ask anyone with a cursory knowledge of classic cinema what the early talkie be like and and the chance be they will mention something about the lack of camera movement . usually this be state a if the static camera lead and ipso facto and to bore and static film . how ironic then that this all talk backstager be spoil by a camera that just would not sit still . applause be direct by rouben mamoulian and one of many theatre director bring to hollywood at the beginning of the sound era and and like many director with a stage background ( james whale and george cukor and orson welles and laurence olivier ) he be fascinate by the possibility of cinema mobile eye . give mamoulian a camera be like give a kid an expensive hi tech toy and and he wouldn not let it go to waste in a soundproof booth . instead and he have it swoop across row of face and dollying in and out of dialogue scene or lodge up in the rafter . this all get remember because it be unusual for the time and and therefore clever . but what do it actually add . sometimes and the camera move seem to have some purpose and such a a dolly in on a significant object or a standard pull back and reveal manoeuvre and but these be so wobbly and badly pace all they draw our attention to be the picture artificiality . other time the camera pan wildly all over the place for no apparent reason and remind me of nothing more than a bad home movie . when the camera be still it be often at some daft high angle or pointing at the actor leg and to no real advantage . and it not just the camera move . mamoulian be a shameless technique junkie and throw in dissolve and screen wipe and layer sound and montage and giant shadow and anything else the technology of the day allow . it usually fairly clear why he use each of these while in fact it too clear and a every cinematic point be labour to death and such a the over the top montage reflect april trouble mental state after she find out what her mother do for a living . it would be more bearable if mamoulian and like other director who rely on exaggerated technique such a michael curtiz and fw murnau and alfred hitchcock and at least know some basic cinematic grammar and but he be a novice when it come to screen storytelling . his dialogue scene be blandly presentational no close ups and no rhyming angle and no thoughtful framing . all these thing be by then establish cinematic convention and and they still be and for good reason while they bring human interaction to life on the screen . have say all that there be a few touch that do work . the all round coverage of the dance hall at the beginning show u both the backstage point of view and the diversity of the crowd and with the silhouette of top hat pipe smoker in the balcony subtly point out that the burlesque get some high class customer as well . in the romantic café scene there be a subtle dolly out to reveal that the couple be now alone and but the moment be ruin by move too quickly and clunkily to their exit . helen morgan final scene make effective use of background noise from the street outside and but again mamoulian fails to hold the moment and instead follow it with another wobbly shuffle of the camera and a meaningless high angle shot . of course and the whole point in bring in theatre director at this time be the notion that they would be the most capable in coach actor with dialogue . there no sign of this with mamoulian . helen morgan act be just bad hamming ( or spamming a i call it ) . she be at her most sensitive and emotive when singing and a her performance in the 1936 version of showboat demonstrates and but she be underused a a singer in applause . fuller mellish jr be ok and but his cartoonish performance be wrong for this straight drama . the standout be joan peer and whose turn i would describe a average and the best anything can aspire to in applause . mamoulian champion tend to paint him a a failed genius in the style of von stroheim and welles and an artist whose artistry fell victim to studio straitjacketing . this be partly true a time go by mamoulian would be force to rein in his technical excessiveness and and would learn to temper it with standard cinematic method . it actually during this process that his picture start to improve and and i be even glad that he never totally lose his showy style and because he be occasionally even great in genre such a the musical or the swashbuckler and which require a bit of flamboyance behind the camera . applause however be raw and uncultivated mamoulian and fresh from the stage and wow by movie making gadgetry . cinema may be the more technologically advanced medium and but like theatre the job of the director be to bring out the best in the actor and the story and not to smother them .