Hollywood Spectator (Apr-May 1939)

'y/tcmL ~tke D I TORS EflSV CHAIR SPECTATOR TO HAVE A BIRTHDAY ITH its next issue Hollywood Spectator will enter its fifteenth year of effort to be of value to the motion picture industry as a business, and to its personnel as artists working in a medium which requires for its continued existence large financial returns on both the mental and material investment in its plants and product. During its fourteen years it has devoted millions of its words to the championship of screen art, but each such discussion was inspired by its conviction that only by meeting the demands of the art could the industry achieve the greatest possible material prosperity. No thought expressed by the Spectator was inspired by consideration of its own material prosperity. As an advertising medium it has been ignored by those whom it has tried most to serve — the producers of motion picture entertainment. For the revenue essential to its continued existence it has been compelled to beg from the industry's personnel, whom also it has strived to serve. O nee more it appeals for the essential revenue. It asks those who approve at least its honesty, if not the logic of its opinions, the support it needs. It has but one thing for sale — advertising space. The next issue will be its Fourteenth Birthday Number. It hopes to have your advertisement in it. * * * IT IS WHAT WE AIMED AT RITES Ed win Schallert in reviewing "Vigil In the Night": ' The quiet tone of nearly all conversations in the picture gives it singular power." To oet this "singular power" in all pictures has been the reason for the Spectator's constant plea for conversations on the screen instead of bursts of oratory. * * * ACTING AND THE FILM BOX-OFFICE UOTING Jimmie Fidler on lwo of the Lane sisters, Rosemary first: "She studies the principles of acting, delving into the history of drama, applies herself like a leech to her music, and can expound by the hour on the technique of every great star in the business. In short, Rosemary's one absorbing interest in life is professional success. . . . Priscilla, on the other hand, doesn't seem a bit impressed by Hollywood's treasures. She takes her roles as they're assigned, races through them with a minimum of effort and a maximum of fun, and makes no bones about her will ingness to throw it all overboard if the whim happens to strike her. I think she'd cheerfully turn her back on pictures tomorrow if she decided that she could have a better time by doing so." Then Jimmie Gets Inquisitive Jimmie proceeds to ask an interesting question: "In view of the fact that their backgrounds, personal charm and initial screen opportunities were approximately the same, which of the two sisters would you expect to be more important professionally? Rosemary, of course. Yet the reverse is true, and I doubt if there is a producer in Hollywood who can give you the exact 'why'." Jimmie's doubt is well founded. If Hollywood had one producer who could give the "why," he would be the only one who never would be bothered with a shortage of talent for his leading roles; he could make new stars with every picture he made. But the interesting question about the two Lane sisters is easy to answer. Priscilla is the greater box-office attraction by virtue of her complete disregard for anyone's conception of rules which govern screen acting; she goes slap-bang at everything given her to do, gets oodles of fun out of doing it, gets her personality on the screen, and lets her audience know she is having a fine time, lets it get acquainted with her, puts it in sympathy with her joys and sorrows. She gives her audience what she feels. One With Emotions, One With Head tfl Rosemary gives her audience what she has learned. She has schooled her emotions to be expressed by rule. Priscilla acts with her emotions, Rosemary with her head. According to Jimmie, Rosemary has delved into the history of drama, and the deeper she delved the greater did she get away from screen requirements, as all histories of drama deal with its expression on the stage, none with its expression on the screen. The stage projects its message to the audience; the motion picture camera enters a scene, records the message, carries it to the audience. I he only thing the two media have in common is their use of players as their tools. In all the centuries of its history the stage never developed a Shirley Temple, a child who for years was the world's greatest box-office player. If the acting technique which distinguishes the stage constituted the requirements of the screen, a seasoned stage actor would head the film box-office list. But HOLLYWOOD SPECTATOR, published twice monthly at Los Angeles. Calif., by Hollywood Spectator Co.. 6513 Hollywood Blvd.; phone GLadstone 5213. Subscription price. $5 the year; two years. $8; foreign, $6. Single copies 20 cents. Entered as Second Class matter, February 21, 1940, at the Post Office at Los Angeles, Calif., under the act of Congress of March 3, 1879. PAGE TWO HOLLYWOOD SPECTATOR