Life — July 2, 1925 — page 36: what you’re looking at

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

, my plans for the summer made. Whenever, by some mischance, I happen to sce a terrible picture during the heated term, I shall hasten around the corner to the theatre where “Don Q” nd remove the bad taste from my mouth. I had hoped for great things from “Don Q,” and my hopes were not vain. It is an inspiring picture. There will be more about it next week. “The White Monkey” HAT with going to the movies so much and one thing or another, I don't get to follow current fiction as closely as I should. Thus, I lack the necessary “background” for the great work that I am doing on this page: in reviewing adaptations of new novels as they appear on the screen, I don’t know blame the original author or the con- is playing whether to EGPE - NT DRAMA he direction is undistinguished, and the acting is ham; and here at least I #m on sure ground. I am quite cer- tain that Mr. Galsworthy was in E: land when “The White Monkey” was filmed; it is improbable that he di- rected the picture or played any of its leading roles. I don’t think I'll read the book, Vv “T'll Show You the Town” another of those popular H novels to which, or other, my attention was not drawn, “Tl Show You the Town” ten by Elmer Davis and is now a movie farce comedy with Reginald Denny as star. It is vastly more entertaining than “The White Monkey,” but it is sill short of a good picture. It tells of a young college professor who lives in a suite at what must be the Ritz- Carlton and dashes about with an at- for some reason was writ- tendant squadron of importunate girls. There are several funny scenes, some of which are handled with no little skill by Mr. Denny, But the reputa- tion as a farceur which has lately de- scended upon him has caused him to indulge in all manner of excesses; he feels that he must mug and grimace and scamper to and fro before he can tease a laugh from his audience. Exaggeration may be necessary in other forms of cinematographic art, but it is not needed in comedy. Almost any Chaplin, Lloyd or Keaton product will substantiate this. “Are Parents People?” TILL another novel that I haven't read. “Are Parents Peopl based entirely on one familiar and time-worn situation: a pair of di- vorcés who are brought together by common concern when harm is a picture tinuity writer who whipped the story into film form. Usu- ally, I adopt a safe middle course by stating that the pic- ture is bad, with no attempt to explain why, There is, for instance, “The White Monkey.” I have heard this Galsworthy novel dis- cussed, and I have seen adver- tisements which show a white monkey climbing up a bam- boo pole, the segments of which are labeled, “First Large Printing,” “Second Large Printing.” and so on up. In spite of all this in- ducement, I haven't read the book. As a movie, however, it is pretty awful. There seems to me to be neither rhyme nor reason in the plot—and even the vague idea which animates the theme appears artificial and strained. THE EFFICIENCY EXPERT WHO HAS TRAINED THE OFFICF FORCE. NEVER TO WASTE ANYTHING GETS A SEND-OFF. befalls their only child. It is a very thin story, and hardly worth the space de- voted to it. But it has one emphatic virtue: it is directed by Malcolm St. Clair with re- markable intelligence, simplic- ity and imagination. Mr. St. Clair has been identified hith- erto with the low-comedy studios; he therefore knows a great deal about genuine mov- ing pictures, and when he puts over an idea he does so in the most economical manner. He doesn’t waste his time with the usual directorial splu FRC. “Are Parents Peopl is well played by Adolphe Men- jou, Florence Vidor and Betty Bronson, and there is one ex- cellent comedy scene by André de Béranger. R. E, Sherwood. (Recent Developments will be found on page 31.) comicbooks.com