Picture-Play Magazine (Mar-Aug 1925)

10 What the Fans Think Continued from page 8 sive trash slipped by the censors. It had an impressive cast. 1 expected too much of it and went to see it in spite of the cheap title. Jetta Goudal was all that redeemed it. Flossie Stanton. Spokane, Wash. A Protest from Norway. 1 was very surprised — and a little angry, loo! — when I read the letter from Claudine Gault in the November PicturePlay. She says that Conway Tcarle, Milton Sills, and James Kirkwood cannot act. Here they are regarded as three of the best actors on the American screen, especially Conway Tearle. M ira Soldi. Toldbadgt, 38, Fredriksstad, Norway. What An Australian Fan Thinks. It is very foolish of ignorant people to run down motion pictures, as they are one of the greatest things we have. There are very few pictures which you cannot sit through — about ten per cent, I should say — and the other ninety per cent are the best possible kind of entertainment. Pauline Crawford. Darlinghurst, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Do We Deify the Stars? I certainly agree with Mr. Nondesberg's friend that the motion-picture industry is "nothing more nor less than a plaything for women." The pictures that we are obliged to see these days at a price that can be righteously termed "robbery" are junk. There are a few exceptions, but the number is very small. I blame the movie magazines for a major portion of this condition. They deify the star rather than acknowledge .the true worth of a picture. As a result the producers go into the circus business and exhibit their stars in zoological garden fashion, forgetting that plot and action are requisites of a good picture. I do believe that it would be a great idea to retrograde some few years back when the names of the players were unknown to the public, and hence the public did not care about the player as such, but thought in terms of the finished product — the picture, the plot, and action. It is up to the movie magazines to better the movies, and a little criticism here and there would open the eyes of the producers that the public is getting sick of the stuff that emanates from their studios. B. S. An Admirable Stand. . Miss Klumph has brought to the attention of the fans an interesting phase of interviewing. She has taken an admirable stand. One that few writers would have the honesty and courage to admit to. The re are undesirables in every profession, and as the majority of film players are lovable and regular people, such players as the two she mentioned should be, as Miss Klumph says, ignored. And there is nothing more hurtful to their vanity than that. It is just such conscientious and truthful members of the Picture-Play staff, such as Miss Klumph, Myrtle Gebhart, Malcolm Oettinger, and the rest, that have made Picture-Play Magazine leader in the field of fan publications. Dorothy Lubow. 2064 Vyse Avenue, New York City. "The Wooden Soldiers." Not long ago, while listening to "The Parade of the Wooden Soldiers," and being fascinated, as I always am, by the Russian rhythm, the Russian melody, and the odd Russian snap, it occurred to me that, although the dark-browed Cossacks may lay claim to the origination of the celebrated wooden soldiers, they cannot, now, assert themselves as holding a monopoly on the rapidly growing output of same. America has stepped into the competition and now bids fair to out-Chauve the Souris, with a parade of wooden actors that marches across the screen rather than out of a toyshop door. At practically every ricture I see now the overture seems to 62 the well-known "clock striking twelve." and then "the fun begins." The dolls of the screen — beautifully arrayed manikins — stand aside and watch, with wondering eyes, as the audience mentally sighs, "Ah, here they come !" Then, before our eyes passes "The Parade of the Wooden Actors," greatest success of "The Cinematic Revue." As the enthusiasts cheer and the soldiers draw nearer, we recognize Jack Holt as the "captain, stiff as starch," all decked out in stunning uniform, his little mustache taking the wind and his chin thrust out in characteristic determination. Head of them all he leads the rest, proudly and with the perfect degree nf mechanical movement that has promoted him, suddenly, from a mere private to the esteemed rank of captain. Next in line, we see Milton Sills, a paragon of wooden grace, himself — his eyes squinted against the sunlight, and his face registering high-minded devotion to no one in particular. Some day— ah. yes — some day, if he but work faithfully, he may attain captaincy ! The others who follow come in line according to their respective prowess in the great screen art of stiffness and life•lessness. Now', we see Lewis Stone striding along, masterfully, all deeply concerned over a commonplace parade. Just behind him, Conway Tearle almost breaks his perpetual scowl by smiling at a beautiful doll named Corinne Griffith, and James Kirkwood staggers along behind Percy Marmont, stiffly, yet a bit uncertainly. The next one in line is really the most perfect soldier in the parade. His demeanor is dignified and patiently resigned and his movements forced and long suffering. Ah — Eugene O'Brien — what an admirabl}' gauche actor — truly a credit to the great art of woodenism ! In the soldier who follows we sense a feeling of wistfulness and a broad hint of self-condemnation. Crossly, John Barrymore rebukes the movie public with a fine scorn. "If I had not wasted my genius on the screen, this should not have been my ultimate end. Now — on the stage — in 'Hamlet !' " And on and on the parade passes, until the toyshop door fades shut, and the next night, when it opens up again, revealing real actors, why, "there's no sign the wood brigade was ever out upon parade." Trix Mackenzie. Orange Villa, Daytona, Fla. Concerning Positive Statements. I have always been angered by positive statements about anything which cannot definitely be proven — from politics and religion to literature and the theater. Most things are so or not so only according, to what individuals think. Therefore, when a writer says, in this department, "We all know that Ramon Novarro is the screen's greatest actor," and "the most biased of Valentino fans have fallen under his charms," and "that he — Valentino — is awful in the role of the French prince," et cetera, well, I protest. If the writer had said "I think" or "I believe" that would be another matter, but as it was, her statements were ridiculous. I can hear her say, "Oh, she's only a Valentino fan." Well, I am, for to me his work shows great finesse 'and shading, and I like his manners and bearing. But I am speaking in general of all these positive persons. I cannot enthuse over Ramon Novarro. He always seems to me like a dancing faun, that should be dressed in a leopard skin and blowing a horn. A pretty boy, but without great depth or interpretation to his parts. His personality just does not attract me. I think. Richard Barthelmess. is the greatest, most versatile artist of the screen. It is remarkable that he could play parts so different, and yet do them so superbly as those in "Broken Blossoms," "Tol'able David," "The Fighting Blade," and "The Enchanted Cottage." At least, they seemed quite perfect characterizations to me. Other actors that I like immensely are : Milton Sills, Conway Tearle, Rudolph Valentino, Conrad Nagel, and also Tommy Meighan, if his plays did not nearly bore me to distraction. And I think Richard Dix, Rod La Rocque, Ben Lyon, and John Gilbert will come into their own soon. Of the actresses, I believe I like Mary Philbin best, artistically speaking. I also think that Lillian Gish, Pola Negri, and Norma Talmadge are fine actresses, and I enjoy Corinne Griffith and Gloria Swanson for their personalities. Isn't it nice that Pauline Frederick is back? Cecil Lester Jones. Washington, D. C. Kleig Eyes and Limelight Eyes. I don't understand the attitude of the fans who must know all the details of their favorites' lives. I have been connected with the theatrical profession ever since I was born, twenty years ago. And I know theatrical people as they are — human beings, hard-working people in the main, good to one another, warm hearted and loyal. There are some who are temperamental, some who are immoral, some who are unpleasant and unkind, superior and conceited — but I ask you where is the profession or place in the world that you won't find some people who are immoral, unpleasant, conceited, and unkind? One should not idealize theatrical people, but one should never look upon them as an inferior grade of men and women. They're not. And the movie fan who goes prying and peeking into their private lives hasn't any right to do anything of . the kind. They — the Paul Prys — are only trying deliberately to disillusion themselves ! they hurt themselves, not the star. Surely the world is unpleasant enough without deliberately shattering idols ! The private lives of screen stars are their own affairs, and no one else's business. Probablv Roland Starr is every bit as moral as John Smith, your neighbor. Only if Mr. Smith commits an indiscretion of some sort, few, if any, persons would ever know about it. But Heaven help Roland Starr under the same circumstances ! The papers would shriek out the new-"s in headlines, the Mothers' Clubs would hold indignation meetings, and the showing of Mr. Starr's pictures would be immediately prohibited. There are two diseases from which motion-picture .people suffer — Kleig eyes and limelight eyes. Both are painful, and the last is unfortunately lasting. A'ere Hobart. 15 South Somerset Avenue, Ventnor, N. J. Continued on page 12