The Washington times., 1929-05-10
GLEANINGS
--:: AND :;;:--
SCREENINGS
..-------: AND
BY ANDREW 4. KELLEY

ny HANabAhASN So sAANA@N~A@@
From time to time regular
patrons of thesdowntown motion
picture houses stop at the edi-
tors desk to report on uhsatis-
factory sound reception for a
particular performance of the
feature picture. The complaints
are not applied to any one thea
ter but to the temporary lapses
in smooth addition which are
unhappily present occasionally
in the temples of amusement
featuring the latest Hollywood
product.
Those who can glance back
far enough may recall the days
when the slide Zone Minute
Please" was flashed on the
screen while reels were changed
in the operators booth and
the blank curtain which told all
too eloquently of some mechani-
cal mishap. Machines and pro-
lection advanced toward the
ultimate perfection with the
silent features until such
troublous moments became a
rarity.
The sound films, it seems to
one of their enthusiastic cham
pions, are passing through
period of evolution such as the
silent cinemas successfully over
came. There are complaints
and they are justified. But the
sincere desire of both producer
and exhibitor to get 100 per cent
quality in the projection of syn
chronized features is bringing
closer the uniform perfection
which audiences have a right to
expect.
Nothing irritates me more
than to see a talking picture
and have to strain to hear what
the screen characters are saying
or miss some of the most effec-
tive dialogue.
Don't catch our feature pic
ture at the first screening.
They're not always set," a GER
tain picture house executive told
me few months ago as / was
exiting from his theater. 1t
happened to be after the show
ing of a feature where the
sound effects were abominable.
NV answer to that is if
they're not set" they never
should be screened. A first
audience is equally as important
as a last audience and fully as
entitled to faultless projection.
The experimentation and the
necessary sound testing should
be completed before the doors
are opened.
Another manager in mid
winter made inquiry about the
quality of what was produced
as a talking special. l told him
it was very poor-sometimes in
audible and again faint and un-
even. 81 can't understand it,"
he replied. "My ushers say it's
all right" Then to make GER
tain he sought reinsurance from
his usher observers. "They said
it was right" he persisted. |
didn't pursue the conversation
further but | failed to find any
body who saw or heard a salts
factory exhibition of this fea-
ture in it's two weeks engage
ment.
I have seen an average of
four pictures weekly for more
than a year and have noted the
continual improvement in projec-
tion. Occasionally, yet, I have
the misfortune to be attendant
on a performance where a weak
lunged or anemic machine is
doing it's best--and it's best is
not passable. | was annoyed at
such a show only last Sunday
night. But to be honest, l find
projection generally of much
higher average than-let US
say-six months ago.
| am one of those who choose
to regard the silent features as
antique. They are as passe as
Mary Pickford's curls and cellu-
loid collars. | fuss and fume as
much as the man in the next
seat when / can't hear what
Stepin Fetchit is saying, but
wouldn't swap a broadway
Melody" Singing Fool" "The
Doctors Secret" and some OF
the others l know are on the
way, for the return of the 100
per cent perfectly projected
silent films. More people are
going to the motion picture
theaters because-with all their
faults-the talking movies are
providing a more satisfying en-
tertainment.
Silest features will still be
made but mostly for the Eu-
ropean market. Over across the
seas they have always been