Cinema Quarterly (1934 - 1935)

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.

Bread brings them too close to the harsh reality of their own lives. That's not what movies are for, for them. Movies are for Jean Harlow and William Powell in Reckless. Based on a recent newspaper scandal of a Broadway torch-singer who married a millionaire playboy, who died soon after the marriage, mysteriously, too, they say. She was never accepted by his snooty family, and when her child was born there was a long battle in the courts for the custody of the child, and finally she repudiated a million-dollar settlement so she could have the child, and went back to Broadway. The film version of this delightful pastiche is as brittle as a pane of glass, and as transparent. Also, as emotional. Harlow finally sets her critics right that she can't act. The dialogue is pompous and recited, and one longs for a time-out period when the director would have allowed at least some of the notorious Harlow sex appeal to creep in, even if it meant discarding the story into the ash-can where it belongs. But it will make a fortune. The sputtering of Frank Morgan in Naughty Marietta makes that film tolerable for the few comic moments when he is on — otherwise it is a beautiful bore. Star at Midnight is a third carbon copy of The Thin Man (a good mystery film — but lamentably destined to be the first of a new series of wisecracking whodunit pictures) . Sequoia has a few good animal shots but much too much insupportable poutings by Jean Parker, who plays a wild, untamed girl of America's great outdoors. Slopping up Nature with a lot of S.P.G.A. goo. Only when the proximity of the actors to the animals has been removed does something of the nobility of the deer and the puma seep through. Otherwise it's a film for Boy Scouts. The foreign film situation in America is all Britain. One Soviet film, Chapayev, was a success in New York. (The new KozintsevTrauberg picture, Youth of Maxim, has just opened.) Among French films, only Yvonne Printemps' lavender and old lace version of Camille was successful, and that only in New York. La Maternelle and The Testament of Dr. Mabuse are fighting with the ubiquitous censors for their lives. Fritz Lang's Liliom was a failure here. But GaumontBritish and London Films are spreading all over the country, and two films of Gaumont's, The Iron Duke and Unfinished Symphony, and London Films' Scarlet Pimpernel have been very successful. So were Chu Chin Chow and Power {Jew Suss). And others. It's an "invasion by the red-coats" all over again, the American distributors are saying. Britain retaliating for 1776 and 181 2. G.-B. and London Films may yet do it. Their forthcoming schedules will give Hollywood no little competition, and Hollywood is blithely stepping right into it by loaning out its players, writers, etc., for G.-B. and London Films. Britain is more favourably situated, with regard to America and the world market, than ever before. If she makes the most of it, not 158