Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1922-06-29
THE MOVIE FANS LETTERBOX
By HENRY NJ. NEELY

the limitations Of the screen. Panto-
mime 50 beautiful and expensive as to
make all copy supertluous. And with
This pantomlme. n careful study OF the
composition. grouping. costuming ana
general value Of the whole. In regard
70 color. ! believe It has absolutely no
place on the screen. being wrong IN
terprctation entirely. feel the same
way about any device which would pro-
ducp the human voice in conjunction
with photography. II seems a viola
tion Of art. an insertion of the human
element where it does not belong and
altogether weird mixture Of two dis
tinct arts.
"l'm awfully sorry If I've bothered
YOU. but | do want your opinion of this
matter.
"I'm very stupid. too. I admit. but
have just been noticing Conrad
Nagel's work. | would never rs yet
class him rs great artist. but he
: brings to mo n particular wholesome
ness at least. He seems awfully prom
iSing and IL is wonder he has not
been starred before this
Since You wav.red in your sug-
gestiou that | do not print your letter.
I'm taking II chance and doing so.
should NOT be brought To the attention
of the fans. Your case Is not III" first
I've heard Of in which Schildkraut
was put in similar light. III
neither Try 20 defend nor accuse him.
Perhaps his whole unfortunate atti-
tude j. caused by shyness: perhaps
because he is nor thoroughly accus-
, TONED ~ American ways of doing things
And. Shhh-dou't forget. he got mar
ricd while he was here. Whatever
ii" case. as You pointed out, any fea-
turCs Of his personality which may not
altugsther please should not be allowed
TO detract from lively appreciation Of
his great ability a. an actor. And
don't think II would do any harm
rather good d-if things like these we're
brought to hi> attention.
Glud YOU like "Thpodora.' ! did.
too. though generally go to sleep az
~pcctarleS. They become 80 entirely
!mpnr>onal and far away. merely masses
and sI2e and crowds and much rushing
around. The Sardou story saved
"Th.odorn" for me, and the artistry
in its technical makeup was cxcep-
tIonally fine.
In regard TO the question OF the ideal
toward which the movies should be
moving. You floor me with MOOD OF
wnrds-word> dear to the hearts of the
screens highest -browed critics and
commentators. When you say that
this particular art 'cannot be direct
rrhcrtion. bur rather an Interpretation
with consideration for III" limitations
and materials of the medium, you
surely said mouthful.
Would YOU think me- hcatheniSh. II
said thought that the next goal to-
ward which the movies should strive
would be to picture stories good
strong. punchy stories-hut do 1t witt
50 much art Of direction. camera anf
acting that II would get away forever
from the trite, tawdry things Of today
The screen can tell story "f actor
far better than the stage 1t can neVel
achieve ns happy results in the field o.
psychological or sociological studies,
where 50 much depends on the spoker
word, the runningly turned phrase, th'
d!stincti- human element. In rather
tired Of hearing everybody talking o
the ElySian fields over yonder which
should be the next stopping place o
the movies. Let en- get out "f burn
ing purgatory first, and they can d.
it by presenting in II sane, artistic an'