Paul
Goble
Staunton, November 19 – When the Red
Army entered Berlin in 1945, it seized the Reichsfilmarkhiv which held
thousands of films from various countries, including from the US. They were
taken to the USSR where some were widely shown. But Moscow, not then a
signatory to the international copyright conventions, did not pay the royalties
owed.
That sparked outrage in Hollywood
even though the US was not a signatory either and contributed to the rapidly
deteriorating relations between the US and the USSR in what was to become the
cold war, Kristina Tanis, an investigator at the Moscow Centre for the History
and Sociology of World War II at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics.
In the current issue of Studies
in Russian and Soviet Cinema, she describes how this clash became the basis
for one that lasted 40 years between filmmakers in the West and the Soviet
government, an article that has been summarized by Alyona Tarasova for the IQ
portal (iq.hse.ru/news/318621278.html).
Moscow’s use of these films not only
brought in money for the Soviet state but provided some diversity in what
Soviet views could see. In 1948, for
example, Soviet theaters showed only 22 domestically produced films but 48 from
abroad, a pattern that continued until after the death of Stalin, Tanis
reports.
Some of these
films were shown openly; others to restricted audiences; but most were edited and
retitled so that Soviet viewers would take away the correct ideological
message, she continues. In 1948, to try to resolve the copyright dispute, the US
proposed selling rights to 20 Hollywood films to Moscow for a million US
dollars, but despite talks nothing came of this.
In response, Hollywood
began producing anti-Soviet films. The breakthrough in this regard came in 1948
with William Wellman’s production of “Iron Curtain” for 20th Century
Fox. It told the story of Igor Gouzenko, the Soviet code clerk in the USSR
embassy in Canada, who defected in September 1945 with materials showing Soviet
penetration of Western governments.
But one feature of this film especially
infuriated Moscow: Wellman used music written by Soviet composers but did not pay
royalties to them. As a result, when the film was shown in Western Europe,
local communist parties at Moscow’s insistence picketed it. And at the same
time, Soviet filmmakers began making anti-American movies.
One, based on the life of Annabel
Buchar who defected to the Soviet Union was produced under the title, “Farewell,
America!” It was scheduled for release in 1951 but for some reason wasn’t,
Tanis says. It appeared on Russian screens only in 1996. More often, Soviet
filmmakers simply transformed Western films by editing out unapproved themes.
Sometimes, the researcher says, they
changed the title of the film and edited it to the point of unrecognizability. “Mr.
Deeds Goes to Town” was renamed “Under the Control of the Dollar” and
transformed from a story about a suddenly wealthy man who suffers various
adventures into an indictment of US capitalism.
In the 1950s, Tanis says, the
Soviets included on the title page of films that had been taken from the German
film archive that it was “a trophy” of war; and that threatened to keep the
copyright issue alive. But in 1952, UNESCO adopted the Universal Copyright
Convention which replaced the 1886 Bern one.
“In the 1940s and 1950s,” the researcher
continues, Soviet viewers reacted to the films in the way the Soviet authorities
wanted them to. But by the 1980s, they were looking behind the often blunt
messages the powers that be had inserted and looking at aspects of the films
showing life abroad in ideologically incorrect ways.
According to Tanis, some even argue
that these films, seized in Berlin in 1945, were “a trigger for the start of the
processes of de-Stalinization, general Westernization and sometimes even the
collapse of the USSR.” This change in Soviet assessments may reflect the fact
that initially they lacked a vocabulary to talk about them, acquiring it only
at the end of Soviet times.
No comments:
Post a Comment