Following the release of The Jazz Singer in 1927, many people in Hollywood believed that talking pictures were just a passing fancy. MGM's head of production Irving Thalberg, for instance, found The Jazz Singer "a good gimmick, but that's all it was", while gossip columnist Louella Parsons said, "I have no fear that scraping, screeching, rasping sound film will ever disturb our peaceful motion picture theaters." Many actors were also quick to reject the talkies, among them British-born Ronald Colman, a very popular silent film star who had started his career on the stage. In a 1928 letter to Abraham Lehr (vice-president of Samuel Goldwyn Productions), Colman shared his opinion on "this "sound" business", while refusing to sign a contract amendment authorising the new work method. In the end, Colman came around and successfully transitioned from silent to sound film, not least thanks to his beautiful voice (which proved a perfect match for his on-screen image). Popular silent stars who were not so lucky and didn't survive the transition to sound include John Gilbert, Emil Jannings, Norma Talmadge and Vilma Banky.
Having successfully transitioned to talkies, Ronald Colman continued to be a sought-after lead in the 1930s and 1940s, eventually winning an Oscar for his role in A Double Life (1947). |
Source: Letters from Hollywood: Inside the Private World of Classic American Moviemaking (2019) by Rocky Lang and Barbara Hall
Transcript:
5th August, 1928.
My dear Abe:
Sorry I did not see you yesterday and that tomorrow I shall be away from the studio on location.
With reference to the additional clause to the contract, - I would rather not sign this, at any rate just at present. Except as a scientific achievement, I am not sympathetic to this "sound" business. I feel, as so many do, that it is a mechanical resource, that it is a retrogressive and temporary digression in so far as it affects the art of motion picture acting, - in short that it does not properly belong to my particular work (of which naturally I must be the best judge).
That the public are for the time being demanding this novelty is obvious, and that the producer is anxious to supply it is natural, and for the actor to dispute this situation or contend against it would be foolish. After four years' experience with myself, the firm should have no doubt as to my reasonable co-operation in this matter - as in others.
For me to function conscientiously before the microphone is one thing, but to sign a legally phrased document authorising this is a very different matter and would logically presuppose my approval of this mechanical accessory to my work.
Furthermore, if the original contract embraces such developments in motion picture making, then the amendment is superfluous. If it does not, I would not care to have it added.
I hope I have made this clear, Abe. May I request that the company will respect these convictions and leave the matter where it is.
Kind regards always,
Ronald Colman (signed)
No comments:
Post a Comment