State Cinema

Hungarian Film & Television

Course 1 · Chapter 3 · Nationalisation & the 1950s

In 1948 the Hungarian film industry was nationalised, and for four decades the state paid for films, ran the studios, set the themes and decided what could be shown. The 1950s were the hardest years, with strict ideological demands, but they also produced the first postwar films that audiences and critics still discuss. This chapter describes the system, the pressure of socialist realism and the newsreels, and the films of Zoltán Fábri and others, treating the period factually and with attention to how filmmakers worked within it. Names and dates are from general knowledge and flagged "check".

The System

Nationalisation

Film production, distribution and cinemas were taken into state ownership in 1948, as the communist party consolidated power (check the date and the steps). There was now one employer, and decisions on scripts and releases rested with state and party bodies.

The studios

Production was centred on the Budapest studios, later grouped under the Mafilm name (check the details). Filmmakers worked in teams, known as studio groups, with some room for debate within them from the later 1950s (check).

Before the clampdown

The immediate postwar years had produced films such as Géza Radványi's Valahol Európában (Somewhere in Europe, 1947), about homeless children in the aftermath of war, often cited as a high point of that period (check).

Socialist Realism and the Screen

  • The doctrine. Socialist realism asked that art show the building of socialism, with positive heroes and clear messages (check how strictly it was applied in film).
  • Typical subjects. Workers, collective farms, the class struggle and the defeat of "enemies" appeared in many early 1950s films, which are now mostly forgotten (check).
  • Newsreels and documentaries. The state newsreel and documentary system was an important instrument of publicity and reached audiences in cinemas before the main feature (check).
  • Small gaps. Even in these years directors found ways to bring humour, human stories and craft into approved subjects, and audiences went to the cinema in large numbers (check the attendance figures).
  • Foreign films. Imports were limited and dominated by films from the Soviet Union and other socialist states, though some Western films appeared (check).

Fábri and His Contemporaries

Director and film (check each)Note
Zoltán Fábri (1917 to 1994), Körhinta (Merry-Go-Round, 1955)A love story set in a village at the time of collectivisation, in which a girl in love with a man her father opposes is caught between the old life and the new farm cooperative. It was a huge success with Hungarian audiences and was shown abroad, including at Cannes (check).
Zoltán Fábri, Hannibál tanár úr (Professor Hannibal, 1956)A film set in the 1930s about a teacher who confronts a bullying right-wing group at a school; it is read as an allegory about intimidation, and was released around the time of the 1956 uprising (check).
Károly Makk (1925 to 2017)His comedy Liliomfi (1955) was a hit, and he went on to make serious films in the 1960s and 1970s (Chapter 4; check).
Félix Máriássy (1919 to 1975)Made socially observant dramas of ordinary life, such as Budapesti tavasz (Spring in Budapest, 1955; check).
Reading a state-funded film A film from a state system can be read in at least two ways: as propaganda that shows what the state wanted said, and as a record of ordinary life, performance and craft made by people who worked in the system. Körhinta is a good test case, since it has a political setting but is remembered for its romance, its village scenes and its cinematography. The careful position is that both readings are possible and that evidence about intent (scripts, censors' notes, the director's later statements) is needed to say more (check what survives).

1956

  • The uprising. The revolution of October 1956 was crushed by Soviet forces, and many Hungarians left the country (check). Film people were among those who emigrated or were punished.
  • Afterwards. A period of reprisals gave way, from the early 1960s, to a more relaxed cultural policy under János Kádár (see Chapter 5 and Hungarian Literature 7; check).
  • Audiences. Cinema attendance was very high in the 1950s and fell as television spread (check the numbers; see Chapter 7).
A British comparison The nearest British parallels are the wartime Ministry of Information films, and the documentary movement of the 1930s, which were also state-sponsored and aimed at shaping public feeling. The difference is that Britain had a commercial industry beside them, while Hungary after 1948 had no independent film business at all (check).
Check the details Dates, titles and attendance figures are from general knowledge, and accounts of the period have been revised since 1989 as archives opened. Verify with film histories and archive catalogues, and avoid reading every film of the period as either pure propaganda or hidden protest.

Exercises

Exercise 1

Describe how the film industry was organised after 1948 and what that meant for a director who wanted to make a film.

→ Solution
Exercise 2

Explain why Körhinta can be read both as an official film and as a popular romance, and say what evidence would help to decide.

→ Solution
Exercise 3

Compare a socialist-realist film of the early 1950s with a later film from the decade, and note what changed in subject and tone.

→ Solution

Quick Reference

  • 1948: nationalisation of production, distribution and cinemas (check)
  • Doctrine: socialist realism, newsreels, controlled imports
  • Films: Körhinta 1955, Hannibál tanár úr 1956 (check)
  • Directors: Fábri, Makk, Máriássy
  • The caution: propaganda and craft can both be present