Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-05-31
Flashes From the Screen
News and Comment of the Photoplay
By c. E. Nelson.
By C. E. Nelson.

Z oil dIllOuLIU Va
announces that it has dlscon-
tinued the practice. This action
was brought about by severe
criticism from audiences and by
wise counsel from other MIN
production companies. The effort
to put across" the sponsored tllmS
was Short-lived and thoroughly
diStasteful to audiences who had
paid admission prices to be enter
tanned. One or two other produc-
ton companies that have been be-
hind such films have made no an
nouncementS up to date, but
they will, in all probability, join
Paramount and the other leading
companies in the ban upon the
sponsored films.
An official of Warner Brothers
says his company will continue to
produce advertising films, but that
the Warner Brothers theaterS will
not show these pictures on pro-
grams of paid entertainment. He
leaves the distribution of such
pictures up to the sponsors them
SelveS-the advertisers who pay
and how they are to be placed on
programs is a problem in itself.
This Is supposed to be gradual
easing out of the sponsored film
field. Opposition to the films has
been especially apparent in the
better class theaterS, and audi
ences have been outspoken in their
antipathy.
The first word of such sponsored
pictures was mentioned in these
columns early in 1881, when
Cornelius Vanderbilt, jr.. in Wash
ington for a few days, mentioned
the proposed plan OF the Aim
producers. The former newspaper
owner, having returned East from
a stay in Hollywood, told of ambi-
tiouS plans of producers toward
forcing paid advertising upon
theater audiences, whether the
latter liked it or not. The plan
evidently went through, but it
fell fiat with the public.
*
One of WaShington's leading
thenterS SHIELDED g1ngSter pic
ture last tUeek! That is, the
manager put it into his theater
norgue and booked another
film. NoU, that 1DGS strange
noue for this day and age, but
it 1DGS tDiSe action. Some time
ago. the public UaS convinced
that gangSter pictures tOere get
ting exceedingly ttreSone, and
nolD the theGter managers are
reaching the same conclusion.
By Christmas, eUen the pro-
ducerS tDiU get their heads to-
Qet1ler and consider the matter.
h <0.r.
more shooting affairs, listen to
the blonde bandit queens and
learn OF new rGcketS.
&A*
THE recent death Of David Be
laSco, wizard of the stage"
brings to mind this idea: What
could BelaSco have done If he had
turned to the screen as q medium
of entertainment All through his
stage work Belasco was not an
enemy of the screen. He seemed
to recognize It's value and its lin
itationS and he was a tolerant
looker-on. He saw the motion pic
ture grow from its f1rst flicker to
the modern product and yet he
did not interest himself in the
medium. He was bound around
with stage ideas, stage technique,
the living theater. And o large
part of his great success was in
the development of lifelike stage
pictures.
Now, if David Belasco had
turned his talent toward the
screen, what wonderful pictures
he might have created! He would
have found, in working with mo-
ton pictures, that he had great
er variety of tools to work with
a wider scope for his Imagination,
a vast scene for his dramas. What
the stage gained with his talent,
the screen lost. He might have
placed the motion picture where
it really belongs today. His sin
cere effort and showmanShip, to-
gether with his genius, should
have made him a master of the
studio craft. The creative ele-
ment In his stage productions
would have been more evident,
surely, on the vast screen.
What movie director David
Belasco could have been!
Do you remember Florence
Turner? Not unless you enjoyed
the moUieS of the old Vitdgrdph
and Btogrdph days. Well, Flor
ence is returning to the screen
In "Er-Bdd Boy" a Universal
production. Carl Ldemmle, jr.,
thought so tDeH of Lois Wilson'S
Dork il, "Seed" that he started
on q hunt for fen more of the
Old-timerS, and he found Flor
ence Turner, t0ho, Is years ago,
tUGS knoDn as the "Vitdgrdph
Girl"-dlong about the time
When Mary Picktord WdS the
Telegraph Girl" Anita LoOS
and her husband, John Emer-
son, hare tOritten the story for |
Miss Turner.
THERE has been considerable dis
cuSsion regarding the change
In well known stage vehicles when
the screen versions are made.
However, these changes, in my
opinion, do not always injure the
picture. There are instances when
such changes are necessary to At
with screen technique. There are
other times WIN the screen really
turns out a better play than the
original stage production. And
there are also times when a screen
director ruins a perfectfully good
stage play by making what he
considers necessary changes. There
can be no hard-and-faSt rule re-
garding this matter; some plays
need changes for the screen, while
others do not This ic oro,1oIt RI