Hollywood Spectator (Apr-May 1939)

narrowly missed by a stage coach, swerving just in time. I hope it was a composition shot. The musical score of Samuel Kaylin is atmospheric. An apparent slip in the editing comes to mind, in which Barrat is seen in a long shot pointing a rifle at a wagon in the distance. In the following close-up, he speaks before he raises the gun. A Cisco Kid more dashing, accomplished. and cleverer than any of his predecessors is here to be seen, and there is a gusto tale wound around him. It is all stuff, but you may find it diverting. Prison Ad clod ram a Is Aderely Grim THE BIG GUY, Universal Pictures Director Arthur Lukin Producer Burt Kelly Screen play t ester Cole Based on a story by: Wallace Sullivan, Richard K. Polimer. Director of photography Elwood Bredel, A.S.C. Art director Jack Otterson Associate art director Charles H. Clarke Film editor Philip Cahn Musical director H. J. Salter Cast: Victor McLaglen, Jackie Cooper, Edward Brophy, Peggy Moran, Ona Munson, Russell Hicks, Jonathan Hale, Edward Pawley, George McKay. Reviewed by Bert Harlen GAIN we are shown into the dread bowels of a orison. Only here the drama is gr’m without being either significant or forcefully melodramatic. The offering is pretty much of a fiasco from any aspect. Its story is fabricated, unconvincing, the playing generally undistinguished. From the Erne the lad is innocently sent to the big house, we know it is only a matter of reels until the warden breaks down and confesses that he knows the lad was forced at the point of a gun to drive the truck in which two prisoners were escaping, and that he (the warden) contended he was unconscious during the entire ride because he had gotten his hands on a bag of money after a smash-up and, with the other passengers dead or unconscious, had hidden it. The fact that a drawing for a new motor, needed to substantiate the boys plea of innocence, turns out to be the paper in which the warden has wrapped the money, is a good narrative twist, Dresents an effective bit of irony, but that is the only merit of the story. Some of the scenes were so improbable as to cause snickers. No Oscars for Anyone <1 As the warden, Victor McLagen appears to be doing just what Director Arthur Lubin tells him too. Supposedly torn by inner conflict in one scene, the actor's grimace was so ludicrous as to provoke a round of laughter. Jackie Copper, than whom, as I have asserted before, there is no better juvenile player in pictures, works earnestly, is forceful in a spot or two. but the performance will not add to his cinematic starure. Edward Brophy is professional as a heavy, and as much can be said for Ona Munson, none too appropriately cast as the warden’s wife. Jonathan Hale makes the best of an insignificant part. Technical phases are all right. A very grim drama during which the audience lauahs at the wrong places. As for the children — have you interested them in making divinity with walnuts ? Jhti tfctliftoccct By Bert Harlen COMES to the screen the ballet in On Your Toes, new Warner opus. Other films have given us ballet exhibitions in the abstract, as it were, but none that I recall presented a story told through the dance. In tlrs picture there are two tales recounted through the art of Terpsichore. Both aim not so much to glorify the ballet as to satirize it — at least one does: I was not sure about the other — but you can get the effect of dance-drama on the screen. Though undoubtedly shortened from their running time in the Broadway show, the two numbers seem very long on the screen, and deprived of some of the color and sparkle they must have had on the stage. Here we feel the dancers are taking too much time to tell their story and are telling it in a cumbersome way. Yes, “cumbersome'’ is the word. Art Forms Confused q The dance itself certainly has a place on the screen, since it places before the camera rhythmic patterns, and rhythm is one of the most important elements of the cinema art. Few sights are more pleasing to see on the screen than a graceful dance routine. As for telling a story through the dance, however, here we get into a piling up of art forms. The camera itself is a story telling medium. To relate with the camera a story of dancers relating a story with their art, is like telling a tale of another man telling a tale. On the screen actors do not unfold a story, but pictures of actors do. There is a big difference. * * * ROUND AND ROUND THEY GO UCH space in the trade publications continues to be occupied by distributor-exhibitor controversy. A glance into the current weekly Variety presents a complexity of viewpoints, of charges and counter-charges, brought to a head by trepidation resulting from the loss of European markets. Distributors, in line with a recent recommendation of Joseph Schenck, feel the exhibitors should cooperate with longer runs: exhibitors have retorted “give us the pictures.’' The only point on which there appears to be any common agreement is that there might be benefit in making fewer pictures, a recommendation also advanced by Schenck. incidentally. Probably there is not full accord even here. And “fewer’’ is not very definite. Murray Silverstone, who directs world-wide operations for United Artists, feels that “every consideration’’ from exhibitors is imperative, else they may even find themselves in the difficult position of having no films to exhibit at all, since the theatre chains affiliated with producer distributors may have to start draining their own product to the full if a dwindling in the flow of films appears likely. Months Ahead Critical CJ Box office returns during the next few months will tell the tale, he maintains. If the income is not sufficient, producers will have to realign investments, and this curtailment is likely to result in lessened quality as well as quantity of output. There be some theatre-owners who “don’t have the slightest conception of our problems, ” believes Silverstone. Exhibitors, however, viewing with vexation the heady Hollywood salaries — still heady, despite magnanimous salary cuts — and piqued by a market flooded with dull quickies, will not take kindly to the gentleman’s admonition. So it goes, round and round. Mo Wax Sits In CJ The best reflection of the independent exhibitor’s outlook is to be found in the editorials of Mo Wax in his Film Bulletin. Recently he cited the attitude of exhibitors at a meeting he attended of the Allied unit of independent exhibitors in Philadelphia. Unanimously they voted to seek elimination of dual bills in their territory. How it is to be done perplexes them, though. Says one exhibitor. “The chain house in my neighborhood milks the good ones dry and leaves the others clear for me — but who wants to see the others l When I play some of those ’dogs’ as singles. I hide in my office for fear the few patrons will demand their money back. At least, two features is a bargain and nobody expects much quality in a bargain basement. Urged to Take a Stand •J Another exhibitor says he paid $2,000 last season for films he did not show. Eventually passage of the Neely Bill will substantially solve these problems of industrial maladjustment. In (Continued on page 12) PAGE TEN HOLLYWOOD SPECTATOR