Evening star., 1936-10-04

not a good idea to have an entire
community overrun with 1t. But
Broadway Is In considerable need Of
some and Miss Bankhead is the girl
who can supply it. Fortunately there
is nothing synthetic, In the California
fashion, about the glamour that Miss
Bankhead provides. 1t Is based on q
natural and almost instructive gift for
showmanship, for providing certain
she does. We reviewers sagely lament
the fact that playwrights fail to pro-
vide her with roles which permit her
to demonstrate the extent Of her acting
talent. I think we should admit,
though, that the important thing about
her is not so much her histrionic skill
as her capacity for giving great side
show wherever she goes. There are
still lot of good actors about, but
there aren't too many vivid per-
sonalities, and the theater can't do
without its splashes of personal color
1t is my guess that Miss Bankhead
Is an excellent actress, but it Is hard
to be certain in the matter. Only in
Rain" have New York play-goers
been given an opportunity to see her
in part which demanded real
Characterization, and there she faced
two immense handicaps. In the first
place, she had to battle against the
unconquerable phantom Of the late
Miss Jeanne Eagles, who created the
role and left behind her a million
memories that made poor Sadie
Thompson peculiarly hers. In the
second place, Miss Bankhead could not
conceal a dominating personality which
made it obvious that the Rev. Davidson
never had chance against her. You
never could worry about her ability
to take care Of herself. In the rest
of her plays Miss Bankhead has merely
parable one-woman show of hers. 1t
is obvious she is shrewd comedienne,
with a sparkling sense of fun about
her. and it is clear that in her more
serious works she is better at sharp
broad, vivid strokes than in the
subtleties of Characterization. I wish
she were given better plays, though
If only that her admirers might not
have to depend entirely on her ac-
tivities for a satisfactory theatrical
evening.
MISS BANKHEAD'S current COM
edy, Reflected Glory" is a dis
appointing play, coming as it does
from George Kelly, one Of the 'front.'
rank American dramatists. AS We
hicle, however. 1t decidedly has its
points. It's heroine, as you have un-
doubtedly heard, is temperamental
star, an actress on the stage and of,
who firmly believes that what she
wants is love and domesticity, while
in reality she is only happy when
giving way to her instincts for ex-
hibitionism. 1t was, I think I can
safely say, type-casting when Miss
Bankhead took. the role. Certainly no
one can seem the actress on the stage
reason that she is our one player who
is in the heroically flamboyant and
legendary tradition of the actress A
few Hollywood ladies capture some
of the quality, but most Of them are
too synthetic, and Miss Garbo lacks
the famboyant aspect. In addition,
the leading part in Reflected Glory"
gives its star an opportunity to pre-
sent a one-person show that could
well make Miss Ruth Draper and Joe
Cook jealous, and you can imagine
how Miss Bankhead takes advantage
Of it.
Nevertheless. despite the grand show
that it's star gives, Reflected Glory
remains unsatisfying. You would ex-
pect Of Mr. Kelly that II he took so
routine and familiar plot. he would
at least, in his customary fashion,
have enlivened 1t with some Of those
shrewd and penetrating bits of in
sight into human conduct and human
character that have frightened his
previous plays. Instead, the treat
ment is as conventional and lacking
in originality as the story. Then, too,
his latest comedy suffers from the
fact that the theater has changed so.
When THE Royal Family" was writ
ten it still was possible to grow hu-
morously sentimental over the tradi-
tion of acting. Since that time things