The Hawera Star. SATURDAY, JANUARY 2, 1926. THE STEREOSCOPIC SCREEN.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 2 January 1926, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

SATURDAY, JANUARY 2, 1926. THE STEREOSCOPIC SCREEN.

Delivered every evening by S o clock in Hawer3, Manilla, N'ormanby, Okaiawa, Eltliam, Mangatoki, Kuponga, Alton, Hurlayville, Tatea, Wnvcrley, Mokoia, Wlmkamara, Obangai, Moremere, Fraser Hoad, arid \rsr«tß.

Tn the opinion of those qualified to speak with authority, the motion picture stands to-day on the threshold of a, new era. Already it has earned the right- to. he classed as an art, and in thirty-odd years it has advanced from the freak hobby of dabbling inventors to a force of undoubted international importance. Fifty thousand screens, or thereabouts, are scattered over the globe, and the studios of California issue tlieir films in thirty-seven different languages. That i.s to say, titles and sub-titles arc so varied; but the screen itself speaks the universal language. One wouders, in passing, what the grammar and idiom of Hollywood often sufficiently startling to an English audience —may become by the time it reaches the Hindustani or the Norwegian: but that is a digression. “If this is soi with the motion picture as it is to-day, still in its picture-book, story-telling stage, what may the results be when it has enlarged its borders and definitely become the greatest, art of the age?” asks an American writer. He docs not .attempt to answer the query, but contents himself with indicating one fresh development “that will send the art of the screen winging its way into a new realm of beauty and power. ” This is t.lie stereoscopic motion picture, the success of which has been already assured by private demonstration in the States. To this we may add that other and fa) 1 greater advance, the “speaking film,” also an American invention, but at the moment being actively pushed in Australia and New Zealand. Hitherto the artistry of the cinema has been chiefly conspicuous on the photographic side. To explain: An ordinary still photograph is not a work of art in the sense that a painting is; yet photography itself is an art. So the screened motion picture is an artistic production by virtue of the artistry which has gone into its filming; but it does not capture reality sufficiently to make if a work of .art. If, however, colouring and the stereoscopic effect could be introduced jointly, the screen would be revolutionised. Then the art would be in the finished picture. Most of us have recollections of the old hand stereoscope —it- semes to be fast going out of fashion these, days —and 1 of the marvellously natural effects which it produced. If these could he registered on the screen, with also the true colours of the objects photographed, the result would bo almost magical. The flat motion picture as we, know it would disappear, and Nature, in all ker illimitable and entrancing beauty, would stand before us. It would require then but the addition of speech to place the screen where the stage is now. And who will dare say that the stage is any more safe from the advance of motion photography than the concert platform is safe from the, competition of the microphone and the loud speaker?