Canadian Moving Picture Digest (May 1925-May 1926)

TORONTO, ONTARIO. Page Five Pictures in Toronto By HECTOR CHARLESWORTH S° far as I am aware the motion picture “Sally” is the most successful attempt yet made to transfer a noted musical comedy to the screen. When one considers how many elements beside the story—the first essential of a screen drama—go to the making of a big musical production, it was a problem whether enough of interest would survive in the process of transference to justify the attempt. The Florenz Zeigfeld production of “Sally” was probably the most sumptuous presentation of a piece of its class (with one exception “Chu Chin Chow”) up to the date of its first presentation, 1921 — and has been equalled by but one or two examples since. It had everything in the way of spectacle that could make a light musical entertainment successful; and in the wealth of other things a good many people lost sight of the fact that it had a substantial story of unquestionable popular appeal as its basis. Considered in the last analysis “Sally” fulfilled an old adage among playwrights that the recipe for success is to present Cinderella in a new guise. On the whole it will be found that when a musical piece lasts beyond the usual period allotted to such shows on Broadway or Piccadilly, it 1s based on a substantial story. But experience has shown that musical shows do not always carry their popularity with them to the screen—vide “Chu Chin Chow.” | With regard to “Sally” I should like to be able to give the fresh unbiassed view of a spectator wunacquainted with the original. That is impossible, and perhaps one of the sources of appeal for those of us who saw the Ziegfeld production are the pleasant memories evoked by the delightful clowning of Leon Errol, who is almost as good in pictures as in life, and the musical allusions in the score. In making a picture from the story it was necessary to make a greater attempt at plausibility than 1s usual with a musical comedy. In the original Sally became a brilliant dancer just because she wished to be one; but in the screen version a preliminary story is presented showing how the At the Imperial, Hope Hampton lends her voluptuous beauty to various hectic situations with Harrison Ford in a picture entitled “The Price of a Party.” The title explains the story sufficiently, without any lurid details. It is at any rate a coherent and welldeveloped plot, with plenty of action, romance, and colorful details of high life in the small hours. The action is swift, and there are no dreary moments in which the audience might speculate as to the plausibility or otherwise of the scenes set hefore them. The audience enjoy it. * * *K The Strand gives a double bill, combining the melodramatic factors that go to make “Another Man’s Wife” a story adventurous moments and rather solid sentiment with an ingeniously devised and _ effectively told western drama in which ranchmen fight a feud with eastern corporate industrialism. The dominant note in this film is the suggestion of vast open spaces and invigorating atmosphere it conveys. Moreover, the theme is much more attractive than that in most tales of the West. Pictures in Montreal By S. MORGAN-POWELL Richard Talmadge in “Youth and Adventure” at the Imperial, has a fine heroic role as a handsome young lover, who suffers the regulation grief and pain before he finally clasps his beloved in his arms while the audience feel for their hats, coats, and rubbers. It 1s an average picture, possessing average qualities of attraction, and perhaps a little less than average faults. | * * * Ok “Are Parents People?” at the Strand is a clever study of the part that parenthood plays in the consideration of married people who desire divorce. Adolphe Menjou, Florence Vidor and Betty Bronson are seen as the husband, wife and daughter, respectively, and the unfolding of this record of marital discord is cleverly depicted. The acting is good. The plot is plausible, logical, and marked by directness and simplicity; and the drama is ingeniously developed. More films of this type and less of the so called ‘super’? type — whatever that idiotically misused term may be intended to comply — would mean a steady improvement in the quality of the screen entertainment all round. Google waif Sally had been adopted by an old dancing mistress, Madame Julie, who taught her something of the art. Thus it was not quite so incongrous that she should rise suddenly from the position of an humble dishwasher in a cabaret into a dancer skilful enough to take the place of a star who had eloped, and thus win fame in a night. Colleen Moore has nothing of the natural grace and beauty of Marilyn Miller, but a great deal of nerve and a sincere quality in scenes of pathos and emotion which has always been her best asset. The cast is excellent. Leon Erroll is himself, which is saying enough; and the Walter Catlett role of the theatrical agent is in the hands of John T. Murray who used to be one of the breeziest of the Winter Garden comedians. ‘To old timers like myself it was very interesting to see in old age, Louise Beaudet, who plays Madame Julie. Forty years ago Louise Beaudet was one of the sprightliest of dancers herself. The two lover roles are played attractively by Lloyd Hughes and Carlo Schipa, a young Italian with a romantic personality. “My Wife and I” Spotlight Merit Class CLASS B—GET BEHIND THESE —Photoplays of real merit, but which require more or less bally-hoo in the way of exploitation to gain the deserved box office results, CLASS B “MY WIFE, AND I” (Warners) Irene Rich, one of the most charming and womanly of screen personalities, is here given a rather creaky vehicle to convey her in her latest story. It is based on a forgotten novel by Harriet Beecher Stowe, brought up to date of course because it has limousines, Long Island Millionaires and—a vamp. ‘This vamp is played by Constance Bennett who is industriously creating a large gallery of portraits of young women devoid of moral sense, capitivating chits whose ears one longs to box, yet whose allure to the male of the species young and old, one has to admit. Irene Rich is lovely and sympathetic, as always, and her sincere performance as the wife and mother would save a much worse picture. Huntley Gordon is plausible as the husband who “falls for” the same little vamp that has ensnared his son. Not a great picture by any means, but one which will respond satisfactorily to exploitation. Boost Irene Rich and her antithesis—Constance Bennett.