Motion Picture News (Jan-Feb 1922)

January 14 , 1922 11 499 Criticism? What Difference Does It Make? Call It an Art or an Industry, Says Rupert Hughes, But Do Not Be Bullied 44/^1 RITICS AND THE MOTION I. PICTURE ” was the subject of a talk delivered by Rupert Hughes at a luncheon given by Samuel Goldwvn recently in New York. Mr. Hughes’ answer to the critics is simply “What difference does it make?’’ His talks is reprinted in part below : “ The best definition of a gentleman that I have ever seen was Beerbohm Tree’s statement that ‘A gentleman is a man who doesn’t care whether he is a gentleman or not.’ And I think that this is true of a true artist, since he is so much interested in expressing what is in his heart that he doesn’t care whether he is an artist or not. “ The moving picture should not be frightened or humiliated or bullied by those critics who say that the moving pictures are not an art. One fanatic recently wrote a ferocious attack in which he made the final announcement that the moving pictures are an industry and not an art, and that the censorship could do them no harm, as they had nothing important or artistic to deliver. Even if he had known the difference or had been qualified to decide just what an art is, what difference does it make whether you call moving pictures an art, an industry, an amusement, a merchandise? The main thing is that they fascinate almost everybody. Their first duty is to make their own rules, to be moving pictures, to be pictures and to move. “ What difference does it all make ? There were plenty of people who said that Shakespeare was only a commercial man ager who appealed to the lowbrow public Three centuries from now a certain kind of critic will be roasting the life out of the moving picture producers of his time and referring to today as the golden age of motion pictures, when people devoted themselves to high art of principles and wrote the great successes of the screen. “ I think that the motion pictures are doing marvellous things ; that there are great geniuses at work producing, writing and acting magnificent pictures. The tide is about to turn and is already turning. A number of critics who a few years ago used the name of Charlie Chaplin as a byword of contempt are now speaking of him with reverence as the greatest artist of his time. “ I predict that in a few years there will be critics thinking themselves the most artistic of the artistic who will make fun of novels and plays and poems and essays and sculptures and paintings as cheap and clumsy devices in comparison with the magnificent charms of the motion pictures. “ Of course, these critics will be wrong and cruel and futile, but they will be no more wrong, no crueller and no more futile than these peculiar persons who despise the moving picture, and despise it because they do not understand what the moving pictures are really trying to do and really succeeding in doing. “ When I praise the motion picture as an art or whatever you want to call it, I do not mean that all pictures are good, or that I like all of them. I hate lots of them and lots of them bore me to death. But that may be my fault, not theirs. “ Many of the critics do not do the motion picture justice because they do not really know what motion pictures are all about. These critics may know something about novels and essays and poetry, but they may know nothing of the film. The man who has no acquaintance with sculpture or with music or with painting has little value as a critic. One great trouble with the motion pictures is that they are being harassed and bullied by any number of critics whose advices it would be futile to follow and whose ignorance is as profound as their own contempt. They say frankly that they don’t like them and don’t go to them. “ Above all things, the motion picture people should not be scared to death or driven out of their senses by the use of this terrible word ‘ art.’ Nobody knows what art is. No two people agree on the definition. What difference does it make? “ My main feeling is, in short, that we movie people should not be afraid of what people will say of our work. We should not allow a word or a theory to drive us into anything or away from anything without some strong inner reason. Most of all, we should not be afraid of popularity and of financial success. Success is like posterity brought within our immediate vicinity. To have pleased millions of people with comedy, pathos or a wellconstructed story is to have done a glorious thing. You can call it art, merchandise, trash or wooden nutmegs, but you cannot rob it of its noble mission— to cast light into dark places.” First National Survey Indicates Revival Closing Months Showed Marked Improvement with Many Attendance Records Broken CONSTANT improvement in the motion picture industry is shown, states First National Pictures, Inc., in making public this week a compilation of reports, following a survey of conditions in various parts of the country. The closing months of 1921 witnessed a steady increase in attendance, the company states, and there is every indication that the new year will be marked by conditions approaching normalcy. This optimistic prospect is predicated on the success with which First National attractions have been meeting in widely separated sections of the country, according to the reports received. The breaking of box office and attendance records has again become common, and S. R. O. houses are more the rule than the exception. However, ' it is necessary to show good pictures to obtain these results, the company points out, as the public is “shopping” for its screen entertainment, and is willing to patronize only the best. “ The Sign on the Door,” starring Norma Talmadge, leads the long list of First National attractions, which are swelling the bank accounts of the exhibitors. It broke the attendance record of the Kentucky Theatre in Louisville, Ky., where it was shown December 11 to 14, and of Thielen’s Majestic in Bloomington, 111., December 12 to 14. At the Grand, Tiffin, Ohio, it demolished all records for Sunday attendance and box office receipts, despite the fact that two religious “ revivals ” were in progress on December 4. The original booking of two days was extended to three and Manager R. W. Lawrence is planning to bring it back later. At the Wonderland, Lorain, Ohio, it was reclaimed after a four-day showing by Manager August Ilg, and offered for the remainder of the week, with profitable results, and at the Kinema in Los Angeles, during its run from September 5 to 10, it did the best business of any Talmadge engagement and broke the “ summer slump ” by doing regular high season business, despite the most remarkable opposition in the history of that house. “ The Kid,” the Chaplin six-reel classic, is still breaking records. It was shown on Sunday, November 13, at the Alcazar, Syracuse, N. Y., where it exceeded the house’s attendance record by 540 paid admissions, setting a new mark for receipts also. And that, in spite of the fact that it had been shown in almost every section of the city and at most of the large theatres. At the Liberty, Vermilion, Ohio, it was shown December 25 and 26, and broke the records for previous Christmas Day receipts. “ Business was unusually good,” reported Manager Charles S. Decker. The Majestic, Evansville, Ind., had capacity ( Continued on page 500)