Judge — December 20, 1930 — page 23: what you’re looking at

Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.

it Rowrns has put a few WW errrontate observations in “Lightnin’,” viz: “With the stuff they sell these days, you can't wet drunk — you're cither sober or dead,” and someone has drawn out the love interest, figuring unkindly that Father Rogers would not tx able to. sta the public. sing! handedly, but otherwise the play made into an institution by the late Frank Bacon has been ‘accurately transferred to the movies. The David Harum legend is the most profitable nd lively myth in our national li- brary. The theory that, although he may be illiterate, uncouth, and awkward, the average / nis more than a match for any German, Italian, or even a city banker — no atter how cultured—is not ay alive as it was when Twain so. tri- antly utilized it, but it is strong enough to make it well-nigh impos- sible for a man to run for President n prove that at) some period of his life he was handy with a pitchfork or a monkey wrench. (‘The monkey wrench was hastily added to the myth symbol for the benefit of Mr. Hoover.) Will Rogers is the apostle of this ureat myth—his humor is kindly, he docsn’t pretend to be any smarter ny other farmer, but he'd. b ard man to beat in a trade. you het—and “Lightnin’ might bh been made to order for him. It mediocre production. The lightin ind photography are poor, the love scenes are awkward and inexcusably drawn out. However, for those who like the radio talks, the syndicated lumn, the adverti nd the acting of Mr. Rogers, “Lightnin’” will be worth the price of admission, unless he ¢ ments, “Broriens” is a movie in which Bert Lytell plays two parts; just two parts too many. JUDGE JUDGING r=MO By PARE LORENTZ and “Big Money” are » there is no use w time on them. Besides this is as a time as any to make the big speech of the vear on Just What Is Wrong With the Movies, and here it is, whether vou like it or not, Last sea son there were a few experiments with the talking movie. The best of these experiments —" Hallelujah” and “Bulldog Drummond” wert with a so ch ting: made reye at symmetry, effect and ainst sound; they were, in other words, more movie than talkie, to use the Chinese action as a dialect current. in This year not one producer has cared to let any of his men experiment with his money outside of the wasted effort Lubitsch, who musical the profession at some comed none movies of the season showed any. in- lopment of the form, of the first talkies, was almost fifty per cent better than any of the noisy gangster movies of the year, even though there is a peculiar opportunity for action and dr: this type of picture. “Hell's A had some remarkably good flyir tures in it, but here again there was nothing new in this production; care and money were spent to ma better spectacle than’ any previous flying picture, but the plot, the form and the direction showed nothing that Recommended A polished piece of work "Worth one trip to ‘or all those who like “Laughter” The best movie of th year: faint enough p “Morocco” A nc w actress who look like Garbo, if that. m s anything “Outward to nd" —An expert tion of the old p VIES é was not done in’ “Wings.” One straight show was canned suecess fully, and by virtue of superb acting and a good pace, managed to be good entertainment. [ refer to “Holiday.” The same author wrote “Laughter” and a cast. vod It was the best movie of the year, but despite Dircetor 1 skill, it was not legitimate. a better director and as Arrast’s “Laugh- ter” moved fast, it get outdoors and all over the city, but it nevertheless ve one the feeling that here was a nned play that would have been better on the stage; the movie ma chine does not wait for laughs nor bows at the end of the show The Russian pictures gave the most promise. Despite their moral lessons, they had great power and needed no nd. in fact. but) few eap- tions to make themselves plutely articulate. The Germans and the English have effort to comp trade, and they ne Hollywood in: © for the Americ ure unbelievably bad. I do not believe the producers ever will go back to making silent movies. They have spent too much money on sound equipment and, besides. that. the boys who sold them their toys own a large interest in the business. Color and the wide film were used desper ately this year in an effort to interest the public. ‘The public was bored. and rightly so, and for the first time it would seem that the fantastically wealthy industry has overreached it self. Two things are liable to help tear down the existing movie monopoly, with its Hays off and its: theatre chains, One is Prohibiti lf. in time, beer comes back, sine man is going to spend a dollar to see a canned stage play when. that) same amount of gold will purchase twenty glasses of beer that will not blind or il him. imminent The second, and most transformation of Holly- (Continued on page 31) comicbooks.com