Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1932-06-12
VARIETY, in one of its cur
! rent issues, states that there

are only IL Sure-lre box
Office Stars-StarS whose
potency is so dynamic that
whether they appear in Ten
Nights in a Barroom, The Old
Homestead" Or Elizabeth Sleeps
Out" is all one and the same
They neither need stories, nor do
stories need them. They can
stand by themselves and lure the
average patron into cinematlc
emporlumS by the mere efficacy
of their personalities. Who plays
with them, what material they
have draped around them, Or
what atmospheric conditions they
are set up against makes not one
iota's difference.
The names of only a few of
these II potentates are mentioned.
Two are referred to as silent
holdover5' Harold Lloyd and
Charlie Chaplin. The others,
bracketed as two single units, are
the teams of Gaynor and Farrell
and MessrS. Marx, Marx, Marx
and Marx, commonly known as
the Marx Brothers. That leaves
seven-only Seven-whose bril-
liancy at the moment can make
anything they do bring home the
best of the bacon in any theater
they happen to be playing in.
Whether this is true or not
and this department is inclined
to doubt that any star nowadays
can last without proper story ma
terial-Who are these seven lum-
inaries? What theater manager,
looking over his list of coming
attractions, will say, We'll, if I
take this l can break records be-
cause So-and-so is in it,"
There is no getting around it
Carlo is No. l. Proof of this was
the recent "As You Desire Me"
Put any other star in Miss CARLOS
place and see how long the pic
ture would have lasted. Carlo
and then who? Here is the list
as we see it, including those al
ready mentioned:
Charlie Chaplin, Greta Carlo,
the Four Marx Brothers, Gaynor-
Farrell. Harold Lloyd, Norma
Shearer, Maurice Chevalier, Clarke
Gable. Joan Crawford, Marie
Dressler, the BarrymOreS.
The above list is no indication
of super-excellence in any par
ticular field; it is merely gauge
of what the public wants, and,
therefore, what it gets. Mr.. Gable
is not by any means the worlds
best actor. Neither is Joan CraW-
ford head and shoulders above the
cream of the crop. But both OF
these young players have that
something which audiences cry
for. And they have advanced
with such overwhelming success
that their futures seem as bright
as was Miss Norma Talmadge's
and Miss Lillian Gish'S a decade
or so back.
Noticeably lacking is the name
of the much-loved Mary Picktord.
Miss Pickford, if rumors are cor
rect, may be back there, however,
during the current season. she
proved a year or so ago that bad
material can topple any star. She
is anxious not to leave a poor I'M
preston with her audiences. she
IS planning a comeback" This
should be one of the cinema events
of the year. Miss Pickford has
suffered much of late from curl
OusIv ineffective publicity One
of the most inane stories which has
been published about this gracious
lady is that she is no longer hi
hat" Said this story: I'm a res
taurant for luncheon, Miss PICK
ford posed for a fan magazine
photographer balancing a flock
of peas on her knife. Two years
ago it would have been impossible
20 get a Fairbanks to pose eating,
much less Glowing with eti-
quette.'
WHILE stars go on and on for
w ever, and such interesting
new blood" as Sari Martha, Lii
liam Harvey and Tala Birrel make
movie-going sometimes more and
sometimes less exciting. There
are certain players who never are
given their due and who. by the
sheer persistence of their art,
often enough save an average bill
from sliding completely doWnhill
We refer to such players as ZaSu
Pitts and Roland Young, two ad-
mirable thespians, who, because
they don't happen to have perfect
proflles. have never landed in the