The Photo-Play Journal (May 1916-Apr 1917)

THE PHOTOPLAY JOURNAL FOR DECEMBER, 1916. PAGE 21 lllll,llllllllllllllllll!lllllllllllllllll!llllllllllll!lli §§ photographic series of light-and-shade ( events which move constantly forward in M faultless sequence. It possesses the I three essentials of a universally popular | photoplay, namely, heart-interest, art and m suspense. | pHOTOPLAYING has proven the | forte of many an artist who could [ never achieve unusual success on the I speaking stage. Verily, numerous screen m favorites possessing real stellar pro m pensities as such were "hits" only in H their own phantasm when they essayed to 1 interpret the Thespian art before the | footlights. Just as truly it is to their ■ credit that they were able to emerge vic1 tors in another branch of the drama after | failing to make their mark in the [ "mother sphere." Thus has the photo1 play served the good purpose of intro ■ ducing dozens of sterling entertainers | who would have been forever in oblivion ■ had not this new form of diversion come | to increase the pleasure of humanity, and, I happily, the unswerving tendency of the I screen is to continue the beneficial work | of bringing forward new personalities. | Indeed, the "movies" have added such a | tremendously multifarious scope to the | show business that bright, new stars ap1 pear nowadays in the histrionic firma ■ ment in pairs and even groups wherein I before the camera exerted an influence 1 for the welfare of amusement it was an I exceptional year which saw the advent of I more than one really great artist to swell I the ranks of "featured players." Even I Mary Pickford, justly advertised as ■ America's sweetheart, owes everything m to the triumph of man in perfecting the 1 science of filming. Charlie Chaplin I could never have attained the popu1 larity which enables him to demand such I fabulous sums for his services if he had | been forced to confine his efforts to the H stage. These facts are given significant jj importance by the further fact that s neither of these premier artists suc1 ceeded in making anything like notable m headway while they were on the stage I prior to their embracing of the golden I opportunity the latest fad afforded. The 1 public is gratified in the knowledge that | one of the most potential tendencies of I the photoplay has to do with developing 1 a wealth of previously obscure talent of I the totally different variety, and there I will never be anything like a lugubrious g wail emanate from this source because m of the persistency with which new and I clever shadows push their way into the ■ pictures. It contributes to the spice of m it and therefore the fans will join enerm getically in urging the perpetuation of jj the proclivity among producers including | even those producers who have frowned = on the growing "star system." | (^ GARDNER SULLIVAN has just m contributed another excellent pho I toplay for the delectation of all lovers | of realism. It is called "The Criminal," I and the title is the only serious mistake ( about the piece, inasmuch as it is in a jj way misleading. This picture is simply = a page of actual life which the hoi polloi | as well as 'the select can homologate and | corroborate with equal power and under | standing, because, after all, everybody knows some certain phases of life very well. Mr. Sullivan has drawn a study of characters easily within the grasp and appreciation of most any man or woman. Beneath it all is a far deeper theme, namely, society's treatment of a girl of questionable birth. Love, of course, does not pause to worry over the question, and her past is placed securely in oblivion. The story deals with Naneta, a girl born out of wedlock. She is held in ill repute by the inhabitants of the small Italian village in which she lives because her father had failed to give her his name. Later she gains access to America, the land of opportunity, through the assistance of an old Italian acquaintance who had emigrated to this country and established a spaghetti restaurant in which the maid works to earn her "keep." Here she meets a young American whose whole ambition is to live on what he can earn from his writings. From the inception he bestows encouraging smiles upon Naneta, who is visibly surprised, having long since concluded she was an outcast doomed to always be excluded from the consideration of fellow-beings. One night she finds an abandoned baby in the hallway of the house in which she rooms, and she takes the little one to her quarters. Mindful of the many humiliations through which she has passed because of having been a no-name, she decides to protect this infant despite all the privations she realized it meant for her. Just at that particular time there is an epidemic of kidnapping in some parts of New York and detectives, in following various clues, finally break in on Naneta's privacy. When she is asked regarding the parentage of the child she at first refuses to answer, but later confesses she stole it, steadfastly refusing to tell the name of its parents, as if to convey the impression the child had a known origin. It is at the crucial moment the young writer comes to the rescue with the truth of the case being subsequently divulged and resulting in the author proposing marriage to Naneta. He stands out like a real hero by making known his willingness to adopt the child. O1 iNE of the best releases of the current month is "Fifty-Fifty," an original drama by Robert Shirley, featuring Norma Talmadge. It is a remarkably simple domestic tragedy, intensely dramatic and well sustained. Intertwined in the pathos are numerous light touches of human interest, most of which are furnished by a fascinating baby. Miss Talmadge's portrayal of the loving mother is one of the best characterizations she has drawn in a long time. Her work is convincing as is also the story, which moves forward with unimpeded progress, the big dramatic situations following in rapid succession. A girl living in the rather uncertain atmosphere of "Little Bohemia" weds a rich business man, but with the advent of their child she forgets and neglects him. When it is too late she discovers he has in his consequent loneliness sought other company and has become enamored of another woman, but a kindly judge prevents a divorce and effects a happy recon ciliation, whereupon man and wife resume life on a strictly fifty-fifty basis, the right principle for successful married life. This picture will appeal to highclass audiences. A N almost unparalleled example of "literature slaughter" is revealed in the photoplay version of Rudyard Kipling's popular novel, "The Light That Failed." Seldom before in the history of motion pictures has there been such a reckless butchery of a meritorious work. The public has just been offered this picturization as a Pathe Gold Rooster feature with Robert Edeson as the star and with Jose Collins, she of musical comedy fame, prominent in the cast. Whoever perpetrated this scenario must regard Kipling as a novice in the art of story-telling, for he distorts the English author's plot and action with a lavish hand, apparently entirely unaware of the fact that what was a corking yarn in its original form is ruthlessly transformed into a theatrical, ultra-stagey thing, lacking altogether in finesse and abounding with glaring blunders in dramatic construction. On top of all this there is a great deal of carelessness in the staging. However, this is not the first instance wherein a fine novel suffered in the process of transition to the shadow stage, and it will not be the last, but for the sake of genius we must join others in beseeching producers to mutilate with impunity if they must mutilate at all, and if they can discover a way in which to do this kind of mutilating. By no means let the screen become an agency through which high-class literature degenerates. This would be a trend presaging irreparable disrepute. And it is certain the producers do not want this any more than their patrons do. The scenario of "The Light That Failed" is a huge mistake such as Pathe is not likely to repeat. Let it be an object lesson to others and it will have had a helpful tendency after all. T^7"HEN Paul Armstrong wrote his comedy drama, "The Heir to the Hoorah," he contributed an achievement worthy of preservation, and Jesse L. Lasky deserves great credit for the striking manner in which he extended the play's scope of wholesome entertaining by adapting it to the screen. It is first, last and all the time diversion unalloyed by anything tawdry or obnoxious, and those who would forget current worries will find success easily attainable while seated in any theater where this film is being shown. Thomas Meighan portrays the stellar role of the big, goodnatured millionaire mine-owner with an artistry and finesse which certainly tend to increase his popularity as a matinee idol. Anita King, the co-star, does all that could be expected of her as a society pauper, the daughter of a society parasite. She wins, loses and regains the love of the mine-owner with true histrionic ability, but her skill as an actress is somewhat relegated to the background by the superior personal success scored by Edythe Chapman, who plays the part of her mother so well that at times she seems to be more the star than anyone iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiM