The Film Daily (1921)

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.

«■ 14 a!i^ DAIL.V Sunday, June 19, 1921 Audrey Munson's Figure Featured Clearly in This Audrey Munson in "HEEDLESS MOTHS" Perry Plays, Inc. — Equity Pictures — State Rights DIRECTOR Robert Z. Leonard AUTHOR Not credited SCENARIO BY Not credited CAMERAMAN Hal Young AS A WHOLE Production of varying merit designed to display star in the nude STORY Very trite and conventional DIRECTION At times good but lacks cooperation in allied departments of production PHOTOGRAPHY Generally very good LIGHTINGS Very good CAMERA WORK ' Good STAR Certainly hasn't been overpraised SUPPORT Generally acceptable EXTERIORS Few used but good INTERIORS Very lavish DETAIL Fair; some subtitles bad CHARACTER OF STORY Artists' model saves butterfly wife of man she loves from villain LENGTH OF PRODUCTION About 5,000 feet "Heedless Moths" offers a slight and conventional plot contrived in the main to permit Audrey Munson, a really famous artists' model, to display herself. The accent of the above sentence, be it said, belongs emphatically on the last syllable of the last word. The general public no longer is obliged to take the word of noted artists and sculptors that Miss Munson's is the perfect figure. "Heedless Moths" brings everything out very clearly. That the picture may possess commercial value and artistic merit are seemingly questions of minor im portance; the big conundrum is "will the picture get by the censors?" There are some beautiful shots wherein she poses in the nude. But such beauty is not appreciated by those who censor the pictures of the screen. And it is needless to add that the close shot showing the Aphrodite depressions on either side of the base on Miss Munson's spinal column may be obliterated by the well known "film eraser." As for the story, it is trite. The beautiful, sensitive model, Miss Munson. The idealistic sculptor ; his butterfly wife. The sculptor does a nude group working from the life. He and his model fall in love but it is a love not to be realized. In the meantime the butterfly wife has become enmeshed in the nets thrown out by a dilletante artist. One night he pulls in the nets and the wife finds herself in his exotic apartment. Climax : the model realizes that the husband is searching for his wife. She breaks into the dilletante's apartment, hides the wife and plays the role of the reveler, thus salvaging the domestic life of the man she loves. For the model, there is left — posing. The continuity is only fair ; but might seem better if the picture were run straightaway and not broken for stage effects as it is in its New York presentation. Robert Z. Leonard's direction at times discloses an artistic touch and the sets by A. Viragh Flower are very beautiful. Leonard, however, has done fetter work with a well oiled producing organization operating behind him. Miss Munson receives acceptable support from Hedda Hopper, Holmes E. Herbert, Ward Crane, Irma Harrison and Tom Burroughs. The child actor is quite overconscious. Value Depends on Censor's Attitude and Character of Audience Box Office Analysis for the Exhibitor The way for "Heedless Moths" has been paved with pages of publicity in the magazine sections of the Hearst papers and their allied syndicate organs. There seems to be no doubt that if the exhibitor ties up his advertising of the picture with these articles he will get the crowds coming in strong. Providing the censors let the producers get by with all the scenes at present in the continuity, it will be possible for the exhibitor to truthfully advertise this as an "artistic production." There is always the danger, however, of the nude arousing the wrath of the more straight-laced audiences. It can be said, though, in defense of the producers that there is nothing intentionally salacious or immoral about the picture. So the course of the exhibitor is easy if he thinks his public will stand for all that may or may not be in "Heedless Moths" when it comes to him. The publicity received by the star will account for an immense curiosity on the part of a large slice of the public.