Hollywood Spectator (Apr-May 1939)

fatten Picture Appreciation E WILL call the class to order and start off the morning with a quarrel, but a nice, friendly one. At the end of my review of the latest Deanna Durbin picture in the Spectator of April 1, I made for motion picture appreciation students some comments on the screen technique involved in establishing some story points. Gladys Christensen, a teacher in the Roosevelt Junior High School, San Francisco, writes me as follows: “Your suggestion at the end of the Deanna Durbin review is good. However, to extend it further than that is of doubtful value at the present writing. The technique of the making of motion pictures would fit well for the junior college or college grade student. For the average high school or junior high school people, the Spectator is amply covering the field in which they are interested.’’ Another Teacher's Opinion C]J It would be impracticable for the Spectator to conduct two motion picture appreciation departments, one for the junior college or college grade student, another for the junior high school or the high school student. I believe, however, that the technique involved in making motion pictures can be discussed entertainingly enough to interest both college and high school pupils. Sharing this view is Lelia Trolinger, Bureau of Visual Instruction, University of Colorado. Referring also to my remarks at the end of my review of Deanna’s latest picture, remarks drawing the attention of study groups to a technical point. Miss Trolinger writes: “By all means continue to add those comments. For those of us who attempt to teach classes which include units on motion picture appreciation, any evaluation of this sort is very helpful. T here are not enough in the field doing or trying to do this sort of thing to cause any danger of duplication.’’ And Miss Trolinger adds this flattering paragraph: “Without any intent of ‘apple polishing’ or throwing boquets, I wish to say that I like your film reviews better than any that I read. Much of my own picture attendance is decided by your reviews and so far I have not been disappointed.’’ Knowledge Is Desirable <J As I view the whole question of discussing the screen from an educational standpoint, the purpose is not to prepare students or members of study groups to make pictures. Rather is it to prepare them to derive greater satisfaction from viewing them. The greater our knowledge of the fundamentals of a visual art, the greater must be the On This Page OWING to constantly increasing circulation of the Spectator among educational institutions which use it as an aid in the study of motion pictures, an effort will be made to present in each issue an analysis of the screen values of some important picture which lends itself to such treatment. Few pictures possess the qualities which give them values essential to their selection as subjects for study, but there may be enough to enable us to keep up the service without missing an issue. The subject of today's discussion is Republic’s Man of Conquest, a picture which is a fine example of the intelligent use of talkie technique. satisfaction we derive from viewing one of its creations. So my gentle quarrel with Miss Christensen is based on my conviction that the technicalities of picture making can be discussed in terms sufficiently elemental to interest high school students, and not too elemental for more advanced students and the adults who compose the many adult study groups. To such groups and to educational institutions are available perhaps a score of booklets which analyze the stories of various pictures and suggest courses of study to promote better understanding of their historical or literary significance. I have before me one sponsored by the National Council of Teachers of English, an organization which takes active and intelligent interest in the screen as an educational factor. The booklet is termed, “A Guide to the Critical Appreciation of the Republic Photoplay Dealing With the Career of Sam Houston: Man of Conquest ." Pay to See Technique One who reads the booklet and follows its instructions as to co-related reading before seeing the picture, certainly will be well posted on the historical, social and biographical significance of the production: and if, after reading it, he can answer all the questions it asks, as well as to do the further reading it recommends, he probably will be exhausted to the point of his not desiring to see another picture of the sort for quite a long time. Man ot Conquest, however, is an important picture, a stirring and valuable contribution to Americana. But how many of those who seek it as entertainment will undertake the course of study regarding it which is outlined in the booklet? BY THE EDITOR People who pay their way into film theatres are seeking motion pictures as entertainment, as a retreat from mental exercise, not an advance toward it. It really is motion picture technique they pay to see. If Man of Conquest were seen only by those who wish to study the history it teaches, it would not return to its makers one cent on one dollar of production cost. That makes it appear to me that the best approach to the desired end of having the public benefit by absorbing the educational values of a picture, is first to interest them in the picture as such, to point out to them its cinematic values, and permit the educational values to be a byproduct of their attendance. Some Man of Conquest Points <1 The Spectator's conception of the meaning of “motion picture appreciation” as applied to school and college classes, is the appreciation of pictures as such and not as historical or social documents. Or perhaps I had better put it this way: The Spectator will leave it to study groups to continue their valuable work in connection with the subject matter of the stories which are told on the screen, and will confine itself to the manner in which the stories are told in the language of the medium which tells them. We will take Man of Conquest as a picture which well repays study. From a technical standpoint it is as nearly perfect an example of the talkie form as the screen has given us since it got its tongue. In preparing the screen play, the writers revealed consciousness of the fact of the camera’s being the screen’s chief story-telling medium. In no place in the picture is a line of dialogue used to express something the camera could express in visual terms. What dialogue there is consists of short, crisp sentences except in scenes in which characters address audiences, and the speeches delivered in the few such scenes get their value largely from their contrast with the terse dialogue in all the other scenes. Introduction of Characters •jj When the main title fades out, there appears on the screen a statement setting forth the theme of the story the picture will tell. Thus is the mood set, and we are not taken out of it by the long list of credits and cast names which other pictures compel audiences to sit through. Man of Conquest gets right down to business by beginning the story and introducing the man, leaving the credits for the end of the picture to allow us to walk out on them if they do not interest us. In the opening sequence we get our first taste of the clever dia PAGE SIX HOLLYWOOD SPECTATOR