CHAPTER XIX
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN STAGE PRODUCTIONS
Although the mounting and staging of photo-plays has been greatly improved, the art has still many imperfections. This is partly due to the conservative character of the industry. There is a lack of initiative and enterprise; the producers are content to keep in the one groove which was established years ago. No one can deny that enormous sums of money are expended upon the mounting of the productions, nor assail them from the photographic viewpoint. But there is a lack of art which at times is sadly jarring.
This was to be expected. When the English pioneers embarked upon the play-producing business they knew nothing about stage-craft. Their ambition was rather to perfect the photographic quality of the films. So rapidly did the movement advance, however, and so insistent was the public in its demands for better, larger, and more lavishly staged plays, that the pioneer found himself out-distanced. At this juncture came the man who had won his spurs in the theatre, and who was thoroughly expert in the technique of stage-craft. His professional knowledge lifted the art out of the hands of the pioneers, who retired from the scene.
The introduction of the professional element commenced in France, and was taken up immediately by the Americans. These two countries went ahead so rapidly that Great Britain was soon left behind. The world became flooded with French and American productions, and in this healthy race the latter soon went ahead and took premier position. The French industry, being threatened, pulled itself together, and taking a cue from American methods it overhauled its organisations and increased its expenditure, with the result that it soon attained the level of excellence achieved by the United States. At a later date the Italian industry, which was in a languishing condition, followed suit. Money was sunk in the enterprise, huge studios were built, and talented artists were engaged to act before the moving-picture camera.
Great Britain lagged in this race, and it is only recently that the British producers, by a change of method have been able to make up the leeway. The British movement was rather of a sporadic nature. It was left to one or two enterprising firms to show the way. But others have followed, and to-day there is the keenest rivalry in producing, nor is expense considered so long as the public gets what it wants. To sink £3,000 ($15,000) in a single production has become quite a common venture.
In many cases, however, in spite of these changes, photo-plays still follow the lines that prevailed ten years ago. The blemishes, defects, and anachronisms are just as pronounced now as they were then, though they are suffered in silence by the public. Many faults are hidden by the gorgeous and lavish mounting of the scenes, while the rapid action of the players serves to distract attention from the shortcomings of the environment. But the feeling of actuality, which ought to be the great feature of the cinematograph, is missing. The scenic accessories might be left out for all the effect that they produce.
As a matter of fact the photo-play stage occupies to-day the position of the theatre twenty years ago. The scenery is for the most part make-shift, crudely painted in the neutral black and white, the stock room being ransacked to discover pieces of canvas to fit the situation. There is no attempt to create an artistic effect. Also there is an entire absence of reality or individuality. A cell scene, for instance, bears every sign of being built of canvas and battens, and so does the exterior of a mediæval castle, or the inside of a conservatory, and completed by a factory hand.