Camera (May 1922-April 1923)

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.

Page Eight 'The Digest of the Motion Picture Industry" CAMERA ! THE SILENT TREND Composite of Views, Previews, and Reviews of Motion Pictures. Johnny Walker in "The Fourth Musketeer" looms up like a winner. And, William K. Howard deserves much of the credit, for it is well directed, and, he was the man behind the megaphone. We cannot agree with one enthusiast, who branded this picture "the greatest ever." Under the strain of unbiased analysis, it does not stand up under the tremendous burden of the superlative, "greatest." It is a good picture of extensive entertaining value and should have a wide vogue in the popularprice field. At a pre-view given this week, this picture received a 60-40 break in its favor from the audience. There was in the majority the enthusiastic clan; there was a minority not entirely satisfied. One thing sure is, Mr. Walker is making long strides towards ingratiating himself with a very general public and Director Howard has angled himself into a position of advantage to him in an endeavor to do bigger and better things. Explicitly, this star and this director now occupy that position from which much can be expected of them. After seeing "Adam's Rib" and pondering over it deliberately for an hour after the show, the most natural conclusion in appraisal is: "Well, it's another Cecil De Mille picture," which may mean much or little. One fact beyond the range of doubt is, this is no world-beater nor is there much of the handiwork of a genius discernible. At times this picture entertains royally; at other times it actually bores one. Occasionally, one's mind turns to wondering if the producer has really become too selfconfident. Almost sinuiltaneouslv, one is prone to wish Mr. De Mille would abandon forever many of his ideas of picture-making and either originate new mechanics for creating dramatic power or give more attention to developing story values devoid of reflections of a directorial personality "Adam's Rib" will satisfy those who like the usual Cecil De Mille fare. A pre-view of Clifford S. Elfelt's newest six-reel semi-western picture, "Danger," reveals the fact that it is not necessary to spend a huge fortune to get a film of satistying power as a diversion. "Danger" did not cost Mr. Elfelt much money, but it will afford a big public with a wealth of entertainment nevertheless. It makes little difference whether or not you are familiar with J. B. Warner, the star, he has a role that fits him perfectly and he gives you thrills. It is unimportant whether or not you ever heard of June LaVere, the leading lady, she gives a high-cJass performance and serves as an embellishment of the story which gains strength for having been devised solely for picture purposes. We have no idea exactly how much "Danger" cost, but we doubt that as much as $10,000 was spent on it. The amount involved is secondary. Of the first importance is, it appea.ses one's appetite for sane cinema diversion more completely than many productions costing $100,000 and more. "The Vengeance of the Deep," an A. B. Barringer production, should not be subjected to the inevitable caustic remarks of critics — it .should be allowed to remain in the deep of oblivion. It Is to be regretted that the expense of taking a company all the way to Hawaii was incurred only to get so little. The producer was admirably ambitious and it is difficult to understand liow TENDENCIES TERSELY TOLD This is the open season for censorship bills again and reformers are busy in several states, but there is a noticeable inclination on the part of the public to shoiv signs of tiring of having a few self-appointed men protect their morals. Hence the situation, as a whole, is not one to arouse alarm within the ranks of picture producers. Carl Laemmle is taking the initiative in the waging of a campaign to bring about a reduction in box-office prices. Lower fees of admission to cinema "emporiums" seems to be a necessity if this form of entertainment is to be kept on its original basis, tchich was one of a perfectly democratic sort because the price was within the reach of all the masses. Independent producers continue to make unprecedented progress in the matter of becoming a real power in the uorld-wide field. There is pleasing reassurance in this tendency since it presages the doom of all efforts to monopolize the great film industry. There is no Ict-up in "the mad rush" of most producers to buy published stories and staged plays because of the alleged exploitation value of the "big na.me.i" involved. However, the actual starting of the filming of its initial picture plmces the Palmcrplay Company, which dedicates itself exclusively to the original story, in. the front ranks of revolutionary pioneers and makes a first dent, a dent of promise. The fad for signing 'em up to longterm contracts is more rampant than ever. Forsooth, everybody's signing up everybody. WJiat's it all the sign of anyway? The day has come when the absence of an all-star cast means the average picture must become an outcast. Another day seems likely to come when the story alone will count and then a different kind of a die will be cast! A studio construction era is on in the southern California jield. It is estimated that a grand total of a half million dollars is noic being spent on making alterations and improvements in various film-making plants. he could miss the mark so widely, but he has very little to show for his pecuniary outlay. It may be possible to salvage the film by re-taking the whole last reel, changing in its entirety the ending and by some clever cutting and retitling some of the earlier seciuences. However, unless there is some ingenious re-vamping, this picture would serve a better purpose unreleased. Judging from the results "in the rough," Ethel Clayton has an excellent starring vehicle in "The Greater Glory," her latest. However, it is rumored the title may be changed to "Can a Woman Love Twice?" or something equally as inane. It is to be hoped sincerely that this change will not be made. Frankly, we cannot understand the mental processes of anyone who thinks such a change of title is wise. "The Greater Glory" is an admirable title and it fits this story perfectly. Next to the artistic triumphs of Miss Clayton, the remarkable character portrayal of Muriel Frances Dana, a four-year-old actress, stands out in brilliance. The directing of James Home deserves high praise. Jackie Coogan in "Oliver Twist" is a new twist in juvenile genius a la histrionic. In a phrase, it is a masterly performance in a masterpiece. Morever, it is quite the best thing Jackie has ever offered and it insures him his place in the front ranks of screen stars. Here is a picture which will delight young America and it will satisfy old America. It is Charles Dickens at his best and the literary brilliance of this great English author has been preserved and visualized with a sure hand directed by a brain of understanding. Little Jackie's performance could not be well improved upon and his supporting cast is satisfactory. Especially memorable is the work of Lewis Sargent, who demonstrates the fact that he is a quite remarkable character delineator, who gives promise of notable cinema achievements. A comedian who is sure to go far is what Monty Banks proves himself to be in his two latest fun films, "Oil's Well" and "Please Arrest Me." Here is another case of picturemaking at small cost. Mr. Banks probably spends less per comedy than any other star in his particular field and yet he manages to maintain a standard high enough to keep him popular in first-run houses. He is his own plot-buiider, gag-man and director, and, his pictures are uniformly pleasing. Hence it seems safe to predict a big future for him since he is sure of having more money to spend on bis productions some day. "The Cricket on the Hearth," just completed by Director Lorimer Johnson, is a bright prospect on the photoplay public's horizon. It has all the ear-marks of a hit. Besides being well directed on the basis of an adaptation with a soul, it is blessed with a cast of players who give it the maximum of artistic interpretation. Especially worthy of praise is Josef Swickard, the featured player, while Virginia Brown F'aire, Fritzi Ridgeway and Paul Moore give performances par excellence. This is a Paul Gerson production and was filmed at Universal City. WHEREIN A "HUNCH" COMES TRUE Several years ago when she witnessed a stage performance of "Three Wise Fools," Martha Mattox, the popular character actress, immediately announced to friends that some day she would have a role in the same play whenever it was filmed. Her remark was passed as a joke, but, just the same, the actress meant it, and, at frequent intervals she says the thought — always one of conviction — recurred to her. Now sure enough, she has been cast to play the important role of the spinster housekeeper in the Goldwyn screen version of this great .succets and, under the direction of King W. Vidor, will start her interpretation of the part before the cameras within a few days. Moreover, the engagement came to her unsolicited, so far as she was concerned — shi:' Continued to Page 21