Film Spectator (1927-1928)

July 23, 1927 can drink my next bottle of Hollywood gin happily. From all of which uncalled-for •attack let me absolve the excellent criticism contained in The Film Spectator. May I hope that all the other letters you will receive about your little slip will be thoughtful enough to add this rider? ' CEDRIC BELFRAGE. THE BEST AND WORST My dear Mr. Editor: While I am in accord with your selection of twenty representative pictures — best and worst — I must confess I am curious to know why you select Camille among the ten best. First I must confess to a certain bias. Camille is the tj^ie of play that I detest above all others, primarily for its unreality. The picture makes it even more unreal. Never at any time during the filming could I accept Norma Talmadge as a quasi repentant Magdalen. Hitherto she has been associated with the chemically pure role, for which she is eminently adapted. Neither could I imagine her as a pulmonary victim; she is too — what shall I call it? — “com fed” to carry *out such an illusion. This is quite outside of the fact that I fail to see any entertainment in the dying throes of a sex-ridden courtesan. Presuming that the goodness of a picture depends primarily and prin'cipally on its entertainment qualities, I should be inclined to delete Camille from your list, and substitute the eminently low brow and eminently entertaining Rough House Rosie. Here we have a clever actress, who has won recognition solely on her own talents, giving a characterization, which might easily be made burlesque, with absolute fidelity, and without stepping out of character for a moment. True, the story is unconsequential, though quite sufficient to sustain interest throughout. Moreover, in your list you overlook entirely the possibilities of entertainment from a comedy point of view, which is entitled to representation. As to the ten worst, it is a subject too uninteresting for argument. Still, three pictures might easily be found as bad or worse than Old Ironsides and The Yankee Clipper, and are also entirely lacking in the pictorial and photographic qualities of the latter pictures. Neither was I particularly impressed by Seventh Heaven, though I recogpiize its claim to a place in the first ten. Again, unreality and sentiment that fails to ring true when considered away from the glamour of the picture itself. My personal choice for the Grand ^ize, without any reservations, is Chang. Here we have a series of events and action, so strange to us as to seem unbelievable, yet never for one moment^ has one the least doubt ^ .^^cry situation and action is auIhenic and actually transpiring. This, I take it, is the true mission of the THE FILM SPECTATOR Page Twenty-one screen, to create the impression of realism. Perhaps it is this faculty, to turn imagination into reality, that makes the Germans such successful picturemakers. With apologies for this long screed, I remain your sincere well wisher in yotir thankless crusade for better pictures. F. ELY PAGET. WE STAND CORRECTED My dear Welford: Hey — you slipped up. You’re caught. A most flagrant case escaped your corps of proofreaders. In your review of The Rough Riders, page 8, 10th line from bottom, left-hand side of the page, you use the word “accept” in place of “except”. Now, by all the gods, what means this abuse of the Queen’s English ? Forsooth and egad, it is prime time (the rhyme is unintentional) you were taken to task. Pray don’t say it was unavoidable. The transgression is too glaring. Personally, I like your journal so damn much I don’t care how many mistakes you make in typographical errors so long as you keep up with the good work you are engaged in. There you sit, in your lonely grandeur— the only man in the country who dares to relate the plain, unvarnished truth about the motion nicture business, and we can sit back and chortle at your daring. Boy! what a task you have. The most mis-used and abused industry in the world to-day; and you, the solitary and outstanding figure who dares to point out the glaring incompetence. Gee! You’re a brave man; because I know your journal is not productive of dividends, and yet you’ve got the courage of your convictions to speak right out, no matter who it hurts — and all for the good and welfare and future of the industry. More power to you. May you live long and prosper. PAUL GERSON. Dear Paul : Thanks for pointing out my mistake. As an exchange of courtesies may I point out that your “no matter who it hurts” should read “no matter whom it hurts”? — W. B. the writer; that with a good script, any old director can make a good picture. In the creation of any work of art there are, it seems to me, two basic processes: conception and expression. As the conception can not be ours until it has been expressed, the second process is as essential as the first. A writer can not possibly give complete expression to a picture — he does not handle it in its final medium. He has indicated what should be done, true; but can an inferior mind realize fully what is thus indicated? I don’t think so. No mind but one equal to that which conceived can give full expression to any conception. Unrealized, what is the worth of any conception ? And if the two are equal? Every true work of art is the expression of an individual; and the stronger the individual, the stronger the work. If our director has as strong an individuality as our writer, can he abide strictly by the latter’s script ? Of course not! His one desire is to give expression to himself. It is, of course, necessary that one mind hold the supreme authority, lest we get only a house divided; yet if one process is placed above the other, the submerged one can not realize fully its potentiality. It seems to me obvious, therefore, that the writer and director of a picture should be one and the same person. DUNHAM THORP. PUTTING US RIGHT Dear Mr. Beaton: Apropos of your comments on The King of Kings in the current issue of The Film Spectator, I am taking the liberty of expressing my surprise and disappointment at several historical inaccuracies contained in your remarks. Your fearless and entertaining X#X«X0X«XOX WRITER AND DIRECTTOR Dear Mr. Beaton: Two issues, and your plea, have made me decide that I may as well switch from the newsstand to the mailman. Naturally, this means that I like your sheet; but you have one fetish that I do not, and to which I would like to take exception: that the director is a far less important factor in the making of a good picture than is — 1 The BLUE ROOK BOOK SHOP 1639 NORTH CAHUENGA (Just off Hollywood Blvd.) Books of Every Kind, Good as New, at Half the Published Price Morris Davis GRanite 2498 The Public is invited to a series of bridge teas to be conducted every Monday afternoon by Mrs. Catherine A. Streeter, nationally known expert of the game. She will give a short talk and supervise your play Charge $1.50 per person. Mrs. Streeter resides at The Garden, and her services are available for all bridge events. The Qarden of Alla G. M. Burbank, Manager 8152 Sunset Blvd. x«x x9x0