To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Joseph Breen
Born
Joseph Ignatius Breen

(1888-10-14)October 14, 1888
DiedDecember 5, 1965(1965-12-05) (aged 77)
Resting placeHoly Cross Cemetery, Culver City
NationalityAmerican
EducationGesu Parish School
Roman Catholic High School
Alma materSaint Joseph's College
OccupationFilm censor, journalist
Years active1934–1955
Spouse(s)
Mary Dervin (m. 1914–1965)
; his death
Children6

Joseph Ignatius Breen (October 14, 1888 – December 5, 1965) was an American film censor with the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America who applied the Hays Code to film production.[1]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    72 463
    31 841
    5 141
    826
    23 955
  • ✪ Neil Breen - And the Other Way is Wrong
  • ✪ Forty Little Mothers (1940)
  • ✪ Way Down South
  • ✪ FORBIDDEN HOLLYWOOD - Joseph Breen
  • ✪ Meltdown - Good Bad or Bad Bad #34

Transcription

Hi, my name is Sven and this is This Guy Edits One thing I found interesting about filmmakers is that the more they direct, the more they can express themselves in the smallest details of a scene A lot of people think directors are distinguished by how they shoot the big set pieces, the crazy oners, the really stylish stuff and yeah, these are the shots that get copied and they do give you a strong indication of someone's vision (tiger roaring) But sooner or later, every filmmaker goes back to scenes like this: Two people in a room talking. Just about the least cinematic thing there is And it's in scenes like that they tell you what they really care about "I've been hacking into government and corporate international secrets all over the world." "What?! Are you crazy? " And Neil Breen, he cares about information "It is you, Leah." Unlike many filmmakers who try to avoid exposition, sometimes Breen does nothing but. "Humans have taken far too long to understand solar energy, but they're beginning to make progress now." In his world, drama happens when a character learns a new piece of information. "I'm so sorry, but due to poor economy we're gonna have to lay you off." How does it fit with everything they already know? "We all had the best of intentions of improving the nation's sustainable energy systems and environment but the corruption and greed and big business and government just won't let it happen." And how do they react to learning a little bit more of the truth? "Yeah, it's always the government and lawyers that prevent progress." Breen styles is an extension of this idea and it's interesting to hear him describe his process "We do want do do something unique, interesting, thought-provoking and exciting We don't do the normal, boring, cliché storytelling." So, what does Neil Breen not do? (Woman from the telephone: "Can you hear me?") "Oh, jeez." "Should we be afraid?" For one thing, handheld. Breen is a lockdown, put-it-on-a-tripod filmmaker (Screams) He hates handheld and rarely does it in any of his films. Doubledown has maybe two scenes, so does Fateful Findings which includes this shot: I Am Here, Now... has some of the most of any Breen film. But even when he uses it, notice how he designs around it. The camera is only work when the women walk and the bike falls. Once we know who has all the power in the scene, the shot is on a tripod. Rock solid. "Wow!" Another thing Breen avoids is the sense of a human being operating the camera. At a time where many filmmakers are deliberately adding camera shake or mistakes to their shots to make it seem like there was a person there, Breen is doing the opposite. "So everything I do is very professional, so I wanted things that were very interesting cinemat- graphically, and as the cinematographer and the DP I wanted things that were visually interesting, as well as support the story." Sometimes you can't tell whether a shot was human-controlled, motion-controlled, or CGI The final effect is ominous, like something out of Mulholland Drive. He also cuts to a close-up only when he needs to. Eventhough Breen's close-ups and inserts are really distinctive, he rarely cuts in because... "I try to visually create a contrast relative to what's going on in the film. I really go out of my way to play that contrast off against each other." In any given scene, he'll go to the close-ups only for moments, and the more he's directed, the more he's done it. "I congratulated you on the success of your first book when we first met. I told you I could help you then." These moments gain power precisely because he withholds the shot on occasion. And lastly, he avoids moving the camera if he can help it. "All of my films have a very constructive theme to them, kind of make them without being judgemental, I don't pretend to give answers, I just have the audience be entertained as well as think about them." "Dylan!" So consider all these restrictions he gives himself: no handheld, no human operating, little unnecessary close-ups, few unmotivated camera moves Now, let's just give him a scene of people talking, can he make it cinematic? "I'm so glad you could all come for dinner." Oh yeah. "We're glad to visit." Talking isn't cinematic, but drama is. This scene is about five people, all sitting. The first thing Breen does is bring us over here. "I want you to try this new wine." "I'd love to try your wine." Just from shot sizes, we can tell this is more important to Emily and Amy than anyone else. Before the conversation shifts to the Dylan character, Breen knowingly breaks the 180 rule... twice. "I still can't believe you're up and around so fast." This is our clue that Dylan is the reason for this dinner. "That is amazing." But Jim, who's out of touch, runs his mouth. "When you were in a hospital, you were in really bad shape, comatose." When Dylan tries to diffuse, Emily cuts in "...feeling much better, thanks." "I mean the doctors didn't think you were gonna make it." "Dinner will be ready soon." Which takes us to Ally... "I'm hungry." ...and away from the pain "I can't wait for dinner." But Jim won't let it go. "It seems like it never happened." "I've got great family genes." This puts Dylan in a tough spot and he has to put his foot down. And this leads to Dylan facing away from his aggressor. Breen saves it for this moment as Jim gets totally dismissed "But I have this really interesting project about elephants in Africa." "I'm sure Dylan doesn't want to hear about that now." "I want to hear about her project." So even without sound you understand the purpose of the scene. Breen has taken your eyes and brought them here to see this drama. "I'd love to try your wine." "And here to see this one." "That is amazing." And then here for the final showdown. "I, I don't feel so well." Five characters, five relationships, all stage for the camera to see. The next time these characters are together, look how far Jim is in the background. "He killed himself! He killed himself..." And see the progression of the relationship in any shot that has the two of them together ending with this one: "I can't believe you commtited suicide I cannot believe you committed suicide How could you have done this? How could you have committed suicide?" That is directing. "I can't help you out of this one, Jim." And as Breen has gotten older, he's actually gotten more subtle. For instance, now he's really good at using emptiness in the frame, so he'll cut to a bed with no one in it or an empty cave with a hint of a shadow. He'll build an entire scene to a moment where someone almost looks into the lens, happy. Or terrified. And he'll show us someone's dysfunctional state through their relationship with technology. It's true that Breen has a reputation for being uncompromising when it comes to challenging his audience. "Magical, mystical, tied into real, real world scenarios. They're filled with metaphor and symbolism." At the same time it's great to watch someone who is actually doing their job. Someone who can show the power of character change through a single dissolve. Someone who's willing to play this moment in full. "I'm sorry. I, I let you down." "You didn't let me down. Let's try and start over. Yeah, we both got problems." "I think... I think I'm beyond that now." "I'm going. I'm gonna get some fresh air." "Fine You go!" "I'm not running away!" Or just let us watch characters walk from Point A to point B. Even if you don't like Breen, this is his craft in directing right now and it's absolutely worth studying. "My job sucks!" "I've gotta get this work done." And if you do like him, here is what he has to say to you... "Thanks very much, I really appreciate all the support, it's been fantastic, the reviews have been great Uhm... anyway, goes on and on..."

Contents

Early life and career

Breen was the youngest of three sons born to Mary and Hugh A. Breen in Philadelphia. His father had emigrated from Ireland and met his mother Mary in New Jersey. Breen was raised in a strict Roman Catholic home and attended Gesu Parish School until the eighth grade.[2] He then attended Boys Catholic High School.[3] He attended Saint Joseph's College but dropped out after two years, after which he worked as a newspaper reporter for fourteen years in Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Chicago.[3] After working as a reporter, Breen worked for the United States Foreign Service for four years, serving in Kingston, Jamaica, and in Toronto, Canada.[1]

As film censor

1934—1941

Breen was a journalist and an "influential layperson" in the Catholic community.[4] Breen worked for Will H. Hays as a "troubleshooter" as early as 1931.[5]

In 1933, the Roman Catholic National Legion of Decency was founded, and began to rate films independently, putting pressure on the industry. In 1933 and 1934 the Legion along with a number of Protestant and women's groups launched plans to boycott films that they deemed immoral.[6] The Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) had, up until then, enforced the motion picture industry's own self-censorship standards, albeit not very seriously.[7] Hays, who had been in charge of enforcing this voluntary code since 1927, worried that the NLD's efforts could weaken his own power and that of his office, and hurt industry profits.[7]

Hays appointed the "tough Irish Catholic" Breen to head the Production Code Administration (PCA), a newly created department of the MPPDA, created to administer the Motion Picture Production Code.[8] Unlike previous attempts at self-censorship, PCA decisions became binding — no film could be exhibited in an American theater without a stamp of approval from the PCA.[9] Any producer attempting to do so faced a fine of $25,000.[10]

After ten years of unsuccessful voluntary codes and expanding local censorship boards, the studio approved and agreed to enforce the codes, and the nationwide production code was enforced starting on July 1, 1934.[9] Liberty Magazine wrote in 1936 that Breen's appointment gave him "more influence in standardizing world thinking than Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin."[11]

Breen has been accused of anti-Semitism[12] because of a few personal letters he wrote in the early 1930s. In these letters, he lamented the immorality of the filmmakers. According to author Thomas Doherty, this outburst was likely a reaction to Breen's sudden immersion in the alien Hollywood culture rather than an expression of deeply held beliefs, stating that "The antisemitic bile erupted during the pre-Code era, when Breen, newly arrived in Hollywood, was shocked by the folkways of the locals and anguished by his inability to purify the screen." After 1934, he was "publicly and forthrightly anti-antisemitic."[13]

William Dudley Pelley, founder of the anti-Semitic organization the Silver Legion of America, believed that Jews controlled the movie industry, which he thought to be the "most effective propaganda medium in America", during the 1930s. Hence he applauded the fact that Breen had assumed the power to censor Hollywood.[14] Breen, who also expressed anti-Semitic views[15], was deeply worried that Jewish filmmakers would try to use Nazi mistreatment of Jews during the 1930s as a vehicle for propaganda.[16] He was concerned that Germans would be offended by harsh depiction of Nazis. He specifically warned Hollywood producers to avoid the topic altogether, saying that "[t]here is a strong pro-German and anti-Semitic feeling in this country ... and while those who are likely to approve of an anti-Hitler picture may think well of such an enterprise, they should keep in mind that millions of Americans might think otherwise."[17] Breen claimed that plans to make such pictures were being coordinated through the Hollywood Anti-Nazi League, which he claimed was "conducted and financed almost entirely by Jews". As a result of Breen's anticommunist views, the censorship board pressured Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer to drop plans to film Sinclair Lewis's anti-fascist novel, It Can't Happen Here.[16]

In 1938, largely in response to Nazi activities in Germany, Pope Pius XI denounced anti-Semitism, stating that "it is not possible for Christians to take part in anti-Semitism". In response to this encouragement, American Roman Catholics formed the Committee of Catholics to Fight Anti-Semitism. The two authors of the Hays Code, Martin J. Quigley and the Rev. Daniel Lord, SJ, promoted the cause. Quigley asked Breen to help gather statements of support from Catholics in the Hollywood film industry. Breen did so, and issued a statement himself, which said, in part, "In my judgement there is nothing more important for us Catholics to do at the present moment [July 1939] than to use our energies in stemming the tide of racial bigotry and hostility."[18]

1941—1954

Breen retired from the PCA in April 1941, announcing that his departure was due to overwork and exhaustion.[19] Between 1941 and 1942 Breen was the general manager of RKO Pictures.[5] He returned to the PCA in 1942.[4]

By the mid-1950s, Breen's power over Hollywood was diminishing. For instance, Samuel Goldwyn publicly insisted that the production code be revised. Around the same time, Howard Hughes, owner of RKO, released The French Line, featuring revealing images of actress Jane Russell in a bathing suit, despite the fact that Breen had refused to approve the picture for release.[20]

In 1951, Breen's office refused to approve Otto Preminger's film The Moon Is Blue because of objections to the dialogue.[21] United Artists backed Preminger in his decision to release the movie without Breen's approval.[22]

In 1954, the same year he retired, in responding to these events in an interview with Aline Mosby, Breen claimed that "[A]fter the events of the past 10 months — The French Line, The Moon is Blue and Goldwyn — the code is more entrenched than ever before. Those events brought tremendous support from groups all over the country."[20] Breen retired from the PCA and was replaced by Geoffrey Shurlock.[23] On his retirement he was presented with an honorary Academy Award[1] for "his conscientious, open-minded and dignified management of the Motion Picture Production Code".[24]

Personal life

Breen married Mary Dervin in February 1914, with whom he had six children, three boys and three girls.[25] Their son Joseph Breen, Jr. was a writer and director.[26] One of their other children, Thomas, whose right leg was amputated due to a combat injury on Guam during World War II, was cast in a feature role in Jean Renoir's 1950 film The River, playing a wounded war veteran. Renoir was not aware at the time that Thomas was Joseph Breen's son.[27]

After his retirement, Breen moved to Phoenix, Arizona with his wife Mary. He suffered from poor health in his later years and eventually lost the use of his legs. He died at the age of 77 on December 5, 1965, at the Brentwood Convalescent Home in Los Angeles and was buried at Holy Cross Cemetery, Culver City.[28]

Legacy

After Breen's death, Variety magazine wrote that Breen was "one of the most influential figures in American culture" and that "more than any single individual, he shaped the moral stature of the American motion picture."[4] The trade magazine went on to say that Breen enforced the PCA code "with a potent mix of missionary zeal and administrative tenacity."[4]

In the 2004 film The Aviator, Breen was portrayed by Edward Herrmann.

References

  1. ^ a b c Staff report (December 8, 1965). Joseph I. Breen, Film Code Chief; Watchdog of Movie Morals For Years Is Dead at 75. New York Times
  2. ^ Doherty, Thomas (2009). Hollywood's Censor: Joseph I. Breen and the Production Code Administration. Columbia University Press. pp. 11–12, 14. ISBN 0-231-14359-1.
  3. ^ a b Robbin Coons (August 10, 1934). "Film Censor Finds Censorship Begins at Home — Breen Selects the Movies His Children See". Sarasota Herald-Tribune.
  4. ^ a b c d Doherty, Thomas Patrick. Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema 1930-1934. New York: Columbia University Press 1999. ISBN 0-231-11094-4, pg. 9
  5. ^ a b Leff, Leonard J. (May 1991). "The Breening of America". PMLA. 106 (3): 432–445. doi:10.2307/462777. JSTOR 462777.(subscription required)
  6. ^ Matthew Bernstein (2000). Controlling Hollywood: Censorship and Regulation in the Studio Era. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 0813527074. Retrieved 15 February 2013.
  7. ^ a b Bob Thomas (August 3, 1965). "Censors Bloomed With the Talkies". The Miami News. p. 2.
  8. ^ Pryors, Thomas S. (October 15, 1954). "Breen is Retired as Movie Censor; At Own Request, Director of Code Leaves Office -- Chief Aide Successor", New York Times; accessed May 4, 2017.
  9. ^ a b Gregory D. Black (1996). Hollywood Censored: Morality Codes, Catholics, and the Movies. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521565928. Retrieved 15 February 2013.
  10. ^ Leff, Leonard J.; Simmons, Jerold L. (2001). The Dame in the Kimono: Hollywood, Censorship, and the Production Code. University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 0813190118.
  11. ^ Wu, Tim (2010). "The Future of Free Speech". The Chronicle of Higher Education. 57 (13).
  12. ^ Jill Watts (February 6, 2007). Hattie McDaniel: Black Ambition, White Hollywood. HarperCollins. p. 146. ISBN 978-0-06-051491-4. Retrieved May 26, 2013.
  13. ^ Thomas Doherty (December 11, 2007). "Was Hollywood's Famed Censor an Antisemite?". The Jewish Daily Forward. Retrieved May 26, 2013.
  14. ^ Michael E. Birdwell (February 1, 2001). Celluloid Soldiers: Warner Bros.'s Campaign Against Nazism. NYU Press. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-8147-9871-3. Retrieved May 26, 2013.
  15. ^ "Was Hollywood's Famed Censor an Antisemite?". The Forward. Retrieved 2018-08-16.
  16. ^ a b Clayton R.. Koppes; Gregory D. Black (2000). Hollywood Goes to the War: Patriotism, Movies and the Second World War from Ninotchka to Mrs Miniver. Tauris Parke Paperbacks. p. 22. ISBN 978-1-86064-605-8. Retrieved May 27, 2013.
  17. ^ Bruce Kirle (2005). Unfinished Show Business: Broadway Musicals As Works-in-Process. SIU Press. p. 132. ISBN 978-0-8093-8857-8. Retrieved May 27, 2013.
  18. ^ Doherty 2009, pp. 211–12
  19. ^ "New Censor Sought by Movie Czar". The Telegraph-Herald. April 25, 1941.
  20. ^ a b Aline Mosby (March 17, 1954). "Hollywood Report". Oxnard Press-Courier.
  21. ^ Bob Thomas (June 9, 1953). "Movie Censorship Faces Strongest Challenge Now". Times Daily.
  22. ^ Fujiwara, Chris, The World and Its Double: The Life and Work of Otto Preminger. New York: Macmillan Publishers 2009; ISBN 0-86547-995-X, pp. 140-42
  23. ^ Bob Thomas (June 1, 1955). "Censors try tempering growing movie violence". Spokane Daily Chronicle.
  24. ^ Doherty 2009 p. 5
  25. ^ Doherty 2009 p. 15
  26. ^ https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0106713/
  27. ^ Doherty 2009 pp. 70, 282
  28. ^ Doherty 2009 pp. 346–48

External links

This page was last edited on 1 March 2019, at 09:01
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.