Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1928-10-07
Are They Too Good?
ancient question, Whats
wrong with the movies?" has
been answered by many different
l. people in many different ways.

TIME ancient question, Whats
wrong with the movies?" has
been answered by many different
l. people in many different ways,
but the other day I heard an
answer that deserves to be described
as absolutely and utterly unique.
1t came from an unusually thoughtful
young man who once gained distinction
as dramatic critic and then, for some
obscure reason, went to Hollywood and
engaged himself in the work of editing
scenarios. Unlike most critics who go
movie, he has managed to stick at his
chosen job and has made success of
1t. Here is the unusual comment that
he offered in my hearing:
1.-THE trouble with the movies now
is that they're too good. They main
tain too high a level of excellence"
After had recovered from the fear
full shock occasioned by this statement
I asked him to explain If possible, just
what he meant.
1.-The people out in Hollywood" said
he, "have become too expert in their
jobs. They're not cropping around
blindly and dumbly any more. They
know what they want to do and fur
thermore. they know how to do it,
WELL I inquired. feebly, what's SC
terrible ABOUT LnaC?
"Just this" said he. "the movies that
you see today are technically good, ano
I imagine that you find them hard tc
criticize. They are free from the abb
Surd faults that used to be so glaringlN
apparent in the old days. And at the
same time, they lack that fine fervol
that made so many of them great. The
childish enthusiasm that once animated
Hollywood has been lost in a mass Of
camera angles and 'expreSsionist1c' et-
fects."
began to perceive a faint glimmer Of
logic in his remarks.
"You know how it is with authors,
he continued. CAS- a matter of fact,
don't know how it is with authors, but
I nodded sagely) Many an author
will start out as young man, aflame
with inspiration and with the idea that
he has a great message to convey to hui
mainly In the first years Of his ca
reer, he will write novels or plays or
poems that may be crude and ANA
flourish, but into which he has poured
MS mind, his soul and his hearts blood.
His reputation will be made by those
early efforts-the fruits of his sopho-
moric ardor. But then, after due prac-
tice, he will become a master at his
IOO. TIE Will UCGOIIlC 044 oSNOAAPtAoAASNA
and facile writer He won't care about
the Importance of his message; he will
think only of the style in which that
message is conveyed. So 1t Is with the
movies. They've learned how to put
their ideas over, but they don't care
what those ideas are"
X \ X
It seems to me that this observation
is a legitimate one. 1t certainly pro-
vides the persistent movie observer with
plenty of food for thought.
Looking back over the many pic
lures that I have seen during the past
year, can appreciate the truth of the
statement that the workers in Holly
wood have now achieved a high level
of technical excellence. Reviewing my
reviews of those pictures, can see
monotonous repetition of the words,
"Well directed, we'll acted, well photo
graphed." The competence of the di-
rectors, actors and cameramen has be-
come actually tiresome.
Yet. in spite of this "high level OF
excellence" how many pictures have
been produced recently that may truly
be described as great? How many
deserve to be mentioned on the same
honor roll with 1.-The Birth of Ma
tion,' 1.-THE Four Horsemen of the
Apocalypse" "Tol-able David" 1.-THE
Covered Wagon" Robin Hood" 1.-THE
Last Laugh" 1.-THE Big Parade" and
other immortals?
THE Patriot is about the only one
that, in my estimation, assumes really
heroic proportions.
There have been several exceptionally
good crook melodramas: underworld, y
'sThe Drag Net" THE Racket" and
others. There has been one fine Chap
lin comedy, THE Circus" There was
an attempt at ruthless realism in "The