see Special Report No. 10, of November
12, from the office of the Commercial Attaché to the Embassy
entitled “Startling Developments in the German Film Situation”).
The passage in the Foreign Office note stating that “the Reich
Government takes the stand, as a matter of principle, that the
issuance of a general prohibition to close contracts without a
preview is thoroughly desirable from a cultural point of view”, is
of interest as being the first official acknowledgment that the
“blindbooking” provision of the German film regulations is unfair
when applied to the foreign product alone. The expectation among
American film interests here appears to be that the “blindbooking”
provision will be equalized in the governmental regulations which
will be issued to cover the next film release season.
I may add that, in the opinion of the Embassy, American film
interests may not for a considerable length of time hope to obtain a
relaxation of the German dubbing regulations. Aside from the
argument of principle, the very general testimony of local
film-goers—of American as well as of German nationality—is that many
American films, dubbed in the United States for presentation here,
lend themselves to considerable criticism with respect to their
quality as artistic and finished products.
Respectfully yours,
[Enclosure—Translation]
The German Foreign
Office to the American
Embassy
VIC 6090/32
Note Verbale
Referring to the remarks of the American Chargé d’Affaires on the
occasion of his call at the Foreign Office on October 6, 1932,
the Foreign Office has the honor to inform the Embassy of the
United States of America as follows:
The Memorandum of September 20, 1932, relative to the “Decree of
June 28, 1932, governing the exhibition of foreign films”, which
was presented by the American Chargé d’Affaires, has been
studied with the greatest care by the competent German
authorities. The result may be summed up as follows:
The German authorities in question are entirely inclined to deal
favorably with applications for exhibiting American films within
the
[Page 373]
framework of
existing legal provision. In particular, the Reich Minister of
the Interior is willing, in principle, to facilitate the
importation of American films into Germany, by granting
certificates from a relief fund which has been made available’
and put at his personal disposal. According to the regulations
for the use of certificates based on this fund, permission may
only be granted, however, if German cultural interests are
served thereby, that is to say, that they apply only import
films but who at the same time, by producing a film of their own
in Germany, contribute to the stimulation of the German film
market, which is desired for cultural reasons. As the Reich
Minister of the Interior has so far dealt favorably with
applications of such American film companies for contingent
certificates based on the relief fund, he also intends to do so
in future. The Foreign Office ventures to mention the fact that
only recently the Paramount Film Company was again allotted four
contingent certificates out of the relief fund, in recognition
of its cooperation in German film production, and, out of the
same considerations, the First National Company was granted two.
Other American film companies which render services to film
production in Germany and which submit their wishes to the
competent German authorities will also be able to count on
similar favorable treatment.
Regarding the remarks contained in the Memorandum about the
so-called “prohibition to close contracts without a preview”
(Blindbuchungsverbot, the Reich
Government takes the stand, as a matter of principle, that the
issuance of a general prohibition to close contracts without a
preview is thoroughly desirable from a cultural point of view.
If it has not been possible up to now to pronounce such a
prohibition to apply to German films, the reason is to be found
exclusively in the extraordinarily difficult business situation
of the German film industry, a large part of which would find
that a prohibition of closing contracts without a preview would
render it impossible to finance their productions. The result
would be additional failures of German film companies, which
must be prevented for obvious cultural reasons.
Another point in the Memorandum regards the regulations contained
in Section 14 of the “Decree of June 28 governing the exhibition
of foreign films”, that foreign films dubbed in the German
language can only be recorded if the dubbing and other work
connected therewith is done in Germany, as prescribed in Section
2 of the above-mentioned decree. Experience in connection with
the most recent films dubbed abroad and exhibited in Germany has
proved once more that the appearance of films of that kind is
not in keeping
[Page 374]
with
German cultural interests. Aside from this fact, the regulation
in Section 14 should also be favorable to the business interests
of the foreign firms themselves, as films dubbed abroad meet
with difficulties in their commercial exploitation because of
defects appearing in them, which could easily be avoided if the
dubbing were done in Germany.
Out of cultural considerations—not the least of which is based on
the above-mentioned unfavorable experience—the Reich Government
must adhere to its opinion that dubbed films are undesirable as
such and that their production should therefore be restricted as
much as possible. Whether or not it will be possible in future
decrees to change the proportion of dubbed films admitted as
compared with films having original texts cannot be decided
until it is possible to gain a survey of the results of
exhibiting a corresponding number of German sound films on the
non-German European market.
Finally, regarding the reference in the Memorandum to the fact
that there are no contingent decrees in the United States of
America, the Foreign Office ventures to state, as a
counter-argument, that as a result of an organization of the
American film business, the exhibiting of non-American films is
regulated in such a way, to begin with, that the interests of
the American film industry are thereby protected. It is a fact,
that in spite of the regulations of the German contingent
legislation American sound films enter Germany far more easily
than German ones the United States of America, where no legal
regulations of that kind exist.
To sum up, the Foreign Office begs to emphasize once more the
fact that the German Government thoroughly welcomes the
appearance of valuable (worthwhile) American films on the German
film market, and is prepared to facilitate the exhibition
thereof in conformity with existing laws.
Berlin, November 28,
1932.
