Photoplay Magazine, January 1921 (anuary 1921)

Photoplay Magazine '""THE photoplay is getting down to the only true basis upon which any art can stand: a basis of honest, deliber- ate expression. The only short road to success is the long road of one at a time. The biggest output, the finest studios, the collaring of a champion crop of bona fide authors all these have been tried, and have failed to advance pic- ture art at all." Gold and Leather Photoplay Magazine's annual summary of motion picture progress and retrogression for the year 1920. w 'HAT have you done in 1920?" Let's be sure we are putting that question to the right parties. The surface aspects of the photoplay industry have changed less, in the past twelve months than in any preceding year of picture history. That is to say, the visible screen reflects almost the identical pageant of drama and comedy beauty and strength, enchanting construction and bizarre location that it did in December, 1919. But behind the screen, really epochal things have been happening. A fascinating, changeable craft, almost fluid in its substance, has been settling down, solidifying, discovering rules and taking on the principles of an industry which is understood rather than the laboratory manifestations of an experiment. We doubt if anyone will ever wholly understand women or the picture business; but in the worth-while establish- ments there has been a little less high-flying, and much more getting back to first principles. Heretofore great acting, notable direction and realistic writing have been more or less matters of happy accident. Now do not misunderstand us! We do not mean that the few genuine remarkables of our art have been mere blunders. We do mean that the conditions sur- rounding actor, director and author have heretofore been hap- hazard. There was no scientific progress because as yet every- thing was experimental. There was no painstaking following-out of any logical path because there were no logical paths. There was no systematic cooperation of writer and producer and player because these had not learned cooperation except in a very primitive, occasional way. Yet once in awhile, amid a welter of mediocre offerings, ap- peared a great photoplay, as scarce and strange as big, sweet raspberries on a wild raspberry bush. Then, everyone claimed the credit. The author was sure he did it. The director knew that it was all his. And on the very face of things, the actor embraced it as his own. If you look below the present surface of photoplay affairs you will see that this haphazardry no longer exists. It is not the occasional, isolated masterpiece which makes picture progress today. Picture progress is being made by those individuals and corporations who have determined to make good pictures, one at a time; each, like a play or a novel, being worked out according to its individual premise, and whatever its corporate or series relationships, making its own way in the world, and standing or falling as it gives, or fails to give, an artistic tran- script of human life. The quantity idea has been definitely 40 The Tear's AVay Down East" furnishes marvelous directorial tech- nique throughout and a new thrill at the finish. junked where good pictures are concerned. Yet the solo photo- plays in several instances are the product of houses which also have the old program obligation to fulfill. While good and bad grist cannot issue from the same mill, theoretically, it is issuing, actually, from several of the most famous sunlight factories in America. The photoplay is getting down to the only true basis upon which any art can stand: a basis of honest, deliberate expression. The only short road to success is the long road of one at a time. The biggest output, the finest studios, the collaring of a cham- pion crop of bona fide authors—all these have been tried, and have failed to advance picture art at all, or the producers' finances very much. So now we are back to our very first question, and when we repeat, "What have you done in 1920?" we -realize that the most responsible persons, the ones who can give the only final answers, are the producers them- selves. The actors, the directors and even the aforementioned bona fide authors are bound in the net of the employer's plans, hobbled by his education and imagination, and either glorified or crippled as his vision is sane and far-seeing, or petty and ava- ricious. It isn't "What have you done. Mr. Meighan and Mr. Farnum, Miss Frederick and Miss Joyce?" It is "What are you doing, Mr. Paramount, Mr. Goldwyn, and Mr. Metro?" By way of answering the question by reviewing the evi- dence let us consider, first, a few of the plays of the twelve- month: Humoresque" radiates the pathos and comedy of the simplest lives. IT was easy, last year, to pick three preeminent photoplays. They were "Broken Blossoms," "The Miracle Man," and "Blind Husbands." No single taste can ever be a universal criterion, hence "the best ten," or "the best three" or "the best half-dozen" of any- thing is never "the best" to everybody. But if we were to pick what seem to us preem- inent, in this year 1920, we would name '"Way Down East," made by Mr. Griffith; "Humor- esque," made by International; "Why Change Your Wife," made by Mr. de Mille of Paramount, and "The Devil's Pass-Key," made by Mr. von Stroheim of Universal. Each of these has a different excellence. "Humoresque" radiates the pathos and comedy of the simplest lives; '"Way Down East" furnishes marvelous directorial technique throughout and a new thrill at the finish; "Why Change Your Wife" is a glittering exaggera- tion of the ornate and voluptuous day in which we live; "The