Evening star., 1947-06-22
On Placing the Blame
It's Hard to Tell Where Film Writing Ends
and Directing Begins
By Harry Macarthur

It is common plant of the Hollywood
film reviewers they too often fail to
director to be praised for his clever touches when all
literally touches that the writer put into
Too often ALSO the writer's maintain critics limited
that picture script when in actaity
q good script sadly botched by direction
The screenpay writer's of will not find their lot happier
the motion pictures that result from
the director and script writer
the two working side by side through every
step of pictures production, from original idea to editing
1t Would Be Complicated.
When this ideal however critic must
that it really isn't his give credit where
is due He hardly blame when he notes
that adapted the screen by Writers and
hat sreennav was written from the adaptation by
and contributed by Writers and
that thing then turned over to Director j.
illustration Of the reviewers problem along TINS hne
4ar ruth the comedy about young misled by
into the belief that her big sister has oeen
b1ets doux with successful Broadway play by
Norman Krsna before motion picture is was
on the stage funny sometimes hilarious romantic farce
The honestly to place responsibility Tor the
merit of Dear Ruth" entertainment would have to go
through complicated routine First he would have to place copy
of the play copy Arthur sheekman eenpy SIDE y soe
and examine them carefully determine what of the hm was
Mr. Krasnas and sheekmans Then he would have to
with both play and film scenario az mana " sec
what contribution Director William Russell made u
That would be than merely complicated 1t "oula
be the part of reviewer whose customers Wa'
only picture and whether or not IL Is likely
bore death.
There are of course when is fairly easy to make
guess about writer's contribution to pnotopay Two @
in category coincidence have turned up IN town on m
uek One of them Web" murder meodrama starring
prc Edmund . Br1en
sudden death by gunpay are ahoao
cinema fare of call this standard oo you
rood vnopss of it, above the meodrama average
however by skilled by its dialogue WHICH Is os
and witty and close to talk at the same time
he Web" the shady hnancier (Pre VINO Is up 70
mn rood including of murders Tor Wne ne can
be blamed The attorney (oBrlen VINO
svs around because secretary (Mss Raanes MS
idea of something to stay possible director ADEPT az
This of thing ingredients Of course and make
ssnnsefu hm but likely to make up the dialogue
went along
Dialogue Is Written.
when the director picks up script put there by the writer's
of he screen play William Bowers ana 6ertah
Mhauser It is to their THE Web sounds better tnan
most recent matter what DIRECTOR Nclael
had tn do with its moments suspense and excitement
The other example which it to know IN Wlch octoh
N noin the finger Affairs OF Bel Ami ln was
the Guy de ana oec
h Albert levin the life OF young man VINO
the discovery number OF women ike 10 De ps
most reared gossip
IN Paris casting betrayed after announcer as ~
heconoe no longer useful to his success
It probably of life when Mapassan wrote IT, ou1
ro Is an almost unbeaaby dull account of the life OF cad
It's dialogue unweidy Its attempts az tne witty
epieram are clumsiy verbose than pthy' . .,,-
clearly Mr. Levin wrote and directed it, responoe
Tie NAV saw that the period in TACT hat ne Is quos
The author directly many but he still can't place the blame on
de Maupassant writer's duty to select ana eo as
we'll as to be original in adapting story to the screen