Film Spectator (1927-1928)

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.

THE FILM SPECTATOR August 6, 1927 Page Twenty -one a Mexican ambassador who will promptly report it, every ensuing picture produced by the same director, will be barred from showing in Mexico. This ruling will hold good no matter what company the director may subsequently become affiliated with. The attitude of foreign countries on American-made films is intricate and results in considerable worry for the producers. One of the most serious cases resulted when the table of a German spy was shown decorated with a photograph of Hindenburg. The producer had evidently forgotten that Hindenburg is now president of the German Republic and that his photograph in the hangout of a despicable personage like a spy would aggravate the German government grievously. All films made by the producer of that picture suffered for a considerable period following the showing of the film. VOICES FROM THE WILDERNESS ABOUT COSTUMES Dear Mr. Beaton: As manager and designer of the wardrobe for five years for FamousPlayers-Lasky and for over a year in the same capacity for M.-G.-M. I think myself qualified to say a word concerning the efficiency demanded of the department. The original plan of costuming a production was the working out of each scene with the director, scenarist, actor or actress. Later methods introduced the general supervisor and ^e efficiency man, all in consultation many times before the principals in the story were interviewed. The method in vogue at M.-G.-M. was efficient in that a finished script was delivered to all departments, and t^e costumes planned, made and tested before the actual day of production started. This I found to be most satisfactory, and, if such methods were pursued in all studios, wardrobe problems would be nil. One of the remarks I shall never forget in talking over difficult situations, such as working department heads twenty hours a day, is, “We grant you the adjustments you desire could be made, but the profits at the end of the year are gratifying, so why bother”? The average director admits that he can not tell what a gown looks like until he sees it on the wearer, but the efficiency man blusters that he knows all about it; then comes the production manager, the assistants, property boys, set dressers, camera men and at last the actor or actress, and finally the wardrobe designers. In executing a director’s idea of a correctly gowned woman, the mode of the moment is not considered, every man having his idea of sex appeal and demanding its expression, likewise his own idea of a gentlewoman, etc. Every designer would appreciate being made to feel that his or her talent and studied taste counted for something. Erte had much to give the public, had his creations been recognized for their true value and had he not been manhandled by gross inefficiency. Though we create here and no doubt ^t the world of fashion for the screen, it is most important that all designers be allowed to travel and communicate with the world at large. We can gather a valuable bit from every country in the world. Constructive co-operation will lead to better results, and this many-handsin-the-pot condition may partly have been brought about in training people for studio jobs. I was the first to bring about the two, and then the three, eight-hour shifts a day, now adopted in the studios, relieving the women of the long hours imposed on them. ETHEL CHAFFIN. To the Editor: Why do you class The Yankee Clipper as one of the year’s ten worst? I remember your review quite well. I read it before I saw the picture, and then I went twice to see the picture just because I had read your panning, and was more convinced the second time than the first, both by my own reactions and by those evident in each audience, that for once you were all wet. I’ll admit that a forty-eight star flag of the early 1800’s jarred the illusion, but on the whole there was for me, and apparently for the two audiences I studied, a real illusion there. Both myself and the audiences each time got a real kick out of the finish of that race which you criticized so vehemently. Are you wrong, or am I? FRANK ROBERTS. Tacoma, Wash. (The two facts, that this corespondent liked The Yankee Clipper and that I disliked it, can not be reconciled. I am glad he liked it. I envy a person who can find enjoyment where I can not. To me there was no suspense in the frigate race; to him there was. Neither of us is wrong, for to each of us there was in that FRANK M. LEVETT Investment Advisor More than 20 years’ experience in Stocks and Bonds. Best of Wall Street references. mum Telephone DRexel 9914 Address mad care The Film Spectator. race just what each of us saw in it. The fact that the correspondent saw suspense in it can not be argued away, simply because it is a fact. A feeling is as much a fact as a ton of bricks, and you can’t argue a ton of bricks out of existence. But I’ll offer this in my own defense: I regard a picture as poor in the degree that it fails to realize its possibilities; a viewer, such as my correspondent, measures the entertainment value of only such possibilities as are realized. I think The Yankee Clipper is a very poor picture because, with the same material, it might have been a very good one; my correspondent thinks it a good picture because he did not concern himself with how much better it might have been.) MATTER OF CREDIT Dear Sir: I heard an argument the other day between a scenario writer and a director in regard to the matter of credit. The writer was bitterly protesting against the practice of having several writers do adaptations on certain stories, all of which would be finally handed to one favored or lucky writer, who alone would be given credit. The director somewhat sardonically maintained that this was an excellent system, and he instanced MetroGoldwyn as an example of how the thing worked. A novel or play is bought. A dozen writers (unknown to each other perhaps) may be assigned to do an adaptation. The last writer — or rather the one picked out to do the final script — has the advantage of all the ideas contained in the several scripts and of course he gets the credit. The director also said, with a wry grin, “The other fellows get their salaries anyway.” But salaries are not enough. They are entitled to credit for their work. It is a notorious fact that many writers and also •X0X0X0X0X0 The Public is invhed 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. GLad stone 6121