We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
advancement have no opportunity to screen either the epoch-making films of the past, whose influence has made our present work what it is, or the current product of foreign studios whose releases do not find their way into American theatres. That such a condition should exist in Hollywood, the world's film capitol. we all agreed, was lamentable. But nobody bothered to take practical action.
Today, somebody has. The Academy’s Don Gledhill, in collaboration with several other equally progressive souls, last year formed the Southern California Film Society. This Society not only talks about such showings: it actually put them on. Its second season is now under way.
Every Friday, Saturday and Sunday night, usually at 8:30 P. M., in the Academy Review Theatre, 1455 North Gordon Street, there is a Film Society showing of a picture worth seeing. Among those scheduled to be seen this summer are Douglas Fairbanks’ “Tire Mark of Zorro”; “Alas De Mi Patria" ("Wings of My Country”), a current spectacle of military aviation, made in Argentina; the pioneer impressionistic film. “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari”; Rene Clair’s “A Nous La Liberte” ; “The Covered Wagon” ; a complete evening of Mack Sennett’s films, including “Molly-O.” with Mabel Normand; the beautifully photographed “Passion of Joan of Arc,” photographed almost exclusively in close-ups; the original “Beau Geste.” with Ronald Colman; “Tumbleweeds,” Wm. S. Hart’s last film; and many others. Among those already shown have been Fritz Lang’s “Metropolis” ; Sergei Eisenstein’s “Cruiser Potemkin”; and “Mientras
Mexico Duerme,” the most popular Mexican-made film of 1938.
To anyone interested in motion pictures, not merely from an "arty’ standpoint, but from the more practical one of studying the other fellow’s work to see why great pictures are great, the Film Society’s program is extremely well worth supporting. We to whom making better pictures means bread and butter should support it generously, for study of such pictures — old and new — cannot fail to bring new ideas, new enthusiasm, and in the long run pay us cash dividends. It should be worth money to any of us.
\et the cost of attending these sessions is ridiculously low. Academy members may attend without expense, though they are asked to pay a fortycent admission charge for their guests. Others may obtain five admissions, to he used individually or together, for two dollars. The Film Society is doing something eminently worthwhile for the film industry. Those of us in the film industry should by all means support it.
* *
*Tp HE trade papers frequently editorialize over the need of closer cooperation between the business heads of the film industry and its ‘just around the corner’ competitor, television. It is equally obvious that since both mediums tell stories visually — in pictures, with the aid of sound — cooperation of artistic minds is equally necessary.
But even more urgent, for many reasons, is cooperation between the two industries in interchange of technical ideas and personnel. It seems inevitable that the two must ultimate
3