THREE DAYS OF FAME IN LONDON

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 224, 10 December 1927, Page 26 (Supplement)

THREE DAYS OF FAME IN LONDON

Triumph of Iso be l Wilford, New Zealand Actress, Who Stepped With Brilliant Success From Ranks of London s “Understudies”

(Written for THE SUN by “CRITICUS.”)

**■', n ■. FAMOUS London actress, desiring to replenish her wardrobe, flew to Paris one Sunday morning, intending to return on M Caßlfc3ißfej Monday in time to resume her part in the successful West End play in which she had regularly appeared during a phenomenal season. She caught a chill, was obliged to seek treatment in hospital for a severe attack of influenza, and for three nights and a matinee her role was filled by an understudy. Upon such vagaries of fortune do some of our greatest actors and actresses owe their careers. The whole theatrical world of London is congratulating Miss Isobel Wilford on her remarkable triumph. Young actresses who, in years past, left New Zealand and Australia to seek fame on the London stage invariably found the path to success strewn with pitfalls and insuperable difficulties. The spectacular nature of Miss Wilford’s triumph is, therefore, the more unexpected. True, the young New Zealander saw her debut short-lived, but in those three days she established a reputation which no West End manager can afford to ignore. She was acclaimed by enthusiastic audiences to whom she was a complete stranger, a Cinderella who, carelessly overlooked while she was relegated to the shadow, became the cynosure of all eyes when the limelight played upon her. For four brief performances she was, in all sense, the darling of the gods.

CHANCE FOR UNDERSTUDY

Friends of Miss Wilford, who is the daughter of Mr. T. M. Wilford, exLeader of the Liberal Party in the House of Representatives and “Father of the House,” were not greatly surprised when, on her arrival in London eighteen months ago, she slipped into an important understudy post for the well-known theatrical managers, Messrs. Clayton and Waller. From understudying Olga Lindo in “The Best People” she went to “The Gold Diggers,” understudying the part taken in London by Ruth Terry. Then came “The Garden of Eden,” an adaptation of a foreign play, in which she was chosen to understudy the leading actress, Tallulah Bankhead, reputed to be the highest-paid West End actress of the day. She was, in addition, given a minor part in the play—a role in which not even a Sybil Thorndike could shine.

Such was the position when news came from Paris that Tallulah Bankhead was ill. M ’.s Wilford stepped into the leading loie on the Monday night and the curtain went down on the second act amid a perfect storm of applause. I saw the play the next evening and I doubt if any actress has earned such an ovation since the “Old Vic” closed down for repairs. Applause and cheers resounded through the Lyric Theatre for Quite five minutes while the young New Zealander, flushed with success and a little dazed

bv the reception, came from the wings five or six times and acknowledged the tribute with a scarcely perceptible inclination of the head. “Who is she?” was the question heard on all sides.

A rustling of programmes followed. An emendation tag within the leaves read: “Owing to indisposition Miss

Tallulah Bankhead’s role will be played by Miss Isobel Wilford.” The whispering started again. “I don’t know who she is, but I hear she comes from New Zealand. Nobody knows anything about her.” “Well, I think she’s perfectly wonderful. Don’t you think she’s beautiful?” And so it went on, while the orchestra played before the commencement of the third act. SPONTANEOUS PERFORMANCE Of Miss Wilford’s performance one can only speak in terms of high admiration, particularly when it is remembered that an understudy is obliged to give an exact replica of her principal’s part and is allowed no opportunity to indulge her own personality. The spontaneity of Miss Wilford’s acting in these circumstances was indeed wonderful. If a little self-conscious-ness obtruded in the first act it was hardly noticeable and must be attributed to nervousness. The responsibility upon her was enormous. Not having had an opportunity to question Miss Wilford, I am not able to say whether the play is one she enjoys acting in or not. It is not generally regarded as a good play, and I have heard of mothers who refuse to allow their daughters to see it. That is because, no doubt, the Monte Carlo setting is not of the sweetest. The part Miss Wilford played is that of a Parisian cabaret singer whose beauty and freshness is coveted by many disreputable .men. The first act is a picture of girlish innocence caught in a human spider’s web and shows the singer struggling with her tormentor

in a secret room under the caba stage. "***’• Rescued from this den of i niqnjt by a pitiable old -woman who, th reduced in circumstances, enjoy luxurious holidays in M Carlo by the simple device of acc WS ing men’s offerings for which she gJ*' nothing in return, the one-time girl finds herself the focus of ing Casino loungers and successful], skates on thin ice until she fali 3 love with a rich youth who promisf her marriage. All is ready for the nu * tials when her concealed identitT > unceremoniously laid bare. She U denounced by a disappointed The most questionable complexion ■' placed upon her past and a furic--family disturbance ensues. THE BIG SCENE T7nfortunately, the misunderstand. ings arrive too late. It is but five utes before the wedding guests arrir including the Prime Minister, who has condescendingly agreed to be presetAmid the fury of the storm the to be followed by the young man ay his people is only too clear. Past 0 . no past, the marriage must proceed or complete ridicule and obloquy fall upoj their heads. “On with the marriage!” they ctt But poor little Toni Lebrun, shocked to the depths of her heart at ty shabby treatment she has received, takes a desperate plunge. She vm have no marriage but one of love. She tells them so in accents fierce and throbing. Her anger feeds her vola. bility. She waxes wrath and then becomes frantic, and just as the band plays “Here Comes the Bride,” or something equally appropriate, she tears her hair and her clothes too, and stands, an infuriated and sadly dilapidated object, before the astonished Prime Minister and his newly-armed party. This, of course, is the “big” scene is the play, and, apart from the fact that it is the second time within an hour in which the leading actress is seen in her underwear, it has the merit of being dramatically written. The rest of the play, which is translated from the Austrian, is not very satisfactory, and the ending, in which the humiliated Toni drowns her sorrow by marrying a rich octogenarian, is frankly cynical. Nevertheless, it will be "conceded that such material requires great acting. Miss Wilford not only succeeded in making the right appeal to the senses, for she is daintily built, but she put tremendous force and earnestness into her acting. I have seen her in two or three plays in New Zealand and Australia, including “If Winter Comes” and “The Cat and the Canary,” but nothing she has done can approach the performance with which she delighted Londoners in “The Garden of Eden.” Ambition should carry Miss Wilfcrd far. It was ambition that took her a few years ago i.o Hollywood and gare her first-hand experience in the films. It has now taken her to London, and in Fortune has smiled kindly upon her for three nights and a day, that will only put edge to her ambition. She is a conscientious player, rejoicing in a petite and vivacious personality. The successive steps of her carter should be interesting.