Inside facts of stage and screen (February 7, 1931)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

Saturday, February 7 , 1931 INSIDE FACTS OF STAGE AND SCREEN Page Five SITTIN’ 'WITH~THE PUBLIC By TED PRICE “TRADER HORN” M-G-M FEATURE Chinese Theatre Hollywood It is going' to take more than the shadow of a monster bat or -gorilla weaving eerily across a library wall to thrill the customers -who have seen “Trader Horn.” This is a pacemaker for the mys- tery factory. It gives a thrill-hungry world the supreme thrills of its life, and the scares are not synthetic. Every hair-raiser in "Trader Horn” is a natural right from the throats of savage flesh rending reptiles and beasts in a habitat that knows no mercy. And the human interest seems every moment to be within slashing distance of their deadly, murderous claws .and jaws. Oooooooo! Man! We have thrilled to Harry Carey in the wild and wooly give -and- .take of_ war-painted Indian and bad man dayjybuf his most daring and courageous exploits in the untamed West could never equal in outright flesh-creeping and blood-curdling intensity the dangers he faced in this adventure. “Trader Horn” is adventure de luxe and the greatest piece of exploitation property M-G-M ever handed an exhibitor. “CITY LIGHTS” LOS ANGELES THEATRE (Reviewed Jan. 31) For one reason and another I cannot take seriously the premiere of a Chaplin, picture that took two years to make just because it opened a two million dollar the- atre and blocked traffic for' three hours, causing movie stars to walk ■six blocks to get there on time. This glamour and wah wah re- moves or adds nothing to the fact that “City Lights” is a sad let d'own of the Chaplin genius. If this is lese majesty or whatever you call it when the flunkey makes faces at the king then so be it. If this genius of Chaplin’s had had its sleeves rolled up and hitting at peak efficiency as it was in “Easy Street” and “The Gold Rush” the values established by the talkies would have been realized to embel- lish and accent his pantomime, and not as an object of nose thumb. In- stead of using sound and an estab- lished demand for aural screen drama to augment his “clowning he stuck his tongue out at it. That, if you ask me, is not the Chapin in- telligence one usually associates with the peerless Charles. There were only two instances in the entire picture where Chaplin would have needed dialogue and those occurred in his brief conver- sations with the girl and the ec- centric millionaire. Fifty words would have met the entire dialogue demand of the story as far as Chap- lin, was concerned. If he had given dialogue to those in his support who were normally most expres- sive with dialogue it would have added immeasurably to the color and depth of his own performance. In refusing dialogue he merely ad- hered to an idea fixed with the ob- stinacy of those others who insist on a complete abandonment of sound, and incidentally get no- where with it. As far as “City Lights” affect- ing the progress of talking pictures or representing a test of the talkies permanency, or changing its status is concerned those who studied that menace intelligently laughed to themselves before the premiere of this picture and laughed out loud afterwards. “City Lights” as a prophesy was another chimera good for only one thing and that was timely exploitation. If there has been any question in the minds of those who debated the life or death of sound it is an- swered here. “City Lights” rang the death knell of the all panto- mime picture. Chaplin made enough concessions to sound in this picture to satisfy the most rabid and vio- lent of the agitators for silence. His musical accompaniment, has re- volver shots, his other background noises and chiefly the “whistle in the stomach” sound effects signified what a marvelous augmentation sound can be to any picture. Charles went for a good IS audible hiccups in the whistle routine and that little faction was one of the outstanding laugh getters in the picture. Ted Price. “GREAT MEADOWS” (M-G-M Feature) LOEWS STATE THEATRE (Reviewed Jan. 28) Mark ye and mark ye -well the picture is “Great Meadows” and the director’s name is CHARLES BRABIN. And as far as I am con- cerned “Great Meadows” classes Charles Brabin ahead of D. W. Griffith by some kilometers. Sub- lime shades of “Orphans of the Storm” D. W. Griffith in his most ecstatic and inspirational moments never achieved anything finer than this. “Huh! Ho! Ho!” chortle my critics. “Genius, eh? An inspira- tion’? A classic? A gem, is it? Were they lined up at the box of- fice for a peek at “Great Meadows”- as they were up at the corner for an opposition picture?” No. I’ll grant you that. True enough and right you are on that 'score but I still maintain that “Great Meadows” is a -classic and I’ll prove it. Here are a few observations: Have;- von ever experienced a fear that tensed your body as taut as drawn wire? Have you ever ex- perienced an apprehension of dan- ger so livid that it suspended you motionless? Have you ever felt a sympathy for suffering that tight- ened the muscles of'your throat and brought ■ a mist of tears over your vision? Have you ever ex- perienced this fear, suspense and sympathy lifting suddenly and the warm wine of gladsome release from it course through your veins like liquid sunshine? Would you believe a movie could be real enough to stir you like that? I have just described the reaction of the audience as it viewed “Great Meadows.” The emotions I have pictured in a feeble measure to you were the emotions that swept that audience ■ like constantly recurring waves of prairie fire running through dried grass, the alternate chill of cold and penetrating rain and the drenching warmth of hot su nshine. A woman shovels away snow that keeps a door from closing; a baby cries in a downpour of rain; a big rawboned plainsman walks' hand in hand with a little boy to the dinner table. Simple strokes of the direc- torial brush that raise "Great Meadows” and Brabin’s direction to a level of high art; that brought in unision from the throats of a thou- sand onlookers murmurs and ex- clamations of apprehension and joy. Yet it is doubtful if “Great Meadows” will wallop at the box office. Eleanor Boardman, John Mack Brown and the title, “Great Meadows” haven’t the lure of the Emil Janning.s, Joan Crawfords and “The Divorcees” of exploitation. Direct exploitation values in this picture are moderate in comparison. It will no doubt be a b. o. flop, but Charles Brabin’s handling of his story and his actors in this picture was magical. He held the audience in the palm of his hand, lifting them up and letting them down at will. It was almost spiritual the way the audience swayed to the drama of this picture.. I wish that space permitted a de- tailed analysis of this picture. It stands up under the microscope ad- mirably. There are only two inci- dents throughout its running that revealed anything resembling a weakness. When John Mack Brown argued the need of avenging his mother’s death against the palpably obvious need - of remaining at the log hut and protecting his wife in a country filled with' the ever men- acing dangers of the wilderness, and when Eleanor Boardman faced the interior of the cabin instead of the open wilderness to call back the man who had left her and their child to shift -for themselves. But errors of this character do not de- tract from “Great Meadows.” Show me a picture of the last six years getting away with less. Ted Price. IN RKO PICTURE Stanley Fields has been cast for a dick role in "Travelling Hus- bands,” which Paul Sioane is di- recting for RKO. Evelyn Brent heads the cast, with support includ- ing James Gleason. Holmes Her- bert and Frank McHugh. Picture Leaders Of the Current Week Pictures leaders for the week are “Kept Husbands,” RKO, and “Great Meadows,” MGM. CHICK YORK-ROSE KING-TRUE YORK “Originators of Tintype Comedy” HEADLINING RKO “FIGHTING CARAVANS” PARAMOUNT THEATRE (Reviewed Jan. 29) The intention, of the producers is not exactly, clear ill this Paramount wagon trailer. If the big idea in the mind 1 of the director and writer was keeping a top heavy covered wagon upright on the open plains and two bewhiskered scouts sober enough to tell an Indian from a giant cactus they succeeded nobly. If on the other baud their object was to intensify interest with good old surefire and reliable romance and danger it was mislaid some- where between a passion for creak- ing wagons and Scotch dialect. I trust that I do not mislead the reader into thinking that “Fighting Caravans” is not an impressive pic- ture. It impresses as mountains and yawning canyons impress anti will bring three rousing cheers from any student class in history but it does not offer the dramatic sub- stance that sends the average audi- ence out of a theatre extolling a pictures virtues; Love interest . and .suspense is brutally submerged by ponderosity.; massive prairie schooners freighting supplies to California. Even the menace to the trains portage, the' ever threatening attack of Indians is left pretty much to the imagina- tion; out' of sight, mostly a mat- ter of discussion between the train niatser and his drivers and scouts. Parallel action was what this pic- ture needed. An actual view of murderous detachments of Indians paralleling trie progress of the train and jockeying for the right mo- ment to. attack. It was lack of this kind of -action that made this blooming opus drag so, and believe me it dragged. The audience got up and went out for a smoke every time -one of those prairie schooners started up a mountain side. I like Ernest Torrence and Scotch dialect but I like Ernest as a supporting character -and his dia- lect in proportion to his role be- cause my main interest in pictures is to see them click at the box of- fice. In this picture there was too much of Ernest Torrence and his Scotch dialect and not enough of Gary Cooper on the make for Lily Damita and menacing Indians which is the combination that cre- ates deep audience interest and plenty of word of mouth which means 40 per cent more at the box. Cooper and Damita are the draw in this picture along with Torrence. They are a good 80 per cent of it but they were seen and heard only about 20 per cent of the time and then with the audience trying to shake off the picture of a top heavy school that threatened to topple over every time a wheel turned. Still, it isn’t a bad picture, that is if you go for a parade of moving vans or thrill to a Universal lum- ber parade. Ted Price. “KEPT HUSBANDS” RKO THEATRE (Reviewed Jan. 29) RKlO conies through this week with, another production that scores with intelligent workmanship in writing, casting and direction. Last week it was “The Royal Bed” and a niftier satire, on the divine right of kings hasn’t broke into lights since Neon took over Marquee. This week it is “Kept Husbands” with that rarest of all combina- tions: a characterization and treat- ment that sustains the thought ex- pressed in the title. “Kept Hus- bands ’ is a fine example of con- sistency throughout, than which an audience likes nothing better as evi- denced bv the enthusiastic reaction to it Thursday matinee. However, there were two slight errors in han- dling- incidental business. -Many readers^ of Inside Facts write in protesting that I lay too much stress on incidental errors. My answer is that the amount of logical character appraisal exhibited m the handling of detail is the thing that counts most for or against audience interest. Once a good motivation is established it is the incidental _ character reactions that serve to intensify interest and in- tensification of interest is of major importance. Too often have I seen your name appears in this column, Inside Facts recommends you to the attention of picture pro- ducers. MAYO METHOT A. S. BYRON GINGER PEARSON ROBERT KEITH for their work in “The Torch Song,,” El Capitan- Theatre. an apparently unimportant bit of characterization undermine and dis- sipate hard earned audience in- terest. Dorothy Mackaili’s quick acquies- cence. when asked Jor a kiss and. in- vited for a drink by tile trouble making bachelor showed lack of thought on the part of Mackaill. She is the type who would pause to weigh consequences. A sufficient pause would have justified the act. As it was the suddenness of her acceptance made the older genera- tion iii the audience suck in their breath with astonishment. The mothers and dads were a bit shocked. However, the entire story being in the light vein with heart interest and suspense well sustained the momentary shock didn’t matter. When Mackaill proposed to Joel McRea the proposal was handled with a sensible appreciation of in- dividual reaction; the action was in good taste and consistent with the nature of the two characters. Later when Mackaill did a little drinking with Bryant Washburn to spite her kept husband who insisted on work- ing to save his self respect, she whoopeed with her brain working. In other . words, the Mackaill per- sonality, worldly and sensible as well as fun loving, remained in character with itself. “Kept Husbands” was skillfully bandied throughout. It rates high. The title will lure the customers and the picture itself cannot -disap- point. Ned Spark’s pessimistic ob- servations were so productive of laughs that his long face was greet- ed with a laugh before he opened his mouth. And before I forget it, Clara Kimball Young bowed in with this picture. She did a hus- band keeping widow. If this intro- duction is a test of her popularity the applause she received assures one that she has not been forgotten. Ted Price. STORM OVER ASIA Hollywood (Reviewed Feb. 3) Here is a great picture, the first Russian production I have seen. As a silent picture it exhibits director- ial handling that is keenly alert to pantomimic values. The story is impressively told and holds interest throughout. I understand now, skier seeing “Storm Over Asia,” why so much interest centers in these Russian pictures; they bring us face to face with the drama of a people in whose faces its engraved centuries of suffering and oppres- sion. They are a picturesque con- trast to the people we meet daily. Their forbearance under the heel of m-onarchial dictate makes our suffering under depression seem like luxury. Filmarte and its foreign impor- tations should enjoy a constantly profitable business. The entertain- ment they bring to us is a welcome relief to those who are getting an over-diet of sex. gangsters and Ore- gon trails. Productions like “Storm Over Asia” give the needed bal- ance to picture output. I must see more of them, but it is my personal belief that their box office and en- tertainment value would be aug- mented 'by the addition of sound.' I believe that the atmospheric sounds of the different mulsical and ceremonial instruments of strange lands would give depth and tons that would be highly appreciated. “Storm Over Asia” was directed by Pudovkin, who made “End of S*-. Petersburg.” The chap is but 27 years of age, and this is his fifth production. He is skillful. The male lead was played by Valery Inki'-shinov, the son of a Mongol, educated in Russian and trained in the Moscow Cinema University, and a member of the Meyerhold Stage Players. Produced by Mejrabporn- film of U.S.S.R. and distributed by Amkino. Characterizations by : Jn- kizshinov, the son, Dediseff the Commander of ■ the White Army, and Belinskaya, his.wife, and Sudr-,- kevich, the daughter; the fur trad- er, name not given, were splendid- ly portrayed. “JAWS OF HELL” ] FILMARTE (Reviewed Jan. 25) When a picture offers as much blood and thunder entertainment as “Jaws of Hell” it’s silly to quibble over such trifling irre'e- vancies as historical inaccuracy. Tennyson’s “Charge of the Light Brigade” isn’t free of historical errors either, and it is the leit- motif of this opera. Cyril MacLaglen is the stalwart cavalry lieutenant who, after many dramatic incidents finally has Fate practically eating out of his hand. Benita Hume displays her beauty to good advantage and is a proper heroine. Supporting plav r ers give strikingly fine performances. Each role is strongly built up to add force and value to the whole. The “Charge” is dramatically spotted and gets across for all it’s worth. B. Elvey and Milton Rosmer di- rected this Gainsborough picture. Vi. (Continued on Page 11) SOLOISTS’ NIGHT Two soloist's nights will he of- fered each week during the Holly- wood Bowl season in July and August, instead of one, as hereto- fore. The Bowl’s annual $1,000 prize composition contest closes Sunday, Feb. 1.