View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of East Anglia digital repository Corrupted, Tormented and Damned: Reframing British Exploitation Cinema and The films of Robert Hartford-Davis This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that use of any information derived there from must be in accordance with current UK Copyright Law. In addition, any quotation or extract must include full attribution. Michael Ahmed, M.A., B.A. PhD University of East Anglia Faculty of Film and Television Studies January 2013 Abstract The American exploitation film functioned as an alternative to mainstream Hollywood cinema, and served as a way of introducing to audiences shocking, controversial themes, as well as narratives that major American studios were reluctant to explore. Whereas American exploitation cinema developed in parallel to mainstream Hollywood, exploitation cinema in Britain has no such historical equivalent. Furthermore, the definition of exploitation, in terms of the British industry, is currently used to describe (according to the Encyclopedia of British Film) either poor quality sex comedies from the 1970s, a handful of horror films, or as a loosely fixed generic description dependent upon prevailing critical or academic orthodoxies. However, exploitation was a term used by the British industry in the 1960s to describe a wide-ranging and eclectic variety of films – these films included, ―kitchen-sink dramas‖, comedies, musicals, westerns, as well as many films from Continental Europe and Scandinavia. Therefore, the current description of an exploitation film in Britain has changed a great deal from its original meaning. Moreover, the films currently described as exploitation films include not only low budget independent films but also films made by large filmmaking companies like the Rank Organisation. The filmmaker Robert Hartford-Davis, whose career spans the 1960s, is frequently described as a director of British exploitation films. How can Hartford-Davis‘ films help us to identify and understand the role of these films which are perceived as outside of the cultural mainstream, and how do these films fit into the narrative of British cinema? Hartford-Davis‘ films, although now described as exploitation, were made to compete with the rest of the British film industry, unlike American exploitation which was sustained in opposition to Hollywood. Nonetheless, Hartford-Davis‘ films exposes the tension that existed throughout the 1960s, between British low budget independent companies and companies like the Rank Organisation and other larger British film companies. Moreover, Hartford-Davis‘ films throw up wider questions, not only about the definition and meaning of British exploitation films, but also about the accepted narrative of post-war British film culture, as well as the structure of the domestic industry during the 1960s. Furthermore, if the outsider status of British exploitation filmmakers is removed, then perhaps the accepted opposition between the ―quality‖ film and lowbrow film is also considerably blurred, and supported only by an existing critical and academic consensus. Table of Contents Introduction: The Question of British Exploitation & Robert Hartford-Davis .................. 5 Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 29 Part One: ―Counting on Compton‖: Exploitation at Compton and British Cinema, 1960 – 1964 ........................................................................................................................................ 33 Chapter One: ―Kitchen-Sinks‖ and Sex: Exploiting Social Realism .............................. 34 Chapter Two: Enter Polanski: ―Art House‖, Horror, Marketing & Publicity .............. 95 Part Two: ―Story Tellers in Celluloid‖: The Titan Films – From Musicals & Comedies to Horror and Sex, 1965 – 1969 ................................................................................................. 135 Chapter Three: From Lulu to Wisdom: Searching for Audiences with Rank ............. 136 Chapter Four: Mad Doctors and Schoolgirl Killers: Independence and the American Connection ............................................................................................................................ 164 Chapter Five: Corrupted, Tormented & Damned: Exploiting the Market with Sex and Horror .................................................................................................................................... 192 Conclusion: Reframing British Exploitation ........................................................................ 217 Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 223 Appendix A ............................................................................................................................... 224 Appendix B ............................................................................................................................... 239 Appendix C ............................................................................................................................... 247 Appendix D ................................................................................................................................ 250 Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. 254 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 255 Acknowledgements I would like to thank David McGillivray and Norman J. Warren, who kindly agreed to be interviewed, and for their patience when replying to my questions. I am also grateful to Wickham Clayton, Ian Cooper, Prof. Mark Jancovich, Jenni Kenneally, Edward Newbrook, Michael Storr, and Bev Zalcock for their advice, guidance, help and support. My thanks also go to the staff at the British Film Institute Library. I am also indebted to Peter Newbrook without whom this thesis would have been a great deal poorer. Peter kindly allowed me access to his scrapbooks and assorted memorabilia. He also answered my many questions with a great deal of generosity and time. This thesis is dedicated to the memories of Robert Hartford-Davis and Peter Newbrook. Introduction: The Question of British Exploitation & Robert Hartford-Davis What is a British Exploitation Film? ‗The term exploitation film is derived from the practice of exploitation, advertising or promotional techniques that went over and above typical posters, trailers, and newspaper ads‘. Eric Schaefer, 1999.1 In Eric Schaefer‘s seminal study on American exploitation cinema, he argued that exploitation films ‗functioned as an alternative to Hollywood while also shedding light on the mainstream motion picture business‘.2 Schaefer declared that between 1919 and 1959, American exploitation cinema developed alongside mainstream American cinema: a period marked at a time when Hollywood was ‗constructing its image as the world‘s premiere manufacturer of wholesome entertainment‘.3 According to Schaefer, American exploitation developed to challenge the hegemony and dominance of the mainstream industry. Schaefer‘s argument is important for this thesis because it raises the question of how we can talk about a British exploitation cinema. Although this thesis covers the 1960s, it is important to discuss whether there was an historical equivalent to the industrial practices within the British film industry. In other words, was there a similar developmental process for British exploitation cinema to the American model? Moreover, if the American mainstream film industry ‗depended on the contrast of exploitation to construct its own image‘ did a comparable structure evolve in the British film industry?4 Robert Hartford-Davis has been described as a producer of ‗cheap exploitation films‘, and the Compton Cinema Group, the company Hartford-Davis began his feature film career with, has been described as producers of exploitation films.5 However, what do we mean when we refer to British exploitation film? The definition of a British 1 Schaefer, Eric, ―Bold! Daring! Shocking! True!‖ A History of Exploitation Films 1919 – 1939, Durham & London: Duke University Press, 1999, p.4. 2 Schaefer, 1994, p.14. 3 Schaefer, 1994, p.2. 4 Schaefer, 1994, p.14. 5 The following authors have all described Compton as a producer of exploitation and sexploitation films: McGillivray, David, Doing Rude Things: The History of the British Sex Film 1957–1981, London: Sun Tavern Fields, 1992, p.52; Mellor, Roger Philip, ‗Compton Films (aka Compton-Cameo Films)‘, Brian McFarlane (ed.), The Encyclopedia of British Film Third Edition, London: Methuen, 2007, p.149; Murphy, Robert, Sixties British Cinema, London: British Film Institute, 1992, p.78. 5 exploitation film, as described in The Encyclopedia of British Film (by the scriptwriter and film critic David McGillivray), refers to a small group of films and filmmakers associated with ‗a large number of poor quality soft-core sex comedies and a handful of intense horror films‘.6 Moreover, unlike the American model, the British exploitation era is described as being ‗at its height in the 70s‘.7 However, it is unclear how this