The Billboard 1924-01-05: Vol 36 Iss 1 (1924-01-05)

JANUARY 5, 1924 The Billboard 37 itussell, Letty Hale, Bernice Speer, Dingle, Patsy Delaney, Walter the Woods Sisters. Other played by Marjorie Lane, Woroths Whitmore, Georce laneroft, Mary Lawlor, Georgie Hale nd Margaret Dumont. “The of O'Reilly” has heen given a sightly production, it is splendidly staged and it is clean. As | said before, it will please a host of people who like bright entertainment, but not too bright. The Liberty Thea ‘Tom isdwin parts and are We 8 tise Rosie ter won't have to seek another tenant for many a month to come. That a pretty safe bet. A fast, clean, entertaining musical comedy; well produced and played. GORDON WHYTE. THEATER, NEW Reginning Tuesday Evening ber 25, 1923 RICHARD HERNDON OLGA PETROVA —In— “HURRICANE” The Story of a Life in Four Episodes By Olga Petrova THE CHARACTERS (As They Appear) YORK Decem rROLIC Presents M 1 Olezewsk! (Deeney)....Camilla Dalberg Masha ....cccccccceccecceses Katharine Roberts John Arkwright......cccccess Lewis Willoughby Richard Peterson.....cee. «Manuel A. Alexander Rose Peterson.....cccccseceeccee Dorothy Ellin BO: wenrvavipecans eoecccoescoocesOeee Petrova Joe Jennings........ eccecccccess Joseph Granby Michael Deeney..... eseeeeePatrick S. Barrett Walter Welch, M. D....ccccccceess-Percy Carr BO ccccckiscaensees eevecccesses-Dan O'Brien “Hurricane”, by, for and with Olga Petrova, is nothing more or less than a collection of dull, droopy monologs, generation-old, on birth control, commercialized vice, love and _ interior decorating. Petrova’s ideas on these subjects might be shocking enough to interest a small-town audience of, say, seven or eight years ago, but to the present-day flapper—if there are any more left—they are as lacking in interest and novelty as the corset. There is little of dramatic action in the play, so it is assumed that Petrova depended upon the “novelty” of her ideas to get the show across to the customers. The first act is not wholly bad. It at least contains one fairly dramatic sequence and holds forth promise of interesting developments in the acts to come. But the dramatic incident referred to is so crudely thettrical in its execution and so muddled by the shrieks, sighs, grunts and yells of the three persons concerned in it that it irritates the spectator, while the promised developments are not forthcoming. This play which Petrova has written concerns the spectacular rise in the world of a peasant girl from Texas, a transplanted Russian. To escape the brutality of her father and the monotony and labor of the farm she runs off to St. Louis with a white slaver, who inducts her into the prostitute’s trade. She goes with him knowing exactly what she may look forward to, but willing to do anything to escape. After two years under the management of her patron she leaves him and goes to Kansas City, where she sets up in “business” for herself. The second act finds her in a cheap Kansas City hotel, where has won the altruistic of a physically deformed surgeon who is engaged in improving her mind that may go with him to New York and climb up another rung of the ladder of life. She leaves her “business” behind her. Five Inter we find her in an expensive hotel in Florida, socially accomplished, financially cessful interior decorator and in turn is loved by a onee, seven vears before, at her Texas cabin when an accident befell his motorcar. He proposes, but she refuses to marry him, telling him quite fully of her past life. He still insists upon marrving her. however. so she telis him to wait three months. The last act finds Ika -that is her name— she friendship so she vears secure—a sucShe loves man who stopped off in her new Long Island home. Her husband-to-be calls upon her, but not before her doctor friend has told her that is suffering from the effects of a contracted in her St. Louis days. So takes morphine and kills herself. There is one advantage movie-reviewing on reviewing plays, and that is that if it is unbearably bad one cun always close his eyes for a moment she disease she has and calm himself. But closing one’s eyes does not shut out a bad play; there are the ears to be considered, and stopping them up requires an effort and is never wholly successful. As far as the acting is concerned, it would be heartless to expect any of those in the supporting cast to be good in such awful parts. H. E. SHUMLIN. IMPERIAL THEATER, NEW YORK Beginning Tuesday (Christmas) Night, December 25, 1923 HAMMERSTEIN New Musical Play “MARY JANE M°KANE” —=With— MARY HAY amd HAL SKELLEY and Lyrics William Cary Duncan and Oscar Hammerstein 2d Music by Herbert Stothart and Vincent Youmans Book Staged by Alonzo Price THE CAST (Characters as they appear) Joe McGillicudy .....ccccccccoseschal Skelley Maggie Murphy ...cccccccccscccocekitty Kelly Mary Jane McKane .....cccccsccccee Mary Hay ARTHUR Presents Books by pool ccercecccccccccccccesmeene Twins get ep ae ecvcccece-Dallags Welford Andrew Dunn, Jr. .....-ceeee-Stanley Ridges OGG TO iwi dat esecdian e+eeeLaura De Cardi Leuls Dye? .ccecces ccccccccccccesce ve Clark George Sherwin ......ecescccceee@uis Morrell Andrew Dunn, Sr. ..........-.-James Heenan Ladies of the Ensemble—Muriel Harrison, Frances Lindell, Dorothy June, Mary Sullivan, Grace LaRue, Lillian Mitchell, Edna Miller, Dorothy Hollis, Ann Buckley, Bobby Pierce, Sunny Saunders, Peggy Quinn, Max Fox, There sa Carroll, Marietta Adams and Grace Culbert. Gentlemen of the Ensemble—Bert Crane, Lester New, Lionel Maclyn, Allan Grey, Eldred Murray, John Wainman, Joe Carey and Harry Howell, “Mary Jane McKane” is placid and harmless, lacking what Carpentier needed to subdue Dempsey and a lot of other things. There were one or two high lights, but when an audience the better part of which paid $3.30 a seat applauds the riding of a wooden hobby horse—well, that’s a different tale! No doubt, however, the bit of childish business was a welcome relief from the preceding inanities. The cast, with one or two exceptions, was atrociously weak, but just what an all-star aggregation could have done ‘With the trite and stereotyped material would be hard to imagine. A lack of imagination must have been responsible for the authors of “Mary Jane McKane” to have fallen back on the old, old story—jit seemed if the the bits of busithe dances, the music and possibly the cast had been in mind before any plot other than the scenery plot was thought of. The may be told in a few words—the country girl who comes to the city—*“her first sight of Broadway"—struggle for a job—small 2x4 room—helpful hand—meets son of the boss—falls in love—separation—disguises herself to be near himthey separate—another girl—final reunion —the clinch kiss and fadeout—and there you are! Starting oft as costumes, ness, story well enough, after a few miniature scenes were flashed with readers to denote motion and build atmosphere, there was shown the interior of a subway car. Details of lighting and various effects added to the naturalness of the episode. The rest of the sets were well devised and suitably constructed—the final flowercovered bower in Central Park. together with the lichting, being pretty but unincidental Of the music one cannot say a great deal—there is only one number that inay become popular, unless I miss my guess, and that is ““‘Toodle-oo. When it comes to the singing—well, when it DOES I'd have to see the show again (which is extremely unlikely’ before I'd believe it. Eva Clark had a few good tones, but just what she was singing about was one of the mysteries of the presentation, I listened attentively, but half way back in the auditorium could not understand one word. The chorus vocally was impossible, and when Mary Hay, the featured player, tried with her tone-deaf, off-key delivery to put over a number it was pathetic. Whoever told Mary she could sing or whoever let her sing should be examined for mental poise. Whoever told Kitty Kelly with her two unblended spots of rouge that she could make up or Eva Clark with her upper evelids plastered with black that she could either should also be placed under observation. If anyone thinks that eyelids overblackened look like aught else but holes from the front he is mistaken. Hal Skelley, the comedian, labored hard—he was one of the best members of the cast, and drew laughs with a breezy style, altho his material was for the most part poor. The Keene Twins should come in for special credit. Not only did they read lines well, but danced in a manner to stop the show and made the only big hit—and the only real hit— of the evening. Kitty Kelly’s reading of lines was amateurish and of the school-girl variety. Dallas Welford, who starred quite a number of years ago in “Mr Hopkinson”, was there with his bluster and his blush. Stanley Ridges gave one of the smoothest performances—he was natural, lifelike and well within the atmosnvhere, in fact he was the best of the cast and the least annoving. Laura De Cardi in the role of Doris Dunn was stiff and constrained. altho the part did not call for much: Louis Morrell in a bit did it most acceptably, as did also James Heenan in another bit. The dances were well devised and better by a good deal than anything else—especially the near-vocalization of Mary Hay, aided and abetted by the “Ladies and Gentlemen of the Ensemble”. This is “Mary Jane McKane’s” “first sight of Broadway”, but unless I miss my guess or the show is fixed up a lot it will be her last. MARK HENRY. APOLLO THEATER, NEW YORK (For Special Matinees) Beginning Thursday, December 27, 1925 FRANK L. TELLER Presents “THE VAGABOND” A Romance of Old Mexico By Wilson Collison Staged by Harry Andrews CHARACTERS {As Yeu Meet Them) Merle Bannister..............e.-..Prurnel Pratt Webbele ccccaccecceceesesccecccsuclee Vee Venture ..... ..-Ann Reader eee eee eee eee. Cherry MacNell.........cccess Anzonetta Lloyd Cactus Joe Wheeler........ Thomas E. Jackson El Capitan Portez............. William Lambert er Louis Bennison Pe ee eee Robert T. Haines Mexican Soldiers, Arizona Rangers. “The Vagabond” is pretty much the regulation play of Old Mexico, with hoof-beats on the desert, gunplay. adobe hut, guitars in the moonlight anda “bad man”. It runs true to form in these particulars and does not depart much from the traditions in its situations. The story is of a murderer who escapes from Arizona with a girl singer from the local saloon. The gunman rides over the Mexican border and the action takes place in a hut there. By and by the bad man of the neighborhood turns up, generally maltreats the murderer, fights the sheriff who is look ing for him, and in the end gets the girl. None of this is told with any great dramatic skill and there is little thrill to the play. Essentially a melodrama, the action is so devised that suspense and punch are almost entirely absent. In other words, this is one of those melodramas that is one in name only. Truth to tell, the author does not call it such. He terms it a “romance” and it may be that, for all I know. Whatever it is, it is not very entertaining The cast is not one calculated to get the most out of the piece, anyway Anzonetta Lloyd, who is the girl in the case, is never convincing. She has a weak method, where this role calls for vigorous treatment if it is to »mount to anything at all; she never develops a character out of the part. Louis Bennison, as the vagabond himself, plays the part with a deal of suavity. It is not exactly in his line, but he manages it rather well. Purnel Pratt is excellent as the fugitive from justice, and Robert T. Haines is a convincing sheriff. Thomas FE. Jackson has a comedy role and extracts a few laughs from it, while Marie Vulray, Ann Reader and William Lambert do well enough with other «nd lesser parts. Scenery and costuming are excellently done; the staging is all right. The play itself is mostly what is the matter with “The Vagabond”. It is not enough different from the other plays of this kind to create much of a stir; nor as good as the best of them. It is neither good nor bad. Call it a mixture of both. Good and bad in spots, as a play; same as to acting. GORDON WHYTE. WHAT THE NEW YORK CRITICS SAY “The Wild Westcotts” (Frazee Theater) HERALD: “Ranges from very good to pretty good and more than once to only fair.’"’—Alexander Woollcott. TRIBUNE: “The play was not really a play and not very successful as entertainment.” TIMES: “It is a bright and rollicking comedy for most of its length.”’ POST: “A fairly amusing but noisy edy.’” com “The Rise of Rosie O'Reilly” (Liberty Theater) TRIBUNE: “A clean, jolly show.” WORLD: “A good show, tut it is not Mr. Cohan at his high level best.”’ TIMES: “It is just a workmanlike and brisk entertainment, with the dancing its out standing feature, and breaking out here and there with bits of Cohanesque kidding."’ POST: “It is first-rate entertainment for eye and ear."* “Neighbors” (48th Street Theater) WORLD: “The play, in cur judgment, is the most unhappy experiment which the Equity Players have yet made.’’—Heywood Broun. TIMES: “Once more Mr. Cunningham has given us a play well constructed, motivated and soberly characterized."’—John Cor freshly “There are odds and ends of Mr. Cunningham's play, but it gets out breath early in the evening and much of the time thereafter it seems rancous, reiterative and monotonous.’’—Alexander Woollcott. TRIBUNE: “Seems to be one of those dramas which some will like and others won't.” —Perey Hammond. laughter in oO f “Mary Jane McCane” (Imperial Theater) “That Miss Hay can dance only 2 should not in headline honors in WORLD: little and sing e, wavy detract from piece."—L. S. AMERICAN: “The offering is long and unsubstantial. It was like a George Cohan story gone qnite wrong. and every time the girls appeared, as, of course, they did in the many they seemed to dragged in oy the heeis.—Alan Dale. EVENING POST: “‘The whole thing was a palpable and well-deserved hit and should bave a long "—C. P. S. MAIL: ‘There were o few brief when one almost wished he had re any her the choruses, be ret ty career FVENING Moments (Continued om page &7) ASRS TT RT ee a ae