The New Movie Magazine (Jan-Sep 1935)

Boy -this suce is Fun SiMce MOM OIL60 THE £W££P£R \wirH 3-in-OmE AMD St^NBO C>PF g^\\> — zz — y When a sweeper runs hard, it Is hard on rugs, too. So keep yours easy-running with 3-in-0ne. All dealers; handy cans and bottles. Get some. Blended from 3 oils for better protection CLEANS LUBRICATES PREVENTS RUST WOMEN ENTHUSIASTIC OVER NEW 3-IN-ONE FURNITURE POLISH Beautify furniture and woodwork with this creamy new polish. Removes dirt and film; rubs to a quick lustre and dry, hard finish. At your dealer's — or sample free. THREE IN ONE OIL COMPANY, Dept. 16-A 170 Varick St., New York, N. Y. I'll try your new furniture polishl Name Street City . State _ lOyOOO SHUTTERS Through a microscope, rough, chapped skin is like 10,000 tiny shutters torn open — broken skin — dry, hard, cracked. Ordinary lotions only glaze over this. DAME NATURE Cream Ends Work Roughness. It is unusually rich liquid formulated by a woman physician who found others ineffective. It absorbs into your skin — softening, smoothing and healing it — not glazing it. It makes entire skin remarkably smooth, comfy, attractive. Redness, roughness, chap, dryness — disappear. 10c, 25c, 50c. All 10c stores. Dame Nature Co., 251 W. 19th St., New York. YOURS! alluring Curls of the cHolluwooa Stars Hollywood Stars set the hairdress styles of the world. Hollywood Rapid-Dry Curlers— "the Curlers used by the Stars" — bring to smart' women everywhere the alluring, soft, lovely coiffures that are the style. With Hollywood Curlers you can easily achieve a flattering hair dress of better and more lasting curls. Hollywood Curlers feature a soft rubber lock that keeps hair and curler securely in place. Perforations permit abundant air circulation to aid swift drying. Available in two models and three sizes to suit your need. For the best curling results, use Hollywood Curlers. • and notion counters 9ea Kathleen Burke, featured in Paramount': Lives of a Bengal Lancer" HOLLYWOOD RAPID-DRY CURLER "THE CURLER USED BY THE STARS" of a dignified, really first-class portrayal of screen doings and actors, besides giving your readers the best of literary efforts in other directions such as the standard magazines all carry. Could you not run a good serial in your monthly instalments? Then I need not buy Home Companions or Journals for fiction. It is amusing to me to read how we movie-goers criticize and complain of the picture concerns. What one of us in a thousand could produce a picture equaling anything they have given us? They have obtained the best talent of the world, spare neither time nor expense, and have so much more than we to lose. If a picture fails because an actress has a little too much lipstick (not thinking of her weeks of effort to make a good picture) we all cry out that our 30 cents was wasted. The American Public accept style dictation, conveyances, etc. Why not the highly specialized art of picture entertainment? Thanking you for your new magazine.— Celia Alman, 70S No. 63rd Street, Philadelphia, Pa. Years ago we used to run fiction, Celia, but it took up too much space. If our readers want it, we will run it again, however. We'll have to wait and see how others feel about it. No. 1 Mrs. Johnson has invited this, so here goes. I would like to see Mrs. Johnson in the place of the movie stars she condemns. I would bet a new hat that she would not leave the screen just because she had attained success. I can picture her hanging on for dear life for the last cent, that she could earn in her chosen profession. Does she ever take into consideration that these stars are humans just like you and me, in that they have to eat and sleep and have a shelter for their heads? Can any one of you blame them for sticking to a job that offers them all these comforts that perhaps they have never had before in1 their lives? I would suggest that Mrs. Johnson read the article on "Stars of Yesterday" in the February issue. Perhaps that would change her views. I am sure no one would care to give up a good paying position so that in a few years' time he might have the pleasure of looking for work, as a mere nobody where he had once been the executive. I ask Mrs. Johnson to reflect on her most unusual condemnations. I wonder that anyone could think that it would be a pleasure to be rid of these great people, the Misses Bennett, Shearer, Crawford, Davies, and Garbo. What would the movies be without them? I shudder to think of such a calamity. I don't believe there have been finer actresses than this group. I am all for them, and I know that the rest of the "fans" are too. As for Mr. Colman, I don't think there is anyone who can compare with him. Candidly, now, has anyone starred in better pictures or given better portrayals? AH together, now, let's give one good rousing cheer for these stars, with the hope that they will continue to be in pictures for many years to come and have the greatest success attainable. — A. Bloeser, 24 Englewood Avenue, Buffalo, N. Y. No. 2 In the March issue of New Movie, one Mrs. Dorothy Johnson dipped her pen in vitriol and criticized the lovely and talented Garbo, Shearer, Crawford You Tell Us (Continued from page 69) and other topnotchers. Just step this way to the guillotine, dear lady, off goes your head; it's excess baggage anyway, if you don't use it to think! Twenty million movie fans can't be wrong, and besides, the Hollywood producers would be stupidly asinine to pay such fabulous salaries for the services of stars with poor and objectionable talents. Such foolish statements as made by this correspondent prove that she doesn't think. These stars make money for their producers, and we, the discriminating movie public, are so impatient for a new Garbo or Shearer release that we literally count the days. So great is the demand for these maligned stars abroad that "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" and "Queen Christina" were released in London simultaneously with New York premieres, and each played to packed houses for eight solid weeks. Shearer's "Elizabeth Barrett" and Garbo's "Queen Christina" are distinguished screen portraits, comparable to any ever portrayed, even by a Cornell, Duse or Bernhardt. As to Bennett, Crawford, Davies, Colman and Novarro, they are perennial favorites, whose talents have stood the acid test of time and changing conditions. So my advice to you, Mrs. Johnson, is to stay out of the line when the SRO sign is hung out, and give someone who really appreciates histrionics an opportunity to use your seat. — Corinne Childers, 506 Clement Avenue, Charlotte, S. C. No. 3 Mrs. Dorothy Johnson certainly did tread on my toes in her letter printed in the March issue of New Movie, wherein she states that such favorites as Shearer, Crawford and Garbo must "give up as they should, to those more worthy" . . . and the adjectives "worn out" and "obnoxious" simply made me see red. I don't think anyone could be more worthy of the fame, popularity and success achieved by these stars . . . and achieved only through hard work and perseverance. Not that I think the neophytes, starlets, near-stars, etc., should not be given good roles and a chance to show what they can do. But if actresses like Norma Shearer, Joan Crawford and Garbo must step aside in order that those farther down the ladder of fame may be given this opportunity, why, that is too much like robbing Peter to pay Paul. Such performances as given by Norma Shearer in "The Barretts" and Garbo in "The Painted Veil" (the best in her entire career, in my opinion) simply can't be surpassed, 'and I failed to notice anything which would class Miss Shearer or Miss Garbo as "worn-out" or "obnoxious." Joan Crawford, I am 9-ure, after her grand performances in "Chained" and "Forsaking All Others," will have more followers than ever. The lady goes on to say ... "a place should be made for real genius, and glamorous and alluring personalities." Why Shearer, Garbo and Crawford ARE genius, glamour and allure, personified! Yessir! I have a strong hunch that Mrs. Johnson has started a nice little war, with the "You Tell Us" column of New Movie as the battlefield, for I feel sure that you will receive many letters from fans who feel just as I do. —Pat Millar, 601 Washington Street, Monroe, Louisiana. No. 4 My dear Mrs. Johnson! ! ! ! The same old worn-out stars! (Those were your very words in the March issue of New Movie.) You want us to give up Crawford, Shearer, and Garbo to those more worthy? Just who, my dear lady, would you consider more worthy? These stars have fought for years for a firm footing and now that they have one you want us to forget them. You'd like a place for real genius, and alluring and glamorous personalities. You'd like only three or four great stars. I'd like to know where you could find three stars with more genius, more allure, more glamour, and a more pleasing personality than Crawford, Shearer, and Garbo have? These stars are acclaimed great in more than one continent and I, for one, am ready to stand behind them. At least when I see a picture with one of them in it, I know it'll be worth my money. When I go to the movies, I want ACTING. Give me more of Crawford, Shearer, and Garbo ! — Jerrine Fromm, 1330 Maple Avenue, Wilmette, Illinois. All right, now, Mrs. Johnson. They're giving you a broadside from four guns at once, but this column is open to you if you want to answer your critics. Whew! If this keeps on, we're going to hide wider the desk. Come on, Mrs. Johnson! We're waiting to hear what you have to say in answer, to all these letters. Progress — Thy Name Is NEW MOVIE— What a handsome new dress your magazine dons for February — such a beautiful cover design — so convenient to hold, and so chock-full of interesting matter! Editor, take a bow! Elsie Janis' articles on movie personalities are so cleverly told they make delightful reading. And that wide-awake article: "Color Magic on the Screen" shows you are not asleep at the switch. Yes indeed, color is the comer, sure as fate! People want it. Black and white will soon be as outmoded as the silent pictures. I saw "La Cucaracha" and "Tulip Time in Holland," both in colors, shown in this city. They packed the theaters at each performance. "La Cucaracha" played a return engagement with the same success. When I want to kn<jw what is new or interesting in moviedom, I turn to 'New Movie.— Mrs. Jane L. O'Connor, 1301 Mass. Ave., N. W., Washington, D. C. We're so pleased, Mrs. O'Connor, we even used the heading of your letter, up above, just as you wrote it. New Leading Men for Mae Mae West is my favorite actress, but if she would pick a he-man for her new picture I'm sure this would make her picture a greater box-office hit. My choice would be Preston Foster, Charles Bickford or George Bancroft. Every picture they played was full of excitement, and powerful, and her other leading men have lacked in both. Hoping for this change. — Mrs. Irene Munsey, 9606 Avenue L, Brooklyn, N. Y. This is the same old problem that comes up again and again, Mrs. Munsey. If the producer follows your hunch, and it isn't right, he loses $100,000. So, naturally, he's a bit shy of making such changes. 70 The Neiv Movie Magazine, May, 1935