Camera (May 1922-April 1923)

CAMERA! "The Digest of the Motion Picture Industry" Page Nine The Screen Writers'' Page Conducted by William E. Wing Stories First <«>^ ONSCIOUS of the public and exhibitor outcry about the decline in the quality of the stories produced into motion pictures, we have made certain that our producers obtained the right material to meet the public favor. Since quality of story was the first essential, the matter of direction was held in abeyance. Having the stories that would measure up to the public demand, we then set out to see that the right stories went to the right directors. This welding together of factors was slow but definite. "We have provided and counselled producers to make stories that afford legitimate, strong drama; pathos, romance, adventure, fun and humor; vigorous action. All of these, strong stories and clean. "To gain strength, none of our producers have had to resort to dirt, vulgarity, commonness or cheapness." This is not evidence in favor of the story first by a manufacturer. It is from the pen of F. B. Warren, vice-president of the American Releasing Corporation, an organization which must meet public approval with its products or fail. Here is a corporation risking its very existence upon the products it handles, depending entirely, primarily, upon the story itself. Mr. Warren not only thus testifies, but does so in the first annual announcement of that corporation. But Walter E. Greene, president, has something to say anent the many subjects to be offered for public approval. One extract is as interesting to writers as anything which has been published in the past year. "The screen has ample brains in its authorship division, but is under-supplied tcith the proper makers of screen blueprints — continuity writers," says President Greene. "Great motion pictures are, and always will be a matter of perfectly constructed continuities plus directorial intelligence. When the industry starts from there, it will finish far above the present level of story standards in motion pictures. "With this demanded improvement of continuities based upon and built from good stories must come new types of stories; not a whipping over and over of the parent and "type" stories that prevail so widely now. The producer mind in America must change, and change drastically. "The collective mind of American audences has undergone a great change. It has wearied of the fare that producers are providing. "Distributors knoic this better than producers, many of whom are working 3000 miles away in California. A distributor senses and touches his exhibitor market from a thou.iand points of contact." President Greene strikes upon one subject which has proven the secret worry of certain prominent manufacturers — the need of the advanced continuity writer. Unpreparedness for a great change, which was bound to occur, is responsible. Now that much damage has been done, the scramble to lock the barn has begun. The official corroborates Camera! in the declaration that there is ample brain in the authorship division. But, the matter of a receptive circle in the studio, to welcome the good story instead of You cannot halt a slump with an outpouring of promise tvithout performance. Only the writer with the better story, and the producer who is willing to abandon the old treadmill, can do that. meeting it with a chip on the editorial shoulder, or the personal likes and dislikes of several other humans in the studio acting as handicaps, is quite another thing. They should call in the doctor for that ailment also. No, Evangeli7ie, you are wrong. Hokum is Egyptian for how come? Characters AMONG the "best sellers" of the screen, several quite recent productions have defied precedent to quite an extent, but nevertheless, have scored so definitely as to beco.me remembrances. It is doubtful if "Humoresque" and "The Good Provider' 'ever will be forgotten by the majority of people who witnessed these productions. And yet the secret history of the first picture reveals the fact that its sponsor had little or no faith in the outcome. After it literally lifted itself by its own boot-straps, to an exalted position among stellar productions, "The Good Provider" was sent forth by the same corporation with much more confidence. You see, the Old Guard made a hard-andfast rule that no screen production could — ■ or should — succeed, unless it was ground out, foot by foot, according to practically the first set of regulations provided. "Interesting but little story," has been the cause of many rejections at the hands of the studio. But certain people — and they were few — decided that the manuscript of strong appeal was good enough for the screen, regardless of ancient screen rules. Therefore not only were the above two productions sent on their way to shatter precedent and make for success over a new route, but others have followed which, in the picture sense, did not carry "much of a story." Then came along one, Rupert Hughes, who had discovered for himself what the people wanted by writing books that could not come off the press fast enough to supply the demand. He dipped into the game until he was able to direct. Thereupon he proceeded to write "Come On Over," which little piece he then transferred to the film. If any old-time manufacturer had read the synopsis of "Come On Over," he would have gasped in horror to discover that Hughes was going to spend real money to produce the same. But old-timers being a portion of the film ailment at present, none knew that the Hughes story, or odds and ends of certain other persons' stories, was another photoplay as sure fire as "Humoresque" and others of its class. For it was characterization, and that someIhing which attends it, which put these productions over. They were xmfoldmentst tvhieh stirred the heart instead of the pulse. To the writer who knows his business, an unusual character is filled with possibilities. It radiates from some peculiar member of the human race. .Perhaps it is not an old character, but a person upon whom such great burdens are imposed as to incite the pity of the writer who visualizes him or her. From characterization, and the situation in which the imaginative writer is bound to find them, flows the so-called story. And characterization has practically proven the success of half a dozen screen productions in the past three years. Frequently a character in a cast, apart from the leads, actually sways the pendulum across the line from mediocrity to success. Therefore, if eager students everywhere, including those who so constantly ask "Camera! " for a guide book to the royal road of success in photoplay writing, will study characterization upon the screen, analyze its relationship to the story and probe for the secret of its worth, they may get a new angle upon screen stories. Many a screen success has been written from a single characterization conjured up by a writer and used practically as the corner stone of his foundation. Don't title your arctic story, "A Summer's Song," or your ocean tale "Through Trackless Wastes." In other words, avoid bad examples. Letters Home — No. 1 Dear Analine: I guess you'll be sirprisd to hear I have quit the garage and gone in for skenario writing. Some other grease hound now can have my formerly previous job. There ain't nothing to it, writing photoplayes. All you got to do is to get some actorine in mind, say Threda Barer, and have her get a eye on some husbind. Of course he squorms but her eye and the clothes she don't wear does the bizness. Wile the society stuff as per above is running along all O. K., shoot in some scenes from the garden of Eding or Cleo Patrick in a boat lamping King Squatro, with a adder concealed on her person. Of course it don't mean anything to your story, but you ought to see the money they can spend on them intrusive episodas. Go back to your victims onct in a wile, but don't forget to show the fall of Rome before you git done. Then mail it in and colleck your check. Will let you know when I colleck my first one. You rs, "CRANKSHAFT" JOE. Make your story believable as well as human.