LAST SILENT PICTURE SHOW

Marilyn Slater · Post by **Marilyn Slater** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:08 am

Did you ever wonder what it was like during the revolution? Between “Silents and Sound” it was a very busy time and yet it isn’t a period in which a lot is written, until now with the wonderful book by William M. Drew, “The Last Silent Picture Show” I posted a little information at http://looking-for-mabel.webs.com/lasts ... reshow.htm

[/size]

Brooksie · Post by **Brooksie** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 3:10 am

Alexander Walker's `The Shattered Silents' is my favourite source on this era - it's fairly easy to track down and well worth reading.

vitaphone · Post by **vitaphone** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:05 am

I would also suggested Donald Crafton's THE TALKIES and Scott Eyman';s THE SPEED OF SOUND.

And for documentary coverage of this fascinating period, the last episode of Kevin Brownlow's HOLLYWOOD series and the really good 90 minute THE DAWN OF SOUND doc on Disk 2 of the wonderful 3 DVD THE JAZZ SINGER deluxe set (shameless plug!)

Harlett O'Dowd · Post by **Harlett O'Dowd** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 6:52 am

vitaphone wrote:I would also suggested Donald Crafton's THE TALKIES and Scott Eyman';s THE SPEED OF SOUND.

And for documentary coverage of this fascinating period, the last episode of Kevin Brownlow's HOLLYWOOD series and the really good 90 minute THE DAWN OF SOUND doc on Disk 2 of the wonderful 3 DVD THE JAZZ SINGER deluxe set (shameless plug!)

Although specific to one genre, Barrios' A Song in The Dark - especially the recently revised edition - is also quite good.

drednm · Post by **drednm** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:35 am

I like Crafton's book and always wonder why it's not better knwon....

I didn't know Barrios had updated his terrific book on musicals. Is he nicer now to Alice White?

Harlett O'Dowd · Post by **Harlett O'Dowd** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:17 am

drednm wrote:I like Crafton's book and always wonder why it's not better knwon....

I didn't know Barrios had updated his terrific book on musicals. Is he nicer now to Alice White?

I don't know about the "er" part, but no, he's still, most definitely, *not* a fan.

Not that version 1.0 was bad, but I think this revision in infinitely better in terms of clarity and overall tone.

rudyfan · Post by **rudyfan** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:32 am

Brooksie wrote:Alexander Walker's `The Shattered Silents' is my favourite source on this era - it's fairly easy to track down and well worth reading.

I agree, it is a great book. A very compelling read.

I need to read Eyman's book, it's on the list...

George O'Brien · Post by **George O'Brien** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:20 pm

Scott Eyman is especially good on the business/financial aspects of the changeover.Especially how MGM, Paramount, and Universal actively fought dialogue in pictures. I think MGM's persistence in employing merely sound effects and music actually hastened the death of silents. In films like "White Shadows in the South Seas" and "The Kiss" you hear everything imaginable but people speaking, and it's a downright weird experience.

Brooksie · Post by **Brooksie** » Sat Sep 25, 2010 8:06 pm

One thing that comes across very strongly in the primary sources is that there was a genuine debate over the merits of silent films over sound films, and the idea that both forms would continue was considered entirely plausible.

Alexander Walker's most intriguing suggestion is that if sound had come only a year later, or the Depression a year earlier, it would have been impossible to convert theatres for sound at the speed or extent that they did, and there might have been quite a different outcome in the `silents vs sound' argument. There's an alternate history to contemplate!

Arndt · Post by **Arndt** » Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:25 am

Having greatly enjoyed THE SHATTERED SILENTS I am reading another book by Alexander Walker at the moment. It is called STARDOM and it is just as insightful and knowledgable.

gjohnson · Post by **gjohnson** » Sun Sep 26, 2010 11:58 am

Brooksie wrote: Alexander Walker's most intriguing suggestion is that if sound had come only a year later, or the Depression a year earlier, it would have been impossible to convert theatres for sound at the speed or extent that they did, and there might have been quite a different outcome in the `silents vs sound' argument. There's an alternate history to contemplate!

Pretty much what happened to the rest of the world in their conversions.

Everyone's familiar with Chaplin's attitude concerning sound but even in his most lucid moments the farthest he would go was that the two mediums would survive together side by side but that no way would the art of silence be surpassed by sound.

Charlie wasn't much of a prognosticator.

Gary J.

Brooksie · Post by **Brooksie** » Sun Sep 26, 2010 6:27 pm

gjohnson wrote:
Brooksie wrote: Alexander Walker's most intriguing suggestion is that if sound had come only a year later, or the Depression a year earlier, it would have been impossible to convert theatres for sound at the speed or extent that they did, and there might have been quite a different outcome in the `silents vs sound' argument. There's an alternate history to contemplate!

Pretty much what happened to the rest of the world in their conversions.

That's not true of Australia. We converted more quickly than just about anywhere, arguably with the least economic capacity to do so, and much to the detriment of our own film industry (though our sound industry did very well out of it - some of the early Australian-developed systems were initially cheaper and better than the overseas ones).

There are a couple of good articles on the of the various Australian-developed sound technologies at http://www.latrobe.edu.au/screeningthep ... yfr16.html and http://epress.anu.edu.au/tal/mobile_dev ... 11s02.html. Raycophone is the best known.