Hollywood Spectator (Apr-May 1939)

taught to write their stories in pictures, not in dialogue. Writing stories to fit stars is another evil which has a distressing effect on film box-offices. Hollywood now proceeds upon the assumption that the star is more important than the story. It would take a long time to get the same idea out of the heads of those who pay to see screen entertainment, but the film industry has a lot of time left in which to make pictures, and it could be done. When writing a screen story, the story should be the only idea in the writer's head; and in casting it, the suitability of players for the various parts should be the only idea in the producer's head. Never should he distort a well written characterization to fit the individuality of a star. There are available in Hollywood plenty of people to fit any part a writer can create. Public's Capacity for Friendship CJ And another point upon which I differ with my friend Hedda, is that old, bewhiskered plaint that the public constantly is clamoring for new faces. Nothing could be more absurd. It is contrary to all human instincts Not until v/e w:sh to see only strangers around our tables when we are giving dinner parties, will we wish to see only strangers on the screens of the picture houses we patronize. The greatest dividends life pays are the agreeable human contacts we make, and the richest man is he who sees friendly faces every way he looks. The trouble with Hollywood is that it tries to concentrate our friendship on a small number of stars. Our appetite for friendship is greater than the supply of stars given us to appease it, and our capacity for retaining it is greater than the producers realize. Louella Parsons writes that every time on her personal appearance tour she mentions an oldtime star, his or her name is greeted with a storm of applause. There are scores of old faces the public would welcome, and scores among newcomers which would be welcomed when they had appeared often enough to form friendships. Casting parts solely with regard for the specifications of the writers, and distorting none to fit a certain player, soon would give the film boxoffice the upswing it needs so badly. * * * DOGS AS PICTURE ASSETS MOST homes have dogs in them. As I write at the moment, my spaniel is curled in an easy chair not far from mine. He contributes greatly to the domestic atmosphere of the room, gives it a touch a human would not give. If it were a motion picture scene, the effect of his presence would be the same, would strike a responsive chord in the emotions of fhe audience, for those who love dogs greatly outnumber those who do not. Yet it is seldom we see dogs on the screen solely to dress sets, dogs which enter or leave a scene at will, which behave on the screen as they do in your home and mine. Ask a producer abou+ it and he will tell you dogs are nuisances when scenes are being shot. That is a poor excuse. Having to do anything is more or less a nuisance. The present condition of film box-offices would suggest the wisdom of overcoming any nuisance which could be transformed info something to add to a picture's drawing power. And the greater use of dogs in dressing sets would achieve that end. * * * STAR MATERIAL BEING OVERLOOKED WHILE viewing the performance of Edna Mae Oliver '' in "Drums Along the Mohawk," I thought how easily she could have become one of today's leading box-office stars if any one of our big producers had had brains enough, six or seven years ago when she first came to the screen, to realize her potentialities and groom her for stardom. At that time the Spectator urged her claim to recognition as a possible star. One of the factors contributing to the present box-office slump is the ridiculous contention of producers thaf the public demands only young and beautiful feminine sfars. The public demands an opportunity to laugh, and anyone who can cause it to sprinkle laughter throughout the showing of a feature picture, always will pull people into film theatres. Neither youth nor age has box-office value on its own account; nor will the perfection in acting technique give a player prominence on the screen in the same measure as it will bring him honors as a stage actor. Miss Oliver came to pictures from the stage, bringing with her that inner something the stage could not use, but which could have made her an outstanding screen star. And there are others like her, people who play even smaller parts in pictures because producers are not equipped mentally to appreciate their possibilities. * * * COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY OF FILMS /1UITE an extraordinary book is "The Rise of the V American Film," by Lewis Jacobs (Harcourt, Brace and Company, $4.50). It is a mammoth work (585 type pages, 48 pages of illustrations) and has a wealth of informafion never before assembled between covers. It fades in on 1896 — and fades out on 1939. Its scope is set forth tersely on the jacket: "This is the first comprehensive and critical history of fhe American movie as a commodity, as an art, and as a social agency. It is distinguished by an original approach and unusual form. The author traces the film from ifs commercial beginnings in 1896 to the present time, investigating and evaluating it as an industry, as an artistic medium, and as a social force. The fi nancial structures of American film commerce are charted; the discoveries and contributions significant to the growth of film technique are analyzed; the effect of the changing times upon the content of American movies and the movie's content upon the changing times, are revealed for the first time in an examination of hundreds of films since the turn of the century. The book stresses the inter-relationship and contributions of each of these three major factors which are responsible for the American motion pic PAGE FOUR HOLLYWOOD SPECTATOR