The Washington times., 1915-03-20
PHOTOPLAYS AND
PHOTOPLAYERS
By GARDNER MACK
Film CdricdtureS tC
Homes Call Forth
an Emphatic
Protest
By GARDNER MACK.

Students Of human nature who
have been devoting considerable time
to the general effect Of the motion
picture dramas on the average pa
tron have come to the conclusion
that we announced some months ago,
that the purely dramatic film story
Is a great educational force. And
that this force is largely expended
for the general good.
1t has been learned that foreigners
are actually learning to use the
English language from the titles
given on the films. The matter of
film Is having it's effect on the
younger element who are initiating
the actors aud actresses In their
style of walking and generally con.
ducting themselves.
AS rule the comment of this sort
that has been made has all been
rather favorable to the film-the
scholars who have heretofore seen
no good in picture plays are now
realizing that there is something in
them beside the mere story that is
shown on the screen.
But there has been one rather
strong note of protest in this chorus
OF comment. The protest Is fairly
we'll founded too. 1t deals with the
ideas that the average patron gets
of the interiors of cultured homes.
Carless or incompetent directors are
at fault In this. Some of the carica-
lures of homes that are shown on
the screen are really about as fine
exhibitions of bad taste and vul-
Earity as can be found anywhere in
the world.
A stage manager once said in re-
sponse to an inquiry that the people
who go to the theater expect to sec
totr fittings
kinds of scenes. Gilt furniture,
garish pictures and wall paper and
rugs must be shown in a drawing
room,' he declared-not because you
ever find things like that in the
drawing room of a cultured family.
but because people who are not
wealthy and not cultured, but who
60 to the theater, demand that those
things shall be shown in such a
scene. David Belasco has proved
otherwise in his settings-although
he has produced some rather garish
scenes.
There really Is little excuse for the
continuance Of this kind of thing,
however-and certainly no excuse
for 1t in the motion pictures where
right ideas might be given in this
as in other things. The editor Of
The House Beautifu!' has taken
up cudgels against 1t. In discussing
motion picture generally he states
1T is with considerable surprise
that we follow these plays from
their outdoor scenes to their in
teriors, and see hideous rooms
crowded with grotesque furniture.
with sentimental pictures in ginger
bread frames. with tawdry curtains
and glaring carpets. The wall paper
shrieks aloud; and sometimes the
mantelpieces are covered with tas-
seled plush and surmounted by
supercentennial monstrosities OF
china and bronze.
"One gauges the wealth Of a
character in the movies by the
amount OF statuary in his drawing
room And in almost every case,
whether the house represented be
that of a millionaire or of the i'm
poverished hero, bad taste re!gns.
Few realize the esthetic influ-
ence Of the movies One shudders
to think what an obstacle to good
taste these object lessons In the
rococo must be. and how the nou-
veau richie of the future, brought up
on the movies. will arrange his
house. One thing Is certain; bronze
nymphs will parade their nudity
from every available vantage point.
for has not the decree gone out from
the picture magnates that this Is
art?"