THEY STILL TWINKLE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17182, 27 October 1923, Page 1 (Supplement)

THEY STILL TWINKLE.

STARS WHO SURVIVE.

(Harry Carr in “Motion Picture Magazine.”)

Now that the dust of disaster has settled down, these stars are found to be the sole survivors:—Gloria Swanson, .Pola Negri, Thomas Meighan, Douglas Fairbanks, jun. The Paramount firmament has been ruthlessly swept of all the other twinklers. Hereafter Bebe Daniels, Jack Holt, Agnes Ayres. Alary Miles Minter and all the other stars of larger or lesser magnitude in the movie planetary system will cease to function ; from now on they are just actors. The newspaper writers have given first one account and then another of the ruling from the conning towers of the groat Paramount headquarters. Jesse L. Lasky said lie didn’t say what they said he said ; so L went out to ask him what he really did say regarding this sad massacre of the stars. And this is what he said . “We can’t make stars or unmake them; we can put an actor's name in big type on a screen. We can say ‘ Miss Jennie Two Shoes in Hearts Asunder’; but that, alas, doesn’t make her a star. It is only the public that can make stars. And the public lia,s spoken with an accent than can’t be questioned. Through the box office returns they have elected the stars you have named.” “ What do you mean by a star?” I asked. Mr Lasky said that, for him. the term “ star ” meant an actress of such direct appeal that the public came to see her rather than the play. “ Why did these stars survive as stars rather than girls like Bebe Daniels ?” “ Frankly T don’t know,” said Mr Lasky. “ All I know is that these actors are the only ones chosen by the public for stardom; that’s the final answer.” In the c'ase of Gloria Swanson, the answer is not difficult to seek—and find. The movie public is sick to the point of nausea of Pollyaimas. There hafve been too many namby-pamby stories and too many sweety sweety heroines. Gloria has never been a -Pollyanna. When you go to see Gloria Swanson, you can be reasonably certain you are not going to be washed in maudlin tears. On the contrary you are going to see a rather scornful young lady who gets through the inevitable sentimental slobber of the scenario writers with a sort of practical. downright, matter-of-fact air that saves you from sea-sickness. Gloria has other attractions. She has a strange beauty that is of style rather than symmetry of face. If vou

pick Gloria’s face to pieces, there isn’t a great deal of beauty there ; but the ensemble is pleasing. There is nothing of the pinky whity beauty about Gloria. She has a beautiful figure and style. Gloria s a god actress but not a great artiste ; and 1 don’t suppose she makes any claim to be. What makes her a star is. in fact, because she isn’t a great artiste. In other words, the public comes to see Gloria sort of glorying around rather than to see her take the part of sonic mimic character in a story. To the end. and at all times, she is defiantly and unmistakably and unchangeably Gloria. Fans sav they go to see her clothes; but you can be sure they wouldn’t go to see anybody else in those same clothes. Somewhat the same thing is true of Pola Negri. Only there is more to Pola—and less, if vou look at her from another angle. There is tlii s abo.;* Pola as contrasted with our Pollyanna girls of the screen. No woman can bo thoroughly fascinating unless she carries the suggestion of being disagreeable. When you see such a one on the screen, you always think unconsciously to yourself: 4 "She was very sweet and lovely to ns to-night, but T’ll bet she will he as mean as Satan to the audience that comes to see the picture tomorrow night.” It. flatters you. Pola has just such a potentiality of temperament. But this is only the superfical attraction of Pola Negri. Above all other considerations, she is a great actress. In a certain type of parts she is the foremost dramatic artiste of this generation. Her start in American pictures was unlucky. “ Bella Donna ” was a very bad picture, and she did some wretched work in it. This was partly because the character iself was impossible; partly because she is not adapted to the part of a society woman with the ai-tificial conventions with which we imagine society life to bo surrounded ; partly because the producers had cold feet and forced he,- to turn Robert Hichen’s heroine into a weak. tea, Pollyannised imitation of the original character. T n m told that while they were making the picture, there was a convention of film salesmen in Hollywood. They saw part of the picture as made ; yelled murder -at its frankness ; the picture was stopped and denatured for the Pollyanna trade. In spite of that fizzle, which she cheerfully admits herself. Pola just “has it. 5 She has temperament and personality. The minute she comes on

the screen, you know something has happened. Nothing finer has ever been shown on the screen than some parts of “ Passion ” and “Gipsy Love.” On the whole, I think it could be said that Pola is the star by right of conquest. She is arrogant, selfish, inconsiderate. impei’ious, lazy, and utterly ruthless. But she is a great artiste. Tommy Meighan’s appeal is not so easily analysed. He is a good actor and an attractive personality : but there are other actors who would seem to be nearly of equal attraction. The box office, however, has given the answer. The American public has picked Tommy as a star. They just like him and that’s all there i.s to that. Oddly enough, the reason they like him is just the opposite ot the reason that they rave over Valentino. Tommr is about as exotic as an income tax collector. Girls go to see Valentino because ne is a vicarious adventure. They go to see Tommy becar.se he is a big brother. Men likoj him because lie is a companionable, genuine big feliow—a good scout. And Tommy Meighan has an Irish heart and that is why he is one of the stars who survived. Douglas Fairbanks. Junr.. is quite' another matter. He represents merely a trade trick : and not a very fair or ethical trade trick at that. So much for stars that Paramount salvaged. There are other studios of the same mind. Very few of the other big studios which release programme pictures have them. Goldwyn, with its big programme of pictures has grabbed the contract of all the well-known actors that niGney could buy hut makes stars of none of them. Norma Talmadge, Mae Murray. Charlie Chaplin. Mary Pickford, Harold Lloyd. Douglas Fairbanks. Lillian Gish. Dick Barthelmess aro stars and always will he. Most of those named make their own pictures and finance thorn through their own banking arrangements. They make special pictures for audiences that have learned to wait for them. They are hardly a case in point. Of those named, Norma Talmadge probably Iras had .the most- devoted following. Norma has a vivid and interesting personality and of all American horn actresses is the best with the possible exception of Lillian Gish. Her great weakness has been the wrong kind of stories. Mae Murray is usually considered to be the surest and safest box office bet on the screen. Her appeal i\ based upon a curious foundation. All her pictures are posters. Every story, every set,-every situation is frankly artificial. Mae shows life as it “ ain’t.’ She is the poster girl of the screen. In her personal life she is about as far from her pictures as it would be possible t-o be. The real Mae Murray in private life is a grave,

dignified, self-contained, studied, aloof personality. She is very charming and gracious hut you always feel that you are talking to her across a great gulf. She does not show the public the real Mae Murray. Bhe does not show the public a real anything. She shows them a dashing pastel done in daring colours of a girl with a verywhite lace and beautiful legs. Her stories are like the colour designs or foreign art magazines. She is the nouveaux acts adapted for the arisen public. Lillian Gish has attained and will retain stardom to the end by the sheer force of merit. Of all actresses on the screen, Lillian is the most thorough master of her profession. She

is the careful, finished workman. She has the sure touch of' the’ experience a expert. Harold Lloyd is not naturally a great actor. He lias won a place by force of a very pleasing, lovable personality ; he is the kind of boy you like to have in the family. Tf Harold were fanc.v free and wanted to marry anybody’s daughter, no father would take more than one look at him without saying. “ You bet you can.” His comedies represent not so much exube'rance or genius as sure-fire jokes. Ha tries and throws out a hundred gags for every one that, gets onto the screen. Harold shows what a ho.v with a. keen, incisive mind, faithful effort and a clean mind can do if he really tries. What has made Haro.6 a star of permanent orbit is that, if the comedy isn’t good, the public never sees it. He lias played fair with bis clientele. Mary and Doc.g. and Chaplin are not stars; they arc institutions. They belong in the category with the Statue of Liberty and t! o White House. They will always l.e because we gott.i have ’em.