Movie Makers (Jan-May 1928)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




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.

Photograph by Newton H. Hartman THE AMATEUR IS GRAVEN IN STONE In a Friese Representing Collegiate Activities at the University of Pennsylvania EDITORIALS A Movie Magazine That Moves ~y\7ITH this issue Amateur Movie Makers becomes, as well as a magazine about moving pictures, a magazine in which there are genuine moving pictures. This may seem a very portentous statement about a very simple plan, because it is made possible at all only by going back to the earliest days of motion pictures and utilizing the principle of the persistence of vision as demonstrated by the "penny peep show" movies, or the card "flip books," which have now been highly developed in the modern animated cartoon. On the lower right hand corner of each odd numbered page in this issue will be found a tiny cartoon of Felix the Cat. By allowing the pages to riffle quickly under the thumb from the back of the magazine to the front, Felix will be seen hanging up his coat, which is followed by a typically clever cartoon denoument. This innovation in motion picture magazines was made possible through the cooperation of the Pat Sullivan Studios and Educational Film Exchanges, Incorporated. The Real Issue MUCH has been written and said about morals and the movies. Photoplays are approved and condemned because of their specific propaganda value; this one is presumed to inculcate patriotism, religious devotion, love of nature, thrift and that one is accused of decrying a people, a sect or a movement. Others are said to be "uplifting" and still others are branded as "degrading". They are safe for youth, for democracy for decency or they undermine them. Those who watch the films of the country with these ideas in mind are doing an obvious duty to their special causes and to their concepts of what is good or bad for the human race, of which they feel themselves, honestly enough, the guardians. But there is a broader concept of morals and the movies that is held, we believe, by all of those persons whom we have referred to as the "cintelligenzia", whom many consider to have no morals, only artistic opinions, but whom we credit with a very keen moral sense, nevertheleess. We believe the cintelligenzia wants, almost above everything else in the movies, directors with clean minds. The cintelligenzia believes that everything can be talked about, written about and filmed about and that the results are sometimes valuable, sometimes interesting, sometimes disgusting and sometimes boring. It is not concerned so much with the matter — having no special field of humanity to guard against influence — as it is with the manner. We respect the cintelligenzia for its quick approval of every photoplay that is exceptional art and produced with a clean attitude toward life and for its equally speedy disapproval of every photoplay that may be even more exceptional art but that is produced with an alert eye to the salacious. And we feel that if this sound One-hundred-jifty-one discrimination is, after all, "morals in the movies," then the objectors should make the most of it to the good of their souls. Better Film — Yes WE came away from the thirteenth annual conference of the National Board of Review with a distinct impression that the movement for Better Films is making decided headway. There have always been better films and poorer films. Comparisons, in spite of the declarations of the producers, still exist and not every great studio rings the tocsin of intelligent approval with each release. What the National Board of Review's Better Films Committee appears to be achieving is a wider showing of these better films. Its highest accomplishment, as we see it, is the progressive education of audiences which is the healthiest thing that can happen to both the motion picture art and the motion picture industry. In fact, we propose a new slogan for the future activities of the National Board in the phrase, "the self-determination of movie audiences". If they can get what they want and if they continually want better films the whole problem is solved. Mating the Exceptionals THE Little Picture House, for New York City, planned by the Film Bureau, a national organization devoted to spreading information concerning the highest grade photoplays, is designed to bring exceptional films and exceptional audiences together under exceptional conditions. The Film Bureau has a remarkable membership made up of the social leaders of the New York metropolitan area. It is proposed to erect a theatre in the center of the Park Avenue district in that city where only the most exceptional photoplays will be shown to an audience whose critical faculty has been sharpened with the best artistic offerings of the entire world. The Little Picture House will have an intimate and selective atmosphere designed to attract the cintelligenzia and will cooperate with various New York social and artistic groups. It will probably start with a cachet of distinction that will bring the whole metropolis to its doors. It will go far toward making movie going the ultra smart activity that movie taking has come to be in the last three years. Since good taste, in spite of the assurances of many sincere democrats, is not, after all, denied to the socially elect, the Little Picture House should carry forward the better films movement in its own particular fashion. R. W. W. *£