The Washington times., 1929-04-27
GLEANINGS'
SCREENINGS
AND
By ANDREW R. KELLEY

LOOK your UP on Cne LAkIiS
Show and enjoyed it. Poor old
Wesley E! Nelson Bell was
faithful to the last. ! wonder
If the house manager did not
Nlearn that w. E. was poison to
most of the male patrons Why
don't you start a campaign OF
education with the managers to
stop the poor vaudeville which
constitutes the atmospheric pro-
logues' and save money-scenics
and good comedies with the or
chestra for overtures would be
my taste.
(Signed( p. A.
Just lend an ear to the re-
buttal, picture Addict" It
was written by D. M. S. (an
estimable northwest resident)
who, evidently anticipated your
critical barrage, for it arrived
in the same mail:
"In reading your column to-
night as / have done every night
for over a year I was agreeably
surprised to learn that there is
a possibility of Wesley Eddy's
return. Surely this will be good
news to any number of people
even though it will be in the
nature of sad surprise to the
one who signs himself, "Movie
(or Picture) Addict No doubt
he will consider that the situa-
tion warrants a letter on the SUBJ
ject. stating his gratitude to the
Palace management at the re-
moval of his pet eye-sore. How
anyone can feel that way in re-
gard to Mr.. Eddy is more than I
can understand. have seen
him each of the rs weeks he has
appeared at the Palace and he
has sincerely tried to please the
public. If anyone deserves the
respect and the admiration Of
the F Street movie mobs, it is
Wesley. He has often worked
under a terrific strain and has
at all times given of his best
for their amusement. /, for one,
sincerely appreciate his efforts!
am by no means a flapper.
and therefore not given to
crushes but I am glad to admit
for the once my admiration for
the one and only Wesley Eddy
and I am here to say, when he
leaves, my very best wishes go
with him. Au revoir, and a
speedy return. What say, Mr..
Kelley? Won't you give him a
good send-off in "Gleanings and
Screenings and see if we can't
shame Movie Addict for being
80 unappreciative. I would like
to have an autographed photo
graph like so many of the flap
per-cuties but I will continue
to act my age and keep my
dignity intact"
There's a little bit more
"P. A." but mostly orchids, and
anyway you get the idea. Such
Q first aid to a vacant column
as ED. M. S." deserves an auto.
graphed photo and I will en-
deavor to see that she receives
it without any sacrifice to a
becoming modesty.
Turning to the non-contro-
versial features of your billet
doux, I second the motion on the
prologues. Either do them in
big league style or dispense
with an unnecessary preliminary
to the feature. In the dynasty
of S. j. Stebbins at the Fox
Theater the prologues were
real assets to the screen pro-
grams. Where they are put into
the program, seemingly as an
after-thought, with scrub talent,
they are surely no aid in Gre
ating illusion.
Good comedies and scenics.
Yes. But they are not always
at the beck and call of booking
managers. The Shorts" cause
more gray hairs and wasted
moments for program builders
than the features.
One of the real boons of the
chattering celluloids has been a
steady improvement in the
quality of the supplementary
screen programs. Even Mack
Sennett has moth-balled his
stuffed clubs, stopped having his
actors running in and out of
rooms and falling down and the
endless nonsensical chases.
Witness, ("The Brides Rela-
tions~. There are still some
directors of the short comedies
who can't imagine anything fun
nier than a man losing his
trousers and a few who will
never be content to let the
frosted lemon MES Stav in tha