Screenland (Oct 1923-Mar 1924)

Production Moving Eastward Eastward Moves Production HOLLYWOOD has been stirred as by a rugged California earthquake through the recent discussions in producing circles that motion picture production is steadily shifting Eastward. Theie is no question but that a percentage of screenplay making is moving towards the Atlantic. Hollywood, however, will always be a Western center of film making, because of its ideal location, its atmospheric conditions and its proximity to so much diversified scenic background. But we doubt that it will continue to be the ultimate center of the screenplay. Celluloid stars are beginning to realize that the narrow confines of a small motion picture colony is limiting to development and work. There is no doubt that the moral handcuffs slipped upon the community by a certain so-called uplift element has been galling to artistic temperament. Then, too, there is the very vital fact that the screenpiay is becoming more international every day. Directors are invading foreign lands to get correct backgrounds and to broaden their viewpoints. Hollywood will always be Hollywood — but it will not long continue to be the capitol of moviedom, despite all the vast amount of monev invested within its borders. How the Films are Migrating IN a single year the actual production of feature negatives in California will have shrunk about fifteen per cent. And this shrinkage will doubtless go on. In 1922 California is said to have done about 85 per cent of actual production of scieenplays in America. Fourteen per cent, or practically all of the remainder, was made in and about New York. In 1923 the Eastern production has increased to 22 per cent in the making of screen features and, in 1924, it is expected to increase to about 30 per cent. In other words some $40,000,000 wiH be spent in production in New York, against $19,600,000 in 1922. The actual figures of 1922 are interesting, in the light of subsequent events. In that year 680 feature films and some 1,400 short subjects weie made in the neighborhood of Hollywood. This meant the expenditure of $119,000,000 in the production of feature dramas and about $7,500,000 in the construction of short films, principally comedies. At the present moment there are twenty-four big studios in and about Hollywood, with a valuation of $24,000,000. And at this writing there are nine big active studios in or in close proximity to New York. Their valuation must run well around $15,000,000. Meanwhile the star of production steadily moves Eastward. ' Hollywood seems to have passed its peak in 1922. Acting vs. Types 1 'sjHE movement Eastward will have an invigorating effect upon the making of screenplays in more ways than one. It will help the silent drama histrionically, Production in and about New York — the means It will mean further that directors can employ actors rather than types for parts, all of which can not fail to improve the acting standards of the screen drama. The type has been too long a menace to the film play. Cold Shoulders for Newcomers I A AST month we commented upon Mary Pickford's ten commandments for a person contemplating the screen ^as a career. The commandments made the screenplay ^* practically prohibitive for everyone save a wealthy genius, if such a being exists. Doubtless Los Angeles has been over-run with would-be actors and actresses from every pait of the countiy. Doubtless the measure of ability among these adventurers has been pretty low. Yet filmdom should find some way to weed out the competents from among this army. Let us suppose for instance, that the various magazine editors decided to ban all incoming manuscripts — and to return all of them unread owing to the low level of the contributions. Certainly human contributions deserve more consideration than typewritten ones. The recent Los Angeles agitation against these adventurers seems to us to be wholly ill judged. If Los Angeles had its way, these newcomers would be turned back at the ra stations and returned to their homes forthwith. Still, Los Angeles, having reaped a golden reward from the movie, ought to be able to bear the accompanying pena One of them is the horde of seekers for celluloid success. The fame rush of '24, as it were. Anyway, the screen needs some of these adventurers. Where else will it find the stars of tomorrow? The Stage vs. the Screen M' anyway stage center of New York and, indeed, of the world that thousands of competent actors are always available ■AURICE TOURNEUR, the director, made a flying trip to New York recently from the placid confines of Hollywood and . declared, just as he departed, that the films had the footlights beaten in every way. "The stage," said Monsieur Tourneur, "makes no real effort for realism, Nowhere have I seen a fraction of filmdom's careful ! effort after lighting effects and details of setting." Yet, puzzles Monsieur Tourneur, these same people who go to the theatre and accept the tawdry make-shift realism of the stage will persist in looking down upon the movie. The director went on to point out the lack of realism in the footlight success, Rain, that popular tale laid in the South Seas in the rainy season. "It rains only now and then from the roof edge," Tourneur lamented. "The painted scenery a foot away is perfectly dry. And yet audiences accept this as a fine staging of tropical rains." Tourneur, it seems to us, has hit upon one of the very manifest weaknesses of the film drama in his statement. This very near-perfection of the screenplay in lighting and setting has caused directors to forget the vital thing of the silent play, the drama itself. Rain, for instance, is a terrific and searching analysis of a woman's soul. The lashing lain of the tropics is properly subordinated. The movie has been worshipping at the feet of false gods. We have too much mechanical perfection and too little genuine life on our screen. 1 ;