The Film Spectator (Mar-Dec 1928)

Page Six THE FILM SPECTATOR July 21, 1928 ing this paradox we should say that as screen acting concerns— the technic is necessary for use only to control the expressions of feelings on our faces. Before we go further, let us establish one and the most important axiom that not only the expression of the feeling or thought photographs, but the unexpressed on facial or bodily surface functions of the soul and mind registers too, and are transmitted as some kind of immaterial power to the corresponding antennae of the audience. For most of the actors there is nothing new in it. They believe in it, discuss it and, strangely enough, take it very little in consideration and do not apply it in their work. Many actors know even that "the camera" registers not only the actual emoitons and thoughts, but very often* brings out the hidden sides of the whole character and personality of the actor. The much discussed 'it" or "personality" is to us to a great extent nothing else than the natural, inborn (or artificially developed) capacity and depth of feeling. If an actor or actress does not register, it means that the strength of his emotions is very little — or none. Only extraordinary photographic qualities of his face and very polished technic can save him in such a case, but such an actor will never be a "hit". On the other hand, we all know that there have been examples, when playing with their backs to the camera, that actors and actresses have registered and transmitted to the spectators their emotions with full strength and distinction. Another — still more extraordinary phenomenon in the sphere of the photography of feeling — is the performance of Janet Gaynor in Seventh Heaven. It is hard to suppose that a young girl like Miss Gaynor could know either by life experience, or theoretically as much about such a great, beautiful, all-absorbing and all-conquering love, as she has given us uath such a plain and terrific power in this picture. It is hard to believe that she could know enough about the transient and vain, about the great sadness and hopeless grief in earthly existence and the suffering of the human soul, to be able to portray something, that we never before have seen on the screen; the photograph of an absolutely empty human soul, and she did it to perfection. We consider those two things as great examples of photoplay of one hundred per cent condensed and one hundred per cent discharged feeling. Janet Gaynor does not need "to learn to act" — in common sense of this expression. Her inborn tactfulness in measuring the strength of her facial expressions is also extra ordinarj^ — and is there anybody who can teach her how to feel? At the same time there are several quite prominent players who have never learned to feel. Few of them, whose technic is perfect, whose performances are always an example of "finish", have never been able to move the audience. They are admired for their cleverness, but never felt by spectators. In a few scenes from Seventh Heaven, a little girl, Diane, has brought out of the souls of the audience more reactive emotions than these stars put together during /their "big" and long careers. Why? Because in these few scenes she has given to the audience more than they will ever be able to give. Is it possible to learn to feel? In a great majority of cases, we think — yes. Feelings— as the functions of soul (or spiritual beginnings of human beings) can be trained just as the capacity to think — the function of reason or mind. Life itself usually is doing it automatically — ^with experience, but it requires time and opportunities. It can be accelerated artificially*, just like the training of the mind by education. Music, art, good reading, thinking — and generally— corresponding (or sharply paradoxical) environment helps the awakening of the capacity to feel. General development of mind is very important for the development of the strength, depth and refinement of feeling. (Although we know that the animals can feel — and very strongly, indeed; often stronger than many human beings). To teach a young actor or actress "to plair" is first to teach him or her to feel, and then to express it in certain measure on the surface, lea%'ing the rest of the feeling to be caught by the camera behind the facial expression. (Here is the point of certain particular difficulties of screen acting: different tempo of action, limitation of space, more artificial than the stage surroundings, disconnected action and necessity to be able in repeating the scenes to awaken several times the feeling with all required strength and sincerity.) The screen is recruiting its new contingents almost solely among the youth — and the youth mostly does not know how to feel. They are inexperienced in life, their emotions are sudden, abrupt and quick-passing; their minds react on their emotions — without analyzing them. It's very difficult for them to awake or provoke emotions and feelings — and it is almost impossible to control the abrupt eruption of an active one. Therefore, the most necessary experience for the screen acting consists in controlling and timing the expression of feeling — after one knows how to feel. It must not be understood, as the complete denial of *Voltaire told that many people would probably never have fallen in love if they had not heard about it constantly. *Not always! Because otherwise many of our screen actors should either retire from the screen — or at least change sharply their types. To Producers! Talking pictures are still experimental as far as permanent audience popularity is concerned. Cut out one element of chance by having your dialogue written by a man who has been for twenty years a successful vaude\ille author, a field by the way, where every line has to click. Am also an expert writer of original scenarios with box-oifice ideas, comedy relief that doesn't seem dragged in, and titles that induce audible laughs. Let's T-A-L-K it over. JAMES MADISON 323 North Citrus Ave., Los Angeles ORegon 5627