"CURSE OF BEAUTY."

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21136, 19 March 1932, Page 11 (Supplement)

"CURSE OF BEAUTY."

MORE CHARACTER REQUIRED.

EFFECT OF'TALKING PICTURES.

Little, by little films are exorcising th.e Wrse of beauty ,which hampered the acting of .film stairs in the days of silent nlras, Writes Mr. E. A. Bang ham in the News Chronicle. The necessity of,talking, has gradually created -a- new" schooi of acting. When the orchid-like ladies of the screen had only to pose, or at the most to show how prettily pearllike tears could course down their lovely cheeks, when their cupid-bow lips had but' to curi in well-controlled anguish, and their figures were adroitly posed in graceful lines, then they were indeed dreams of beauty. How- much of the popularity of the silent films rested on that beauty! Came the day (as sub-titles put it) when these paragons of pose had to talk. Even when their voices were pleasant and not too American, the act of speaking upset all their mannerisms. They were no longer expensive godbut ordinary mortals, and the acting which the speaking of dialogue demands either destroyed their beauty or was destroyed by it. The real actress then came into her •wn. A woman of mature age (judged by film standards) climbed to the top of the tree. Ruth Chatterton was a stage actress and in the old days of the silent films would, have been considered too old for a film star. But. she made good at once in talking films' because she is an actress, and had Jearned.her job on the stage. « Marlene Dietrich, a fascinating woman, bnt not in the very first flush of youth, luddenly conquered Hollywood. She, like Ruth, Chatterton, had had stjige experience. 5 These two actresses made the old silent stars seem wooden and inexpressive. Greta Garbo, in spite of her odd, guttural voice, is gradually mastering the new medium but the strange elusiveness cf . her- face is disappearing. Before she spoke she seerned a. goddess come down to live on a commonplace earth. Sometimes the talking has improved a film star's position. That is the case with Constance Bennett, but she is an exception, and probably could not do herself full justice in films that required nothing more from an a.ctress than the power of posing and of facing a close-up camera without flinching. Our popular Tallulah Bankhead is a much better actress on the stage' than she is on the screen. She has had to conform to the cult of beauty; the curse is on her as on Elissa Landi. Even Ruth Chatterton is not exempt,., and Greta Garbo would not be if she were ft woman who could be compelled to be ather than herseJf. . - It is interesting to wonder what the two Talmadges, Norma and, Constance, would .

have done it the dialogue film had como into being earlier in their careers, for both *fe fine actresses.

Films must really rise above the ideal of static beauty if they are to accomplish anything as dramatic art. For the truth is few of the great actresses have been beautiful in the ordinary sense. Ellen Terry in .her prime was a vision of loveliness, it is true, but her face, with its decided and exaggerated features, would "ot have passed.a camera test for beauty. Nor would Sarah Bernhardt, fie jane or Saraji- Siddons (-handsome-as. she,was).. In later days, Mrs. Patrick Campbell &nd. Irene Vanbrugh, two of the best of pur,actresses, would not have satisfied the ideals of the film-fan. None of these Cantons stage players relied on mere beauty °f face. They had character and individuality. and when they acted in emotional denes' they did not think first of all of whether they reached some inhuman Standard of beauty. Jn films, acting is continually being spoiled bv having to bear the;primeval curse of beauty.