April 12.
'Mr, Leslie Howard, the other day, "is reported to' have expressed his boredom with cinema work and his intention to return to the stage. Other actors und lectresses have found the studio luncongenial but their decision has been rightly or wrongly attributed to their lack of the right type of personality for Iscreen productions. Mr. Howard can be under no'such disability judging from the success Fecorded by him, although re unwise to attempt dogmaism on that point for the ways and works of cinema publi lure peculiar. One passage in Mr, Howard's remarks suggests that his verdict may be taken its face value. He felt the handicap of being condemned in his screen appearances to! complete divorce from personal touch with his audiences. That has been a basic difficulty in accepting the cinema as a perfect substitute for the stage. It explains the remarkable achieve. ments of the animated cartoon which, as time goes on, may well be regarded as the purest, mani-testation of the cinema's art. Walt Disney and Lotte Reiniger perament or temper without being able to do anything to adjust the relationship. There fare many cinema productions in which the playing of one partilcular performer, for some reason or other, stands out in contrast unflattering to the leading artist. This "stealing" of the picture may be good or bad. Whatever it has to stand. If bad, it ruins" the reputation of the picture and is, definitely unfair to the dispossessed star. In the theatre that sometimes happens but, should it disturb the artistic balance of the production, it can bbe corrected and the play' saved. It_ may be argued that this process is not unwelcome. It puts too complain in their pi the discriminating audion the thrill which always is generated from the triumph of weak over the strong. Still It must discourage the accom: plished artist who is thus the victim of circumstances which it yus beyond his or her power to, alter.
Here is the question of the jactor's contact with his friends lon the other side of the footlights, No audience is like another. There is a distinct personality about the house }which the player on the stage, if worth his salt, can instantly detect. A large house can. be more readily mastered than a small one. A great Polish actress, in a certain emotional part, used to say that it depended entirely on the mentality of her' audience whether she shed real tears or not. The studio can will also be agreed that, in so, far as they are indifferent to the, financial side of their profession, they will) echo Mr. Leslie' Howard's dissatisfaction, with the screen. The stage is by no means dead. It has' shown signs indeed of ministering more faithfully than ever to the cultivation of the thought of the day. The cinema can hardly compete with it there. Where screen productions with idea secure attention is where th original. stage-play wag a [successful harbinger. The screen more episodic than thought. provoking. Modern plats are finding large circulation in printed form. That in itself is a proof of the virility of the stage. Twenty years ago would be a rare thing to find London or New York stage success figuring in the bookshelf of the ordinary household. Yet that is happening to-day in England and America, It means, of course, that sooner or later the opportunity to see the play the stage will be taken. "The Miracle at Verdun," "Children in Uniform," "Cavalcade" are known to thousands who have never seen those productions. It isa perplexing situation in Which the actor and playgoer alike are involved. Mr. Howard may yo back to the he may not find all faction he expects.
His audiences mi which irre: ly lands him back again in Hollywood, But the stage must win on its own ground. if only because Mi Ruth Chatterton could not pos-may be the honoured names avoid the lapses which occur on sibly be seen in a screen version the cinema of a hundred years the tage owing to temporary of The Rich are Always with hence, when Laemmle, de Mille ts, such as an unexpected Us." two years hence, whereas land the rest are forgotten. The jion'in the theatre or the she would be just as delightful success of the cinema in tapping passing loss of an actor's form. on the stage in the same playin audiences whom the stage has On other hand it cannot achieve 194% as in 1933. The fashion failed to reach is due, in the that supreme moment when, directors would see to thal main, to the cheapness' of the moved by the enthusiasm of the prices charged. The screen. house, the actor surpasses him-places " premium on the big self and brings out latent talent Important delegates of various auditorium. Provided the appeal unsuspected perhaps by his most lof the theme selected can be as fervid admirers. The cinema has peexinelal and district Kuomintang headquarters are arriving in the broad as possible—like the sheet done the stage a. service by [capital to report to the Central of the "popular" newspaper—introducing the dramatic art to Kuomintang the activity the the cinema management can thousands who previously were party branches,
lof small prices and large profits.
Droceed happily on the principle ably improved the standard by ignorant of it. It has immeasu Even the recklessness of cinema which audiences judge not only ce and the blatant waste-the actors but also the technique fulness of its wayward magnet of production. The inhabitant ALBANY HOTEL, have not checked this tendency lof Shanghai does not have to [Just now the world depression endure the efforts of a worthy Lancaster Gate, making itself felt in the studios but conscientious touring com-
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.