Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-05-13
Philadelphia Season Of
Prosperity and Starvation
"War Prosperity" Brought Money to the The
atre and Good Plays to New York; but the
Sum of Our Season Was Barrenness
By K. M.

HNHE season of 1915-16 in the Phila-
to parallel the remarks of Walter Prich-
ard Eaton on the year in New York,
which appear in an opposite column, If
not the most profitable financially in
many years, at any rate one of the most
dscouraging. Not only have the movies
failed to kill" the spoken drama, they
have let 1t come near to killing the intelli-
gent playgoer.
1t has been a singular season-both here
and in New York. 1t began in gloom,
but 1t ends in gladness. Before Christ
mas old warhorses like William A. Brady
and Abraham Erlanger were next to GER
tain that the theatre was dead. Brady
stopped productions and plunged into the
movies. Erlanger went doggedly ahead,
but made no bones of his pessimism on
Broadway. Both saw the end of the
theatre they had built up and made the
further blunder of imagining that this
meant the end of the drama
Then the great war began to make
itself felt. The super-prosperity of the
movies ended as soon as the withdrawal
of European film manufacturers launched
dozens of American firms on career of
overproduotion very much complicated by
the absurd triumph of the tive-part fea-
ture. But this had only negative effect
on the theatre The positive force was
war prosperity" Gathering its force at
New Years, 1t broke over the theatre
going classes. New York--and Philadel-
phia in only slightly smaller measure
woke up to the fact that people were
eager for entertainment and had the
money for drama and movies, too AS
Broadway put 1t, ANY show would CO."
The busy production of plays that fol-
lowed the awakening brought New York
a dozen interesting. worthwhile new
pieces. Philadelphia, too, felt the finan-
cial awakening. But as for the plays
well. Philadelphia must wait a year until
New York relays them over.
Undoubtedly, Philadelphia's theatres
have done well this year, but what about
its playgoers? Just what have We seen?
For one thing, of course. we have seen
our usual quota of stars, in spite of the
seductions of California and it's movies,
Not so many perhaps, as 10 yec, ago,
but enough. Mr.. Eaton finds the acting
level of New York plays improved by
the competition Of the movies Here, there
has been no such result. II there is one
criticism to be made of the acting we have
seen, 1t is the poorer quality of the play
ers in the minor parts. Either the movies
have taken the good ones or they are all
in New York.
At casual glance, the actors who most
pleased, outside the ever-expert, popular
and humdrum stars, were George Sidney
for his theatrical manager in THE Show
Shop Frederick Perry, Tor MS study or
the nerve-wracked hero of ION Trial.;
Grant Mitchell, for his naive humor in st
Pays to Advertise" Patricia Collinge for
the charming impersonation which saved
"Pollyanna"; Laurette Taylor, for her
accession TO high comedy in "The Woo
ing of Eve; George Hassell and Ralph
Herr, for two delicious Englshmen in
"Ruggles" o. p. Heggie, for his incom-
parably meek Androcles; and, among the
people of musical comedy, the eternal
Tinney, Williams and Lauder, the neN!-
conner Grossmith, of Nobody Home" and