THE MOVIE WORLD STUDIO & SCREEN

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16923, 23 December 1922, Page 5

THE MOVIE WORLD STUDIO & SCREEN

NOTICE TO CORRESPONDENTS. Correspondents desirous of having questions answered in the current issue are requested to see that their communications ere delivered at this office not later than Tuesday afternoon. The Sheik.—Thanks for card. Your interesting contribution will appear next week. Queen of Sheba.—Tho scene mentioned is an exact replica of the famous painting. Betty Blythe. Reference is made in my notes to the picture. Flapper.—The cast of “ The Sheik '* is as fallows:—Diana Mayo. Agnes Ayres; i-'heili Ahmed Ben Hassan, Rudolph Valentino: Raoul de Saint Hubert, Adolphe Menjou; Omair. "Walter Long: Ga3ton, Lucien Littlefield; Youpsef, George Wagner; Slave Girl. Ruth Miller; Sir Aubrey Mayo, F. E. Butler. A.i Orphan.—The cast of “ Orphans of the Storm" is:—Henriette Girard, Lillian Gish: Louise. Dorothy Glsh; Chevalier de V.itulray, Joseph Schildkraut; Count de 1 : r.icres. Frank Losee; Countess de Lini res. Catherine Emmett; Marquis do Treble, Morgan Wallace; Mother Frochard. Lucella La Verne; Jacques Frofhard, Sheldon Lewis; Pierre Frochard, Frank Puglia: Pioard, Creighton Hale; ."acquer-Forget-Not, Leslie King; Danton. Monts Blue: Robeanierre, .Sidney Her-l-crt; King Louis 3TVI., Leo Kolmer; Tho Doctor. Adolph Lestina; Sister Genevieve, Kate Bruce. Tho “ Movie Man 99 wishes his numerous readers a merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year. The manager of the Queen’s Theatr ’ informs me that his contract with the 1 *Yx Film Corporation, has been renew ed and that ho will have the rights of production over tho firm’s complete output. Amongst the pictures liste t for release arc:—“ The hast Mail,” *• Silver Wings,” ‘‘Monte Oristo.” “ A Fool There Wan.” “ A Little Child Shall Lead Them,” “Nero,” and “If Winter Comes.”

(BY “

“ THE MOVIE MAN.")

seen to be realised Tt is a stupendous production—that word about fits the case. Magnificent scenes are flashed on the screen, enormous crowds are engaged in the massed effects, there are two exciting chariot races which were filmed from racing motor cars, tho sets are constructed with the most careful attention to detail and are wonderful to behold, and all round the acting is high-class. Picture patrons on no account should miss this great production when it comes to Christchurch, as it will about the middle of January. An under-water craft as a pirate ship is something quite new. Such a pirate submarine furnishes the motive of the •plot of “ Wet Gold,” the new .T. E. V, illiamson photoplay, produced by tin* Submarine Film Corporation and distributed by Goidwyn. The picture unfolds one of the most fascinating stories of adventure ever photographed. It shows how a submarine actually works order water both from the outside ami horn the inside. Divers without any air line —the new diver’s helmets carrying an hour’s oxygon supply— are seen to walk out into the ocean until they disappear from view, and then to continue along the floor of the sea to the si - .bmerged submarine. “Wet Gold,* which is a human drama that takes place on land, on water and under the surface of the sea, is on the current programme at the Liberty Thentre. Bex Beach has been engaged by Bara mount to write stories for Thomas Mcighan. Betty Compson and Bert Lytell are to have the leading parts in “ To Have and to Hold.” Mary Johnston’s famous romance of the early days of Virginia n: the time of King James 1. “The Red Be acock” featuring the; famous Pol a Negri, which was screen- j

I understand the teal trouble between the Harts came up over money matters (says an Ameiican writer). Mrs. Hart had prodigal ideas and Bill had not. In June, about four months before the baby was born, they agreed upon a separation. Bill gave Mrs Hart 103.000 dc liars and placed 100.000 dollars in a trust fund, the interest of which was to be paid to the baby upon hi* arrival. In addition to this, he settled an income of 100 dolars per week upon his motlier-in-law for the period of one year. I understand that Bill’s adventure of less than a year in matrimony cost him something in the neighbourhood of 700,000 dollars. What brings the tears to Bill’s eyes, however, is not the money but a- clause written in Mrs Hart’s handwriting at the end of the contract of separation which provides that she 13 to have sole custody forever ot the baby. All stories to the contrary notwithstanding, I know that Bill Hart is heart-broken over the whole affair—especially over the separation from the , baby which lie was not allowed to see , • for a week after its arrival. He in- ■ tends very soon to begin making an- j oilier picture There is a great wave of films dealing with the shortcomings of wives (writes a London critic). “ Foolish Wives,” “ Don’t Neglect Your Wife,” ‘ Why Change Your Wife?” “Too Wise Wives,” “ His Other Wife,” “ A | Wife’s Awakening,” ‘‘ What’s a Wife • Worth?” “A Sportsman’s M ife,’ are [ a’l among current films, and are now j followed by • ‘ Rich Men’s Wives,” shown at the Alhambra Theatre, London. This liighly-spiced specimen of j American film confectionery concerns a I husband who is too busy to give liis | wife affection, with the result that she j is “singed in the flame of flirtation, • and estranged from him.” They are 1 eventually reunited through the agency of their little boy, one of tlio.se insuf- j ferablv angelic children invented by j Mrs F. Hodgson Burnett and adopted j wholesale by American producers. No enemy of the United States could have produced a greater libel on that country than “Rich Men’s Wives.” Not even in American “society” would they take a sick child out of bed and stand him in a fountain to pose as Cupid for a company of semi-intoxicated drivellers. A film of which the villain lias “ smouldering eves,” and of which the hero “ takes two hours to choose a horse and one glance to choose a wife.” cannot be regarded as a serious contribution to any discussion. The representative of one of the big American producing firms recently gave his reasons for the falling off in the attendances at motion picture theatres. Ho said: “ My experience with exhibitors has convinced me- that the motion picture business is going through a perod of readjustment just like all other businesses, which boomed during the period of prosperity and extravagance due to the war. During this period, which was abnormal, many new and pretentious motion picture houses v. er© built throughout the country. It was a time when tremendous amounts of money were made by owners of motion picture theatres. I know several proprietors of mediocre houses who cleaned up around a quarter of a million dollars in a short period. There was a rush to build theatres. As a

result the seating capacity in many cities and towns lias doubled within the past year. And there haven’t been enough people to fill all the seats, or even to pay expenses of the extra theatres. Also, it’s true that people haven’t the money to spend that they had in the era of bloated earnings. The and the theatre manager who has the goods will survive. That is, the exhibitor who knows his business and is able to meet normal business demands will make money just as he did before the war. “ Beople are not 1 tired ’ of going to see pictures. But where business is split up among too many theatres it isn't surprising that some of them are having a hard struggle to survive.” “ ROBIN HOOD.” HIGH PRAISE FOR FAIRBANKS PICTURE. When the last American mail to hand left New York, the big attraction for movie patrons there was Douglas Fairbanks’s “ Robin Hood,” which al ready had been screened at Hollywood. i make the following extracts front criticisms in newspapers and niaga- “ Robin Hood ” is by far the outstanding production of the year—and one of the very greatest contributions to the advance of motion pictures as

an art. Douglas Fairbanks is to be congratulated and highly praised. The premiere ot Douglas Fairbanks’s biggest picture proved the most remarkable event of its kind ever staged in this neck of the woods. It resembled a real first- night of a famous stage ptay in New York. Every celebrity here paid tribute at- the premiere of ‘ Robin Hood,” which also marked the opening of Sid Grauman’s new Hollywood Egyptian Theatre. The consensus of opinion among the motion picture folk, as well as tho public, hails ‘ Robin Hood” as one of the really great and worth-while motion pictures. Outside of D. W. Griffith’s “The Birth of a Nation,” I have never known a picture to be so unanimously acclaimed by professionals, who are ever a critical

lot. “Dong” reveals himself in “Robin Hood” as an actor of unsuspected power—and I have an uncanny idea that he has unconsciously acquired two or three of Mary Bickford's mannerisms, which is laudable and not to he wondered at. Enid Bennett is ex- i quisite as the “Maid Marian,” while the acting honours go to Wallace Beery as the beloved Richard the Lion-heart-ed, and Sam de Grasse as the sinister and villainous Prince John. There is food for pride in the New York premiere of “ Robin Hood.” both because of the picture and because of the premiere itself. The spontaneous enthusiasm of the crowds that packed the Lyric Theatre and the mob that jammed the street outside is a tonic to a film man’s occasionally shaken faith. The deep appeal and strong mill of the motion picture still exist. There i=i no necessity lie re to discuss “Robin Hood” as a picture. Tho reviews can

do that —ami then they seem futile and useless —for a Fairbanks picture hag become a Fairbanks picture. There’s no other guarantee needed. But of “ Robin Hood ” as an epic of courage, of sinj cerity. of devotion to an art too much cannot be said. They say that the truly great artist always feels within him a gratitude towards his art and the opportunities it has given him. We can well imagine “ Robin Hood ” being conceived and created in gratitude—from Douglas Fairbanks to the motion picture. We had hotter stop —before we start raving. Douglas Fairbanks’s latest photoplay, “Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood,” opened at Cohan’s Grand Opera House. Chicago, to great crowds that it was necessary to call tlic police reserves to

quell, so anxious were they to get into the theatre. That the public liked “Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood ” was amply demonstrated bv the frequent and prolonged outbursts of applause as the scenes were flashed across the silver-sheet. And the- reviewers for the Chicago newspapers, were in hearty and unanimous accord with the public viewpoint. WORN-OUT FILMS. “ What becomes of the old films after their picture service lias ended?” is >j question that has . come to many a small-town movie goer who has sat through films in which the actors seemed to be playing in a steady downpour of rain, so persistent were the

scratches in the emulsion (says the ‘ • New York Tribune Such films would seem to be ready for retirement. Lu fact, they may have been retired by the companies which produced them, but film pirates may have secured possession. In that case, a film, no matter how scratched and battered, must go on furnishing more or less dubious entertainment to the multitude. Perhaps the pirates ship it abroad, and the dwellers in China get the idea that the thunderstorms in America are ‘‘velly bad.’* What happens to the retired film, as o rule, however, is complete destruction, after the silver in the emulsion on it« surface lias been salvaged. A production which may have cost 1.000.000d0l to produce is turned over

to the mercies of a Lord High Executioner, who is armed with that simplest but most effective of all implements—an axe. A series of heavy blows —and cutting through solid celluloid is no easy matter —and the marvellous production of “ The Sin that was not ' Hers,” which gave employment to half of Hollywood and opened on Broadway at 2dol, with a special, orchestra, has been hacked in pieces which are guaranteed not to fit any motion picture machine. Each reel, of about 1000 ft, is cut into four pieces. Merely chipping the film part way through will net serve, as the film so cut can be patched up. The wa-vs of film pirates are marvellous, and the companies and exchanges have to exercise every precaution, in junking their discarded, material, to see that everything is made hopeless for exhibition i>urpo6es. Thousands of dollars

have been made through this pirated film which v»i started for the junk pile but never arrived. Probably 90 per cent of tho junked film in this country is sent to Newark, to the film of Emile Snyder and Go., who are the most important salvagers of film by-product. There is little use for the celluloid itself, the chief salvage being the nitrate of silver used in the emulsion. The celluloid, after the silver has been soaked off, is bn rued. From ten to fifteen tons of junked film is de stroyed every week by the Newark firm mentioned. From 125 to 140 ounces of silver to the ton are salvaged from the old film. There is little use for the celluloid. A very small amount is used in making imitation leather. Some is used also in making film cement by dissolving the celluloid in acetone. Bur. most of the mutilated celluloid goes into the flames after the emulsion has been removed. Each reel, about 100 ft, weighs 51b, of which the emulsion represents a very few ounces. A new reel of positive film coate at wholesale about 40dol, printed and packed, which, of course, is exclusive of the studio cost of production. The studio costa are what send film production into the “ staggering ” class. Producing negatives may cost from 2000dol for a one-reel cheap comedy to about J.000.000d0l for a spectacular production of twelve reels’ playing length. These finished productions may be the result of from three to one hundred reels of shots, trimmed down to playing length. AH the “trimmings” go into the junk pile first-hand, of course. The . finished reels must serve their term in edifying the public until they reach that stage where patching ceases to be a virtue. Then comes the inevitable for the comedians, tragedians, trained animals. animated cartoons. educational pictures, news scenes and seenles.