Evening star., 1952-10-21

SOuNQ equipment can Oe moved
quickly and easily from one set
to another.
There is. however. curious
philosophy at work here. 1t is the
intent. apparently. to try to give
this impression of an audience by
photographing Il Married Joan"
always from one side, as if over
the footlights. This can only
achieve. not the theater's and the
motion pictures illusion of watch
ing people. but a new one. the
illusion of watching actors initiate
people.
The telefilm- makers even go to
what some observers consider COM
ical lengths to give home viewers
this impression of being part of
an audience. The audience got into
broadcasting in the first place be-
cause some comedians claimed
they were lost without immediate
response to their wit. Now. there
lis theory that you will not laugh
out loud while sitting at home
alone, unless you hear a lot Of
other people laughing. You may
enjoy the show just as much, but
these boys want you to laugh out
loud so you'll think it was fun
nier than it was and tell your
friends.
Some shows are filmed with an
audience present. and its laugh
ter is recorded on the sound track
along with the dialogue. There are
some cases when this is not feasi-
BILE, but ingenuity has triumphed.
In these cases the completed film
is shown to an audience seated
before open microphones. The
laughter recorded then is care
fully added to the sound track
already on the film.
No one could be found. on a
recent quick jaunt to Hollywood.
who could explain why the tele-
film trend is to abandon the f1eXi-
bility of the camera and squeeze
these fictions inside the pro-
scenium arch. Or why so much
time and effort is expended on
audience laughter. more often an
irritant than anything else.
One optimistic note was
sounded by p. j. Wolfson, pro-
ducer Of II Married JOAN" whose
feeling seems to be that these
practices are not too firmly rooted.
He was asked directly why he
thought it necessary to add spuri-
Gus laughter to a telefilm sound
track.
II don't" he replied. "But some
body started it, now everybody
does it. I'm convinced that in five
years. hope less than that
nobody will be doing it."
There is another aspect of
telefilm production which must
be changed if Hollywood is to give
us much but mediocrity when it is
providing that promised 80 per
cent of our TV fare. It was en-
phasized accidentally yesterday
by a New York Times headline
which read. "Niven Busch Gets
$4,000 for Script" That script.
of course, was a motion picture
scenario. The price is exactly the
same as the informed estimate of
the entire production budget of
the costliest situation comedy
telefilm, Amos n Andy"
The telefilm practice, as in live
television and radio, too often
seems to be to figure first the stars
salary, then the directors and
other salaries and other produc-
tion costs. If there is anything
left of the allowable budget. that's
the writer's fee. One successful
writer explained quickly and clear
ly recently why he does no work
for one of the well-known telefilm
producers.
Last I heard they were paying
$3.50 for half hour scripts"
You do run across more realiStS
than you expect to meet in tele-
film circles, men striving to do the
best they can within the financial
limitations imposed upon them.
One Of these, o producer who
probably would prefer to be name
less. was asked If possibility Of
future profits from pay-as-you-go
|or subscription television was one
|of the reasons so many shows were
turning to film. He shook his head
and instantly replied:
II don't think people would
Espend money to watch, these
shows"