FERNANDEL - (to Carlo RIM)Biblio.com
Typed letter signed by Fernandel to the film director Carlo Rim on the defense of French cinema against the Hollywood onslaught. ""It is possible to achieve in France despite the growing number of detractors a production worthy of this country""
1948Best.-Nr. 92534Marseille 1948. Fine. ""It is true that if he could replace me he would be an artist and that is not a gift given to everyone"" Marseille 7 avril 1948 21 x 28.7 cm Une feuille Typed letter dated and signed in blue ink by Fernandel addressed to his close friend Carlo Rim the Provençal writer caricaturist and filmmaker who was also his biographer concerning their joint film L'Armoire volante. One page on Fernandel's letterhead. Some light soiling and folds from mailing. A document that sheds light through the exchange between an actor and his director on the inner workings of French film production in the late 1940s. On 7 April 1948 Fernandel was working on his role as Alfred Puc in L'Armoire volante a black comedy written and directed by Carlo Rim which was released in cinemas on 29 October of the same year. It was the third film in which Carlo Rim directed Fernandel. Although shooting had begun in March the actor was still in April at the stage of reflection: in this letter he proposes to the director ""to shoot this film with a moustache for a change from the characters of his recent productions"". The letter also reveals how scant the material at his disposal was: in the absence of a screenplay Carlo Rim had sent him a synopsis supplemented by the shooting script a document setting out the staging of the film shot by shot. Fernandel is on the other hand delighted to have Antonin Berval as his partner with whom he had just made Si ça peut vous faire plaisir and whom he describes as ""a thoroughly decent fellow and what is more a talented artist"". Finally he returns to the difficulties encountered with his stand-in who ""for all his goodwill was unable to pull it off"" leaving him no choice but to reshoot his scenes himself. On this subject the actor displays a delightful self-satisfaction: ""It is true that if he could replace me he would be an artist and that is not a gift given to everyone"". Between these remarks on the production Fernandel slips in a more allusive paragraph on what in his eyes was at stake in the success of L'Armoire volante at a time of crisis for French cinema: ""This film must succeed; first for our own sake then for the others. They are waiting for you to slip up and I want the film-world menagerie to acknowledge that it is possible in friendship -and with talent- to succeed in France despite the growing number of detractors in making a production worthy of this country; which remains in spite of everything and against all comers one of the foremost in the film industry."" Fernandel is here echoing a topical issue: the decline of French cinema in the face of the influx of American films. In May 1946 the Blum-Byrnes agreements signed in Washington had opened French screens wide to Hollywood productions reserving only four weeks of screen time out of every thirteen for domestic films. Between 1946 and 1948 American films thus accounted for more than half of all films released in France provoking a vigorous response from the profession. Founded in December 1947 on the initiative of Claude Autant-Lara among others with the backing of the Communist Party and the CGT trade union the Comité de défense du cinéma français Committee for the Defence of French Cinema organised a demonstration on the grands boulevards of Paris on 4 January 1948. Thousands of film workers technicians filmmakers and filmgoers marched alongside stars such as Jean Marais and Simone Signoret. In referring to the ""detractors"" of French cinema Fernandel may have had in mind certain members of the profession itself. Many distributors and exhibitors had indeed taken advantage of the new import regime to programme American films on a massive scale as these were available in large numbers and often on more favourable terms than French films a practice regularly denounced by the Defence Committee. The profession's mobilisation met with partial success: in September 1948 the agreements were revised unknown
