New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1918-04-07

on the Jaw at every performance.
any military Importance.
The chief trouble with making faces
at Germany from Forty second Street
and whereabouts is that some spec
tators may 60 home after a couple of
hours of lusty hating and Kissing with
the satisfied feeling of having done
their bit. This may be delusion. Of
course, nobody in these days will say
word against patriotic plays, no mat
ter how bad they may be, if it can be
proved that they aid the prosecution
of the war in any way; but since all
that we have seen have been vainglori-
Gus and shallow, it seems inconceivable
that stimulus may be found in them.
If we allow the question of utility
to lapse for the moment there can be
little question that the term "patriotic
play" on programme has usually been
an invitation to the spectator to sur
render his critical standards. The pro-
Queer says in effect: "Won't you
please accept veneer of patriotism
instead of solid foundation of art q"
There are several reasons why the
war plays are almost invariably bad
plays. First of all, they are done in a
hurry, since the authors know we'll
that not one of these dramas can pos
sibly exist week after the struggle
has ended. They are often written by
men who have not a first-hand knowl-
edge of war conditions. In so far as
our war plays concern the Germans
they are bad plays, because We have
almost lost the faculty of considering
any German as an individual. We
think of them only as like pieces in
machine. Most important of all, per-
haps, is the handicap OF the nature of
war itself. Modern war is not dra-
matte. 1t is too big in scope for stage
or screen. 1t is not much concerned
with individuals, and it is repctitious
and monotonous from dramatic
standpoint.
1t might be assumed that the moving
picture men would have a great ad-
vantage over the theatrical folk in tell
ing stories Of the war. This does not
seem to be proved yet. Griffith's big
picture, "Hearts of the World" is GER
tainly far less interesting than "The
Man Who Stayed at Home" or "The
American Ace" or "Seven Days Leave"
Mr.. Griffith's failure to succeed more
auph n tico1l,, docs pot liz :, ..x I,
OF war atmosphere. That he has pro-
yided in abundance. Some of his
snatches Of things seen at the front
are brilliantly translated to the screen.
The trouble with Hearts of the
World" is that when Griffith gets to
fooling around with the guns and the
trenches he loses interest in his story.
Whenever it does bob up the director
let's fly at it with machine guns and
rifles and bombs and hand grenades
and trench mortars, and by and by
the poor little plot learns its lesson
and lies low.
A plot thrust aside for few min
utes is a plot forgotten, and the
spectator is hard put to it to follow
"Hearts Of the World" in many of its
phases. Of course, the film has a num-
Der Of terrific effects. Here at least
it may set new mark in the picture
world, but 60 much has been done in
this direction already that interest
lags. Some Of the best effects we're
hurt to considerable extent on the
first night by the tempo. Marching
men went flashing by at a speed of at
least fifteen miles an hour, and horses
galloped faster than express trains.
Even the tanks left trails of dust.
On the screen as well as on the
stage there is the inevitable lack Of
dramatic material about the war. The
combinations Of attack and defence are
not great, and Griffith is Obliged to
do the same thing over and over again.
Neither the stage nor the screen is
ever going to get very far 80 long as
its stories are harnessed close to
physical action, and war stories neces-
state a greater amount Of physical
activity than the average spectator can
assimilate in an evening.