GENERAL FILM GOSSIP.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18450, 28 April 1928, Page 25 (Supplement)

GENERAL FILM GOSSIP.

x-ith a strong supporting cast, this photoplay offers unrivalled entertainment, so intriguing is the atmosphere 3 f the story, which concerns a lovely *irl, Antoinette, who is declared to lave dark blood and falsely sold into slavery, only to be freed and proved white by the man who bought and loved her. Billie Dove makes a very attractive Antoinette.

“ Harold Lloyd is one who is convinced that the voice will never be successfully synchronised with motion picture comedy ” (says the “New York Morning Telegraph’’). "I do not believe the public will want talking comedies,” avers Lloyd. *“ Motion pictures and the spoken drama are two distinct arts, and when you try to unite them lam sceptical of the results. The action in motion picture comedies is too fast, or at least should be too fast to attempt to synchronise it with the talking apparatus. Anyway, the voice has so little bearing on cinema comedy that I don’t believe any one is at this time contemplating the joining of the two. It is action, and little else, that counts in motion picture comedy. It would be impossible to reproduce such a comedy as * Safety Last ’ even on the stage.” Lloyd’s latest effort for Paramount, " Speedy, ’ is said to be so fast moving in its action that the human voice would be out of place if associated with it. “Speedy” will be released in New Zealand this year.

Cecil de Mille is turning a spotlight on the reform schools of the nation in his “ The Godless Girl” (writes a Hollywood correspondent). This picture will present the result of research by de Mille’s agents in many sections of the country. The result is likely to make a stir. De Mille hopes his picture may do for American reform schools something like what Dickens’s “ Oliver Twist ” did for the charity schools of England. The back lot of the de Mille studio has been laid out with a huge reformatory. The yard of the institution has a fence, supposed to be electrically charged, separating the boys and girls of the school from each other. A guard in a tower armed with a machine gun overlooks the yard. The “mud horse,” an instrument of discipline discovered in one school, is shown in operation. It is a handbarrow, which the boys to be disciplined load with rock, carry to the other end of the yard, dump, load again, carry back, till the time assigned

is consumed. Actual stocks, of the sort used by the Puritans, strait jackets, foot chains wjth iron rings with which squads of children are fastened together, and to their beds at night, all are shown. re « Australian film producers are worried over the possibilitv that the three Aus-tralian-made pictures considered worthy of world-release may be classed as “ foreign ” under the Cinematograph Films Act of Great Britain. The three are: “For the Term of His Natural Life,” “ The Romance of Runnibede,” and “ The Adorable Outcast.” The British trade commissioner for the Commonwealth has asked for information about Australian-made pictures with a view to finding out whether they are admissable under the British quota system. The producers of the three films on which about £IOO,OOO was spent, were Americans, and so were the principal players. Under the British Act a film, to be classed as “ British,” must fulfil certain requirements as to the nationality of the producing organisation, authorship of the scenario, locality of the studio scenes, and proportion of the salary bill payable to British subjects. It is considered that the salary stipulation probably makes the three films officially “ foreign.” Those in the trade declare that it will be grossly unfair if the Commonwealth adopts a British quota system while pictures made with Australian capital and partly American personnel are declared “ foreign. ” in Britain. They point out that even now, whereas Australia admits British pictures duty-free, Britain levies a duty on Aultralian pictures, and all efforts for its removal have been vain. x ::

A Melbourne paper in referring to the manner in which vaudeville turns are given prominence at numerous American motion picture theatres says:—The result has been that prices of admittance have increased, the demand for first class films has decreased, and the former vaudeville houses have been compelled to show films in order to keep their audiences. The film which began as a variety “turn” has “gone full circle,” and has become a variety “turn” again. For a long time signs of the beginning of a similar movement in Australia have been appearing. Large theatres like the Capitol, feeling apparentlv that there should be something to distinguish them from smaller and less expensively equipped theatres, have. staged “atmospheric prologues.” Generally these are poor things and Tinworthy of the films they introduce, lew of them would have earned a place on the programme of any vaudeville theatre. Other theatres have engaged singers to enliven their less interesting films, and to lengthen already over-long programmes. The prologue habit has extended, until to-day exhibitors appear to regard themselves as bound to burden any picture of more than ordinary merit with a prelude, in which hastily trained entertainers caricature an incident in the film which is later thrown upon the screen. Some prologues, particularly those introducing “patriotic” films, have been in poor taste; few of them would be ornaments to a suburban concert. As successor to the prologues comes the vaudeville “turn” pure and simple. Seme Sydney picture theatres are now giving greater prominence to their vaudeville attractions than to the films shown under their shadow.

FILMS AND VAUDEVILLE. ; POSITION IN NEW YORK. Moving pictures are coming to occupy a less and less important place in the programmes of the huge cinema theatres of New York, which are, it is reported, rapidly becoming vaudeville show's on a grand scale (says a contemporary). The ‘‘ mode palaces” of this city were so costly to build, and their running expenses are so high, that it is essential that they be kept filled if their owners are to make a profit. The Paramount. Building, which houses the Paramount Theatre, cost £:?.500,000. The Roxy, .so named by its founder, Samuel R«*tliafcl, whose nickname is “ Roxy,” was less costly, but has accommodation for 0200 people, and earned in gross receipts £64.000 in the first two weeks *«f its career. But, if these theatres are not filled day and night, losses are correspondingly heavy. To widen the appeal of the entertainment, which they offered the controllers of these huge theatres early decided to bolster up the films with variety numbers. For some time the Paramount Theatre engaged Paul Whiteman s jazz band at a cost of about £I2OO a week Recently the programme at the Capitol Theatre included a concert with numbers by Albert Spalding, a noted violinist, four popular and costly revue * turns,” involving a chorus with 200

dancers, a news reel and, at the end, a moving picture. Films are not likeiy to disappear altogether from these theatres, because they are owned by moving picture producers, to whom they are valuable as places where the hallmark of a much-advertised New York showing can be given to their more ambitious productions. An. interesting commentary upon this new develop ment comes from Mr H. L. Mencken, who has pointed out that the spread of vaudeville t,o the film theatres is severely damaging vaudeville, itself. The more popular “ turns ” are bring attracted to the film theatres, and the audiences arc following them, with the result that the vaudeville houses are in financial difficulties. In some cases the wheel has been given its final twist, and former vaudeville theatres have begun to add moving pictures to their programmes.