One notable aspect of the film industry is how it differentiates defending on the time period. Beginning in the 1910s, this is when the identity of the star was unknown to the public. The star’s name was not advertised on film billboards, not any other form of exposure. During the 1930s and 1940s, “studio publicity focused the public’s attention on stars’ personalities rather than their craftsmanship. In promotional campaigns for specific pictures and behind-the-scenes bios of individual stars’ audiences were told that Hollywood actors were natural actors whose unique qualities were captured by the camera” (Cynthia Baum, ‘Crating Film Performances’, 31). The studios placed a large emphasis on showcasing the star’s personality, and showing that the star is a real person. It was sort of a facade; the studios would try and show the star’s personality through their film work. Basically, the character that the star played would have to have the same personality as the star themself. When comparing this to how film and Hollywood work today, they are complete opposites of one another. In today’s world, a film star can play many roles, no matter what the character’s personality is. The star is actually praised more if the character doesn’t match the star’s real life personality because this shows talent. The transition to sound also affected the film industry greatly. 1926-1934, to be specific, were the transformative years of sound in film. During this period, vocal modulation became of great importance in the film industry, thus there being an influx of demand for dialog and drama coaches. With this new sound and intensity of the vocal range, there was a shift of where the successful actors and actresses performed. Once vocal modulation became of importance, drama actors moved from Broadway to Hollywood, resulting in a decline in theater productions. With the rise of Hollywood stars came more employment in Hollywood film industries and production companies. With more employment came a larger production atmosphere, and with a larger production atmosphere came stricter rules and regulations for the stars. In the 1940s and 1950s, it was extremely hard for a star to move from one studio to another. We then move onto the time period of the 1950s and 1960s. During the 1950s and 1960s is when tabloids started to play a big role in a star’s career. “Publicity offices were responsible for distributing stars’ photos to magazines and newspapers, for planting stories about their private lives in news outlets and for arranging interviews with journalists” (Rigoletto). A prime example of this can be the analysis of Marilyn Monroe’s career. She was one of the biggest icons of this time. Her entire life was a string of some true, but mostly false narrative created by production companies. Specifically by male members of the production company. Monroe’s whole life was constructed by the media. I think it’s important to compare Monroe’s physical appearance to another female star such as Marlene Dietrich. Dietrich was originally staged as a cold and unapproachable beauty. Dietrich was always photographed with dark clothing, thin dark eyebrows, and prominent lipstick. Her facial expressions were stale and stern. She carried a “no bullshit” attitude to put it simply. Evidently, Monroe’s appearance was the exact opposite of this. Monroe always had open body posture, her makeup was never dark, and in her infamous playboy cover she is wearing a white flowy dress. This is a small, but significant key difference that played a huge role in outlining the star images for the two actresses. Monroe changed everything to put it simply. Before Monroe, the women of Hollywood were seen as home-loving, church-going folks.

When comparing Monroe and Dietrich to one another, the difference between how they were viewed by the public becomes apparent. In my opinion, both of them are female icons, but generally men view Dietrich to be the classical image of “female empowerment”. Why is this? The public’s mind has been conditioned that when females partake in, and even desire, sex they are “bad” and some may even say “tainted”. Dietrich wasn’t publicized as a person that had a sexual drive and that partook in the act of sex, but Monroe was. Because of this, the public automatically assumed that Dietrich was ‘better’. Why is it that men can have such an adamant sex drive, but women are shunned when they do so?

In conclusion, the film industry has evolved into different eras, and will continue to do so. So, the question is, what is next for the film industry?