HEALTH OF STAGE

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 81, 6 April 1933, Page 11

HEALTH OF STAGE

CONTRARY VIEWS

VOGUE OF THE "TALKIES'

COLISEUM GOES OVEE

(From "The Post's" Representative.) LONDON, February 16. . Two weeks ago The Coliseum reverted to a variety programme, following the splendid spectacular successes of "AVhite Horse Inn" and "Casanova." Genee was one of the "stars" of the change over, ballet being a special feature of the new programmes.- Public enthusiasm was immense. This week comes the bomb-shell announcement from Sir Oswald Stoll that The Coliseum ia, early in March, to become a picture house. For its wonderful revolving stage there will now be no use.

Explaining his reasons for the sudden decision, Sir Oswa.d states: ''Pictures are very popular with the public. The majority of the pictures aru excellent entertainment. That is, sufficient reason' for their popularity, but it is not the reason' why so many places of entertainment are obliged to abandon the human programme for the mechanical one. The stage theatre is in a parlous state. Unless new companies can be formed with capital to be loat in the employment of human actors, it will not be able to carry on. The shadows of the screen will put the fleah and blood actor out of business.

"This is not becauso everybody prefers the screen to the stage. It is because every, theatre is being driven to find the form of entertainment for which the least amount of cash has to be paid out, through saving of wages, salaries, special expenses, and general upkeep. The public cannot afford, to pay for all these necessaries at the present time. TAXATION AND COSTS. "Through taxation the costs of most businesses are very high compared with the total amount of money that can be obtained in actual prices for the product which has to be sold. But in running a theatre, part of the sum yielded in prices has to bo added to the coats, even though the whole of the money paid by the public may show % heavy loss on the trading.

"If the costs are £1000, and the total receipts are £800, .there is a loss of £200 without regard to entertainment duty. But here this duty steps in. It represents 17 per cent, to 20 per cent, of the receipts. This reduces the £800 by £136 or £160, making the actual loss £336 or £360; but the real depletion of the theatre is £472 or £520 in cash. The costs have become £1136 or £1160, and the prices £664 or £640.

"On the other hand, if, at times, profits are made, which might cover some of the losses, they are prevented from doing so by a heavy income tax. The companies I represent have paid nearly £3,000,000 in this iniquitous duty.; This has been paid in cash, the one thing that is vitally necessary for carrying. on the activities of fixed capital buildings like theatres. The Government looks at the duty through a false perspective. The returns to the Treasury do not materially decrease; for years they rose as the numbers of cinemas increased. Consequently, the Treasury imagines that all is well with this duty. ADDING TO UNEMPLOYMENT. "It is nevertheless killing individualised entertainment. It is killing the. vocation of the actor, and as a cqn-i sequence it is killing tho vOdatlon from which the majority of the stars of the screen must be drawn. It is, therefore, tending insidiously to kill tho screen. Meanwhile, it is adding to the unemployment of this coiirtry. Hundreds of artists, musicians, skilled and unskilled stage workers, and engineers, will lose their occupation when The Coliseum has to sacriii.se its wonderful stage to the screen.

"With, great reluctance the decision was made to abandon the human programme for the mechanical one. But after fully considering the matter we feel we have no alternative. The same business on lower overhead expenses •will, I hope, yield a profit."

The theatre has a real grievance in the entertainment tax, said Sir Oawald. On Monday a petition against the tax, signed by practically all the important' actors and actresses in this country, Was handed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. REPLY IN DENIAL. In the "Daily Telegraph" Mr. G. W. Bishop replies to Sir Oswald Stoll, denying the contention that the "stage is in a parlous state." The general feeling, he says, is that the "flesh and blood" theatre is in a healthier state than-it has been for some time, and he proceeds to quote authority to support this. Here are Mr., Charles B. Cochran's views:—

i "When tie produced 'White Horse Inn,^ Sir Oswald Stoll told the British public that he had rescued the British, theatre by means of a German masterproducer who had-evolved a synthetic process of scenery, three-dimensional stages, harmonies of light, music, and literature.

*'After 'Waltzes from Vienna,' Sir Oswald Stoll went to America, and in an interview said that the secrets of his success were a scientific financing of each of his productions, bracketed withthe engagement of masters in each department for the process of production. I gathered from the interview that with these precautions failure was impossible. I do not quarrel with these earlier statements of Sir Oswald Stoll. But I strongly resent his entirely unjustifiable statement which appears today. ■

"Only a few days ago a manager who had experimented in the West End with poor revivals of worn-out plays, attributed his financial losses to the fact that interest in the theatre was finished. Now, these statements are as damaging as they are untrue. Sir Oswald was cock-a-hoop when he had success, and then conditions in the theatre generally wero far worse than they are now. In 'White Horse Inn' he had -a fifty-year-old play which has been known as the 'Charley's Aunt' of Central Europe. In whatever form it has been plaj'ed, either as a straight play or with a littlo music, with lavish production or with stock scenery, it has been successful.

" 'Casanova.' was a different proposition. In Berlin it enjoyed nothing like the financial prosperity of 'White Horse Inn/ despite the fact that it had a potent attraction in Michael Bohnen, a German singer whose popularity is only second to that of Tauber. THE "SOMETHING" THAT APPEALS. "I am the last one to acclaim 'White Horse Inn' as a great work of art, or to agree with Sir Oswald that Erik Charell, capable showman that he is, ■brought anything new to the theatre, Tiut it had that-'something' which appeals to great masses of people and which we are all looking for. 'Cavalcade' was a costly production and made a lot of money. 'The Miracle' was a costly production and lost a lot of money. But one had the elements the public wanted and the other had not. "So fax from theatrical business being moribund, I venture to assert emphatically that tho theatre today is more prosperous than any other luxury business —it always has been and it always will be. The only difference today ;is that audiences, thank good-

ness, are more discriminating. They ! want the best of every kind, and they don't want any ono kind more than another. 'Jit is a fallacy to say, 'You must give the- public what it wants.' How should it know what it wants? It only knows what it likes when it sees it. A great spectacle, a small farce, a burlesque, a satirical comedy, a melodrama have equal chances of success if they 'are good of their kind. "ILLOGICAL" STATEMENT. "There are several plays in London which are doing admirable business. My two current productions, 'Dinner at Eight' and 'Mother of Pearl' were sold out last night. 'The Streets of London' is crowding the Ambassadors, 'The Dubarry' is still doing big figures at His Majesty's. lam told that 'Richard of Bordeaux' is selling out every night at the New, and that Mr. Novello's two plays, 'Flies in the Sun' arid 'Fresh Fields,' are flourishing at the Playhouse and the Criterion respectively. Another play which I hear is doing most satisfactory business is 'The Green Bay Tree' at the St. Martin's. ' "I may have omitted some successes, but I am mentioning those of which I havo direct knowledge. They, make a formidable list, and could not well be of a more varied character. "A statement such as Sir Oswald Stoll's, emanating from a man of Ms importance in our industry, is extremely harmful as well as being entirely illogical, bearing in mind his previous pontifical pronouncements in his halcyon days of big box-office receipts." The Drury Lane management states that Sir Oswald StolFs doleful remarks find no echo at that thoatre, and a similar* view is expressed by Mr. Bronson Albery, who is a director of the New, Wyndham's, and Criterion theatres. ____________