The educational screen (c1922-c1956])

Theatrical Film Critique 31 I is completely submerged in the strength s Talmadge gives to the vehicle. We are jlad to be able to praise honestly that young r that we are tempted to enumerate her ly commendable spots in the film. We won't, ice it to say that she is sweet, strong and ible, on the island as the old sea-captain's sekeeper, later in the difficult role of res- • of the "younger son" of an English house- l, and last in the trying battle amidst the :gish snobbery and the dishonesty of the flish environment to which the young son ime welcome because of a sudden inheri- :e from an uncle. The old sea-captain, ap- •ing but for a few feet in the first reel, is imfortable, likeable fellow and Harrison Ford the drunken, tired boy is stronger than some ht have predicted. Like Wallace Reid, Mr. d can be something more than merely good look at. AVELIN' distinct disappointment. Usually the pho- raphy of the Hart films has an etched quality, se of light and darks, of silhouettes, that ce the film worthy for that if for no other .on. This film lacks all these things. It i wild tale of old western matters and the e conflict between the saloon and the church )ss the way. The wicked villain does all he to keep it from completion. He hugs the ister's wife and, like Jean Valjean, robs the idful rich gambler to feed (spiritually when money has been used to build the church) poor. In and about is the bad man, arriving le with nothing but the protection of two is. He nearly abducts the minister's wife, rly gets himself hanged and then rescues minister from being hanged and takes him- off across the dreary prairies leaving even le Jocko behind. The monkey was charming i dear old Pinto Fritz was right there! But , Hart dashing through feet upon feet of uloid to find his pet in the storm, the per- :ent flash of what looked like lightning struck ML were two absurdities in the general con- ■ration. Please don't do it again, Mr. Hart! FRN 'EM UP BARNES ^e mention this film because we liked it and peculiar mixture of Johnny Hines comedy h its ideas of vagabond loyalty and Bliss ■men poetical feeling. We have never liked pretentious and aggressive egotism of Mr. es' work but in this film he is commendable. you are interested in comedy that rises above slapstick type this picture may please you. IE GLORIOUS FOOL l Rinehart, story will receive the attention film enthusiasts whether it deserves atten- i or not. The Glorious FooL with Richard Dix in its cast was promising. But the Richard Dix of Dangerous Curves Ahead is not the man of this film. All the keen electric magnetism of the former is gone and it is not a matter of a difference in parts. Miss Chadwick as the hesitant, hard working probationer is very satis- factory. On the whole not a bad picture nor yet a distinctive feature. THE FIRE BRIGADE We mention this of the Toonerville series be- cause it illustrates a point. This series is pop- ular as are all the film efforts of our favorite cartoons. Generally the humor is sincere and convincing. In this Fire Brigade a school room is presented for no other purpose than to fur- nish the opportunity for a series of titled jokes which such children would never give voice to. The sequence of the teacher's disconnected questions spoils the reality of the thing. The fire de- generates into slap-stick and poor slap-stick at that. There is plenty of material for the Tooner- ville series without efforts of this sort. GRAND LARCENY An experimentation,—a picture that ends with a question asked directly by a long leader in caps. The story, a rather new twist to the eternal triangle, moves nicely under Mr. El- liot's steadiness and Miss Clair's fairly good interpretation of a selfish wife. There is nothing radically wrong with the picture but we can not see why it was given the advance advertising it sustained. BACK PAY Seena Owen and Matt Moore have a strong story to portray. We liked the filming of Back Pay better than Miss Hurst's written form. The most cautious and wide procedure was followed in the spiritualistic touch. The audience could choose as to whether the girl actually saw her dead husband or whether his presence was a mental image of her insomnia. HER MAD BARGAIN A bizarre tale but one that rings true despite its use, at the end, of the "blood transfusion" stuff. The main comment, however, to be made is that concerning Anita Stewart. Like many of those actresses who betrayed unusual promise Miss Stewart has persistently failed us. In this film, she is the antithesis of disappointment. GARMENTS OF TRUTH The picture, provided you have imagination delicate enough to sustain its hypothesis of "truth," is acceptable. Gareth Hughes is like a rain-cleared dawn. A quality of radiance gets out of his eyes onto the celluloid that carries to the most careless observer an impulse of good.