MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1934848400 · doi:10.7202/1030232ar

Stage Actors and Modern Acting Methods Move to Hollywood in the 1930s

2015· article· en· W1934848400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cynthia Baron

Bibliographic record

VenueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiques · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheater, Performance, and Music History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHollywoodStanislavski's systemMovie theaterThe artsPerforming artsVisual artsMedia studiesArtAestheticsArt historyHistorySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the author considers factors in commercial 1930s American theatre and film which led to the unusual circumstance of many stage-trained actors employing ostensibly theatrical acting methods to respond effectively to the challenges and opportunities of industrial sound film production. The author proposes that with American sound cinema fundamentally changing employment prospects on Broadway and Hollywood production practices, the 1930s represent a unique moment in the history of American performing arts, wherein stage-trained actors in New York and Hollywood developed performances according to principles of modern acting articulated by Stanislavsky, the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in New York and the acting manuals written by theatre-trained professionals and used by both stage and screen actors. To illustrate certain aspects of the era’s conception of modern acting, the author analyzes a scene fromCaptains Courageous(Victor Flemining, 1937) with Spencer Tracy and a scene fromThe Guardsman(Sidney Franklin, 1931) with Alfred Lunt and Lynn Fontanne.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.028
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiquesSame topicTheater, Performance, and Music HistoryFrench-language works237,207