1921: The Battle of the Babbies

Today, the Scottish novelist and playwright Sir J.M. (James Matthew) Barrie is best remembered as the author of Peter Pan, but in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century he was wildly popular for all of his works. Upcoming publications were anticipated with the same enthusiasm as the Harry Potter stories are today. Beloved for his melodramatic romances laced with quaintness and fantasy, The Little Minister was not Barrie’s first published work, but it was his first big success. Published as a novel in Great Britain in 1891 and debuted as a play in 1897, the tale quickly crossed the Atlantic and into the hands of American readers. The Little Minister has not withstood the test of time as well as Peter Pan, but for twenty years after its first appearance, The Little Minister was performed hundreds of times in theaters both grand and local, across the pond in the U. S. And while literary critics sneered at the whimsy and droll of Barrie’s writing, audiences loved it.
Colloquialisms such as “Life is a long lesson in humility” and “Temper [is] a weapon that we hold by the blade” were quotes from The Little Minister that readers memorized and embraced as their own personal adages. Another favorite was “The life of every man is a diary in which he means to write one story, and writes another, and his humblest hour is when he compares the volume as it is with what he vowed to make it.”
While the novelization of The Little Minister takes place over a period of ten months, the play timeline is but a day and a night. Set in a small Scottish village, much of the drama contains doses of local flavor and language. But American Anglophiles adored both the romanticism of the Scottish village setting, along with the quaintness of the fanciful tale.
The play was first filmed in 1913 and again in 1915. However, the simultaneous filming in 1921 of The Little Minister by two major Hollywood studios was an uncommon occurrence, indeed. It was just as rare then as it is today.
Most actors resent competition between roles, such as the "best performance" categories in the Academy Awards. This is understandable; one nominee’s role is generally unlike another. To compare one actor’s interpretation of a Shakespearan character to a portrayal of a famous athlete to a performance of a dancing singer in a musical to a fictional protagonist in a dramatic role is like apples to peanuts to pork chops to angel food cake. To be precise, they are not at all the same, defy resemblance, and make for an illogical contest.
As a rule, when two different actors take on roles that are literally of the same character and the productions are completed within weeks or months of each other, distributors have generally taken the tactic of pushing back the date of the film completed last. This is mainly to avoid each canceling out the other by offering too (two) much of a good thing. An example of this is the recent depiction of the same character in two separate films; that of the late Truman Capote. Albeit, the portrayals are offered in two very different screenplays about the author’s life. In 2005’s Capote, the title role was performed by Philip Seymour Hoffman and based on the Gerald Clarke biography of the same title. Have You Heard? is derived from George Plimpton’s collection of interviews in Truman Capote: In Which Various Friends, Enemies, Acquaintances and Detractors Recall His Turbulent Career (Nan A. Talese, 1997). Little wonder that the release of the latter was pushed back after Hoffman won a Best Actor Oscar for his portrayal of Capote. Another case in point is of the modern film adaptations of Choderlos de Laclos’ classic novel Les Liasons Dangereuses; 1988’s Dangerous Liaisons and the following year’s interpretation, Valmont. While the first is well known, very few people have ever heard of the second. It is as if one canceled out the other by their being released too soon in the public memory. This is a predictable outcome, and no one in the film industry would want to make such a foolish move, as the chances for failure are 50/50 and those odds are too high to gamble. Therefore, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find another example in which two films, inspired by the same novel or play, have been produced and released at exactly the same time, as in the case of the Paramount and Vitagraph releases in 1921 of The Little Minister.
And if Paramount and Vitagraph were doing it for publicity, they certainly succeeded. The Paramount version of The Little Minister with Betty Compson starring as the female lead was released one week prior to the Vitagraph adaptation featuring Alice Calhoun, which premiered on January 8, 1922. Newspaper and fanzine articles about the films, comparing and contrasting each of the performances, sets, costumes, editing and subtitles, etc., ran for months after the movie’s debuts. Audience anticipation and expectations were high, and the rivalry was on to see which version was “the best”. Opinions were exchanged and argued over. But since both films sold a similar amount of tickets, neither company suffered any financial losses by daring to use this approach. Theater advertisements in the newspapers made it clear which version was being shown on their silver screen, such as The New York Times listings for “This Week’s Films” :
RIVOLI – “The Little Minister,” directed by Penrhyn Stanlaws, with Betty Compson in the leading role, adapted from Sir James M. Barries’s novel and play by Elfrid Bingham, supervised by Thompson Buchanan, a Paramount picture; “Chums,” a comedy, with Baby Peggy.
PLAZA – Today, “The Little Minister,” with Alice Calhoun, the Vitagraph version of Barrie’s novel and play; …Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday, “Little Lord Fauntelroy,” with Mary Pickford.

In initial reviews, critics agreed nearly unanimously that Vitagraph’s James Morrison was perfectly cast as the title character; it was a role the consummate actor was born to play. Reviewers also, more often than not, preferred Alice Calhoun’s performance of Lady Babbie over Betty Compson’s. In the January 22, 1922 issue of The Stevens Point Journal (Wisconsin) the national “Harrison Reports” comparison of the two films was run:
The Vitagraph version is the better of the two. The Vitagraph picture has been produced with more care; its supporting cast has been selected more intelligently, its atmosphere is truer to life, it is better acted, and its continuity is smoother.…
…As to the leading players, the ones in the Vitagraph version are by far the superior. Miss Calhoun is a more refined actress. As a gypsy, she acts the part; as a lady, she looks and acts every bit of it and is better adapted to the role. Miss Compson, the heroine in the Paramount version, on the other hand, is altogether miscast. As to the leading man, James Morrison, the hero in the Vitagraph version, is a real life little minister, is sympathetic and succeeds in making the spectator feel his emotions; while George Hackathorne, the Gavin of the Paramount version, is miscast.

Promotional ads by Vitagraph read “Don’t be fooled”, insinuating that the Vitagraph version was more preferred than the Paramount offering. So confident was Vitagraph in their production that the stakes were upped even more. As part of their publicity for the film, Vitagraph offered a prize of $100 to anyone who could prove that the Paramount production was superior to the Alice Calhoun vehicle.
To her credit, Betty Compson was most certainly a fine and talented actress who appeared in 121 films over the span of her career. At the period of time when both the Paramount and Vitagraph versions of The Little Minister were filmed, both Betty and Alice lived in similar familial circumstances, each residing with their mothers in Hollywood bungalows. Their rise to stardom, their versatile talents, and their wholesome lifestyles are other similarities.
Nor is there any evidence that Alice Calhoun and Betty Compson had any hard feelings about the rivalry created by their respective employers; both artists were simply pawns in a publicity stunt perpetrated by the movie machine. And no one, including the critics, panned Betty’s performance as Lady Barbara/Babbie, either. In fact, she received high praise for her performance. One reviewer called it “her best work” and described her as “perfectly romantic” in the role. Modern day critics, such as AMG’s Janiss Garza personally preferred Compson’s Babbie to Calhoun’s. Although it should be noted that Vitagraph’s The Little Minister is classified as a “lost” film, so it is doubtful that Garza ever actually viewed Alice Calhoun’s role.
Alice herself always felt that the part of Lady Barbara/Babbie was the best role she performed in her career. It was always one of her own favorite films, and one of the few that the humble performer didn’t mind viewing herself . It is most unfortunate that no known copies exist today.
But ultimately, the final word on the “battle of the Babbies” rivalry would be put to rest when the opinion of the author of The Little Minister and creator of Babbie was rendered. It wasn’t until 1925 that he voiced his choice. In the May 17 edition of the Los Angeles Times, it was reported that Sir James Barrie called Alice Calhoun “the ideal Babbie of the screen.”
- (c) Susann Disbro Gilbert 21 Jan 2010

References:
The New York Times pg. 65, December 25, 1921.
The Stevens Point Daily Journal (Wisconsin) January 28, 1922.
…called by Sir James Barrie “the ideal Babbie of the screen”…Los Angeles Times, California May 17, 1925
Author’s note: There is no record of anyone actually claiming the prize of $100 offered by Vitagraph. “Lost” meaning that there are no known public or archived copies.

Final Note:
This is a excerpt from a chapter in "Alice in Hollywoodland: The Life and Times of Silent Screen Actress Alice Calhoun" by Susann Desborough. I chose to put this up on the blog in the hopes of getting some feedback and constructive criticism. One of the issues my editor has with it is that I discuss and compare this unusual circumstance with modern film. I personally found it interesting and more informative, but I'm curious to know what you think. Please share your opinions with me.