The educational screen (c1922-c1956])

182 The Educational Screen The Theatrical Field Conducted by Marguerite Orndorff With this issue are combined, under the above title, the former departments called "From Hollywood" and "Theatrical Film Critique." This brings all matters theatrical into one department and into the hands of a department editor who is particularly qualified to handle this important field. Correspondence with Miss Orndorff on any question pertaining to this subject is Invited. — The Editor. What's the Matter Now? MOVIE history is like any other variety: it repeats itself. Ever since the smash that followed the first golden boom ip the movies, producers, stars, cameramen, extras, have wailed in lamentable tones over the dear, lost, "old days," just as dolefully as old-timers in any other way of life. But the movies are h*ke the fellows in the song, "When you're up, 3'ou're up, when you're down, you're down," and at the present time they appear to be decidedly up. If we pause just here to consider their history of the past year or so, we may even catch them in the act of— as indicated — repeating. A little over a year and a half ago, when I was newly arrived in Hollywood, a terrible slump had just struck the motion picture business. The public heard from day to day of big companies that were "curtailing production," or in vulgar English, shutting down. They learned of actors and actresses who were "between pictures," who were "resting," or who were off on personal appearance tours of the country. When I visited one of the big Hollywood plants one day during this period, a confidential publicity man informed me that I was in luck that afternoon, for there were four companies at work! Trying on a later day to communicate with the publicity director of another big company, I learned that there was. for the time being at least, no publicity department at all! Altogether things were exceedingly quiet. Salaries tumbled; a number of prominent people quit the movies entirely— some to the accompaniment of definite statements of reasons in the papers (usually to the effect that they were several pictures ahead of their scheduled releases) and some so quietly that no one knew they had gone till their pictures began to be missed in the theaters. Rumors began to be heard that it was practically all up with the movies. Theaters failed; small producers dropped from sight; wise ones prophesied that never again would the movies see the golden days just past. Then, most mysteriously, after a very few months of this uncanny depression, things began to pick up again. This studio and that started production cautiously with one unit, or even two; company heads held long consultations, and announced conservative policies regarding future production; the general slogan was, "Fewer pictures and better," — which was safe if not startling. The machine creaked a little, but it gradually got under way. That was the start, and now, a year later, note the difference. That same studio where I was lucky to find as many as four companies working, now carries eight or ten simuhaneous productions. The same company that suspended operations entirely for a period of months now maintains four or five producing units, and is busily signing contracts with one expensive star after another, in pursuance of a new policy of expansion. Other companies that suffered almost to the point of total annihilation, are announcing the acquisition of featured players, stars, directors, technical experts; reorganizing their groups of stock players and adding new ones. With production at its height, salaries apparently as top-lofty as ever, and expenditures on a grander scale, if possible, than before, motion pictures seem to be balancing precariously on the edge of another drop. The recent rush among stars who were employed by large corporations, to break away and become independent producers, has undoubtedly had much to do with the present expansion. The established companies, in order to cover the loss of famous names, and hold on