University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Shadows of stardom: Latina actresses in the 1930's Hollywood produced Spanish language films

(USC Thesis Other)

Shadows of stardom: Latina actresses in the 1930's Hollywood produced Spanish language films

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
SHADOWS OF STARDOM:
LATINA ACTRESSES IN THE 1930’S HOLLYWOOD PRODUCED SPANISH
LANGUAGE FILMS

by

Sandra Garcia-Myers

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(CINEMA-TELEVISION: CRITICAL STUDIES)

May 2012

Copyright 2012 Sandra Garcia-Myers

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Completing this dissertation was a long journey, which would not have been
possible without the support and encouragement of many people.
I would like to thank:
My dissertation committee of Tara McPherson, David James and George Sanchez
for their considerable support. This includes Linda Overholt who provided
administrative support for the Critical Studies program and always had kind words of
encouragement for me.
My family including my parents Robert and Maria Myers, for always being there,
along with my sister Deborah and brother Walter.
To the wonderful archivists and librarians at the Margaret Herrick Library at the
Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, UCLA Film and Television Archives,
UCLA Performing Arts Special Collections, New York Public Library, Library of
Congress, Warner Bros. Archives at the University of Southern California and the
Archives of the Performing Arts at the University of Southern California.
To my colleagues at the Cinematic Arts Library at the University of Southern
California for their support during this endeavor, especially Steve Hanson. He has been a
wonderful mentor over the years but more importantly, a terrific friend who never
faltered in his support of my returning to school to undertake obtaining my doctorate. I
can’t thank him enough.

iii
Another thank you goes to David James. I have told him over the years that I
never would have completed my degree without his help and encouragement. He has
always been generous with his time and guidance and truly exemplifies what being a
professor is all about.
And finally, the biggest thank you goes to my mother who has also become a
most important friend. There have been many ups and downs throughout the writing of
this dissertation and as throughout my life, she has been with me every step of the way.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ii
List of Figures v
Abstract viii

Chapter 1 1
Introduction

Chapter 2 25
Latina Stereotypes Imprinted on Celluloid

Chapter 3 47
The Film Industry’s Transition From Silent
To Sound and Hollywood’s Introduction of
The Spanish Language Film Experiment

Chapter 4 83
Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez On and Off
The Screen Through the Lens of Hollywood

Chapter 5 129
The Arrival of the Latina Actress and Their
Introduction to Hollywood

Aftermath 215
Conclusion 220
Bibliography 223

v
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Sombras de Gloria Advertisement 61
Figure 2 El Cuerpo del Delito Advertisement 79
Figure 3 Dolores Del Rio featured in the Wonder Bar 103
Press Book

Figure 4 Lupe Velez featured in Princess Pat Advertisement 126
Figure 5 Maria Alba 130
Figure 6 Lupita Tovar 131
Figure 7 Mona Maris 132
Figure 8 Rosita Moreno 133
Figure 9 Conchita Montenegro 134
Figure 10 Catalina Barcena 135
Figure 11 Rosita Moreno arriving in Los Angeles 140
Figure 12 Lupita Tovar, Maria Alba and Delia Magana 143
Figure 13 Pamphlet Cover for No Dejes La Puerta Abierta 163
Figure 14 Inside of Pamphlet for No Dejes La Puerta Abierta 163
Figure 15 Newspaper Advertisement for Marido y Mujer 169
Figure 16 Max Factor Make-Up Advertisement 173
Figure 17 “La Sociedad” section in La Opinion 175

vi

Figure 18 Lupita Tovar on cover of Cine-Mundial fan 179
magazine

Figure 19 Lupita Tovar featured in soap advertisement 180
Figure 20 Lupita Tovar featured in a fan magazine 181
Figure 21 Lupita Tovar seen reading the Cine-Mundial 182
fan magazine

Figure 22 Lupita Tovar featured in a fashion layout 183
Figure 23 Lupita Tovar featured in La Opinion 184
Figure 24 The “La Mujer Ante El Espejo” column in the 186
Cine-Mundial fan magazine

Figure 25 The “Ciencia Domestica” colunm in the 187
Cine-Mundial fan magazine

Figure 26 Cine-Mundial fashion layout (1) 189
Figure 27 Cine-Mundial fashion layout (2) 190
Figure 28 Cine-Mundial fashion layout (3) 191
Figure 29 Cine-Mundial fashion layout (4) 192
Figure 30 Catalina Barcena publicity still (1) 195
Figure 31 Catalina Barcena publicity still (2) 196
Figure 32 Catalina Barcena publicity still (3) 197
Figure 33 Rosita Moreno on cover of Cine-Mundial 199
fan magazine

Figure 34 Rosita Moreno publicity still (1) 200
Figure 35 Rosita Moreno publicity still (2) 201
Figure 36 Rosita Moreno publicity still (3) 202

vii
Figure 37 Rosita Moreno publicity still (4) 203
Figure 38 Rosita Moreno featured in a fan magazine 204
Figure 39 Rosita Moreno featured in a fashion layout 205
Figure 40: Conchita Montenegro publicity still (1) 208
Figure 41: Conchita Montenegro publicity still (2) 209
Figure 42: Conchita Montenegro posing with co-star 210
Leslie Howard

Figure 43: Conchita Montenegro featured in a fan magazine 211
Figure 44: Conchita Montenegro featured in a fashion layout 212

viii
ABSTRACT
Shadows of Stardom: Latina Actresses in the 1930’s Hollywood Produced
Spanish Language Films focuses on the actresses and Latina representation in the
Spanish language films Hollywood produced in the 1930’s. This project explores the
unexpected opportunity that the short-lived production of Spanish language films created
for Latina actresses struggling to overcome marginalized, stereotyped roles offered them
by mainstream English language films of the era and the impact the films and actresses
may have had on early Latina moviegoers, fan culture and consumption in Los Angeles.
In 1928, as the movies were learning to talk, the Hollywood film industry became
fearful of losing its dominance in international markets. Among the studios’ responses to
the challenge of sound was producing multiple-language films. Originally intended to be
shown outside the United States, the Spanish language films also found an audience at
home, particularly with immigrants in Los Angeles, exemplifying one of the earlier
moments of globalization.
These films and their female stars have largely been forgotten as most scholars
have written the films off as aesthetically worthless. Yet, an appraisal of some of these
films begins to tell a different story. The predominant screen role models for Latinas
during this period had been primarily Anglo actresses while Latina roles largely followed
stereotypes. Two exceptions were Dolores Del Rio who was at the height of her
Hollywood career and Lupe Velez who was set up somewhat in opposition to Del Rio.
There is more to this story.

ix
These Hollywood produced Spanish language films used Mexican, Spanish and
Latin American actresses in a positive context. They were the stars and heroines of the
films. This study argues for their inclusion in the Hollywood story which in turn will
expand this area of film scholarship.
This dissertation is an historical reconstruction of the Hollywood Spanish
language film experiment starting with an overview and covering the business practices
of the studios, publicity and fan culture, the actresses and the films themselves. The
project is woven together with primary sources, archival materials and textual analyses of
the films. The goal of this project, which intersects the fields of film history, Latino/a
Studies and Visual Culture, is to “reanimate” these actresses and bring them out of the
shadows.

1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Jack L. Warner, vice-president of Warner Brothers stated that plans are already
taking shape for the production of foreign language pictures by his company.
1

Universal under the direction of Paul Kohner head of the Foreign Production
department will begin producing Spanish language talkies.
2

Warners Decide on Foreign Versions; Last to Give In.
3

The gates of Hollywood are wide open to receive incoming contingents of foreign
stars. And these foreigners are poring through: Spanish, German, and French for
the most part.
4

Production of foreign films in foreign lands by American producers is a state of
affairs slowly taking shape. Universal and Fox are preparing for production in
France and Italy while Spanish versions will be taken care of in Hollywood.
5

Hollywood is destined to be the center of foreign language film production. The
matter is no longer the subject of debate and conjecture.
6

Paramount studios at Joinville in France is making talk films in fourteen
languages.
7

1
H.G. Knox, “English Gives Way to Babel of Tongues As Foreign Language Film Demand Grows,” The
Erpigram (July 1, 1930), 1.

2
The Los Angeles Times, September 20, 1929, A8.

3
“Warners Decide on Foreign Versions; Last to Give In,” Variety, February 12, 1930, 4.

4
Elena Boland, “Foreign Stars May Shine in English,” The Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1930, B15.

5
The Los Angeles Times, July 31, 1930, A12.

6
The Los Angeles Times, November 16, 1930, B13.

7
“Topics of the Times” The New York Times, December 16, 1930, 24.

2

The output of Spanish films is growing steadily especially at Fox Studios.
8

Paramount, Fox and Warners have recently gone in heavily for Spanish language
production.
9

Paramount went back into production in New York for a few Spanish talkers.
10

Between 1929 and 1939, Hollywood made one hundred and sixteen feature films
in Spanish. Of these, forty-nine were from original screenplays and sixty-seven were
either dual versions of English and Spanish language films or remakes of silent films.
11

The films were made as an economic response to Hollywood’s potential loss of the
lucrative foreign market due to the advent of sound films and the problems of releasing
American films in different translations. Although they entered the Spanish language
film experiment at different times and paced themselves differently, all the major
Hollywood studios were involved in the productions of these films with the Fox and
Paramount Studios making the majority of them. Some of the films were made on studio
lots in Europe and New York but the most were made in Hollywood.
Historians have not been particularly kind to these Hollywood produced Spanish
language films. Focusing strictly on their aesthetic quality or on their financial success
has led scholars to overlook issues of significant historical interest and the films have
received scant recognition in the decades that have followed. The time has now come for

8
The Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1934, 9.

9
Variety, December 4, 1934, 11.

10
Variety, January 1, 1935, 29.

11
Pancho Kohner, Lupita Tovar: The Sweetheart of Mexico, (Xlibris, 2010), 70.

3
another look at these films and to take into consideration some noteworthy issues
including what these films might have offered to Latinas during Hollywood’s transition
from silent films to talkies and, more significantly, the unexpected opportunity that the
short-lived production of Spanish language films created for Latina actresses struggling
to overcome the marginalized, stereotyped roles offered them by the mainstream English
language films of the era. This project engages exactly such issues.
In recent years, a few scholars are returning to look at these films through a
different prism. One of these is Ginette Vicendeau, who notes that scholars have
generally ignored multiple language versions of films because from a strictly financial
and industrial perspective, they were overshadowed by the sound patents struggle
between American and European producers for the domination of the international
marketplace. A second factor is that most historians consider the foreign language films
produced by Hollywood to be worthless. Vincendeau, however, sees a hidden value in
them.
MLV’s (multiple language versions) interest me because they failed:aesthetically
these films were terrible, and financially they turned out to be a disaster.
However, it seems to me that they can be of use to the historian as they are
located at the point of contact between the aesthetic (this term being used here
rather loosely to cover cultural, thematic and generic constructs) and the industrial
dimensions of cinema. In this sense, they can become precious instruments of
knowledge for a crucial period of the history of cinema.
12

Another supportive scholar is Natasa Durovicova:
The multilinguals would still remain as fascinating traces of the complexity and
turbulence brought about by the transition to sound, bearing testimony to the full
range of soundtrack options. Yet, it is out of this very disturbance that the

12
Ginette Vincendeau, “Hollywood Babel: Ginette Vincendeau Considers the Coming of Sound and the
Multiple Language Versions.” Screen 29, no. 2 (1988), 25.

4
American cinema’s relationship to the non-American-speaking world has
emerged, even as other arrangements between language, economy and power
were being negotiated and established. Problems related to the multi-lingual-how
to regulate the transposition of languages continue to this day to worry classical
Hollywood cinema’s dissemination to all non-American speakers: To subtitle or
not to subtitle, to lip synch or not. The history of FLV (foreign language versions)
thus properly comes to an end, and can be profitably taken up now, at the moment
when English, in its increasing dominance of the global mass media is about to
render the very idea of a “foreign language.”
13

While these films have received scant recognition by most scholars and historians
in the decades following their release, nevertheless, they do represent the embodiment of
some of the points raised by Vincendeau and Durovicova as well as other significant
issues regarding the representation of Latin culture that still resonate today. The Spanish
language films essentially represented a chance at a “do-over” for the studios after years
of neglecting Latino talent when it came to providing them with the same types of major
roles offered to Anglo actors and actresses. Foremost among those being offered
marginal and stereotypical roles were Latinas who did not photograph “white” like
Dolores Del Rio. They wound up with the peasant and cantina girl roles in most English
language productions.
Interestingly, little scholarship has been directed at these Latina actresses who
worked in the Spanish language films of the 1930’s, and any social or cultural impact
they might have had remains largely unexplored. Some like Lupita Tovar and Lupe Velez
are remembered for their supporting roles in later films or, in the latter case, the notorious
“Mexican Spitfire” roles, but their contributions in the Spanish language films and what

13
Natasa Durovicova, “Translating America: The Hollywood Multilinguals 1929-1933,” In Sound
Theory/Sound Practice, edited by Rick Altman, (New York and London: Routledge, 1992), 139.

5
these meant to their careers and to their audiences remains unexamined. It is these issues
this project seeks to look at.
While their stardom in Hollywood was short lived, they are part of film history
and should be represented as part of the recorded history of the cinema. It is my intention
to bring these forgotten actresses of these Spanish language films out of the shadows of
Hollywood’s past and to “reanimate” their careers as a means of exploring what these
films and performances meant as well as to look at what the extra cinematic elements
might have represented to young Latinas who were movie fans. Critics and scholars
might have written off these films but what is also forgotten in this equation is that the
aesthetic taste or likes and dislikes of those writing about the films don’t necessarily
match or coincide those of the movie goers themselves and it is clear that these movies
did have an audience.
14

According to the “Theatre Receipts” section of the Motion Picture Herald for the
week of May 16, 1931, the film Gente Alegre showing at the International California
Theater in Los Angeles made $6,600
15
and the following week May 23
rd
the Spanish
language Dracula made $5,600
16
. While comparing this to the English language Dracula
which made $21,000 the week of April 11, 1931
17
and $13,600 the week of April 25
th
at

14
“Exhibitors Greatly Encouraged by Success of Spanish Versions,” Hollywood Filmograph, 10, no. 38
(October 4, 1930), 7.

15
“Theatre Receipts,” Motion Picture Herald, 103, no. 7 (May 16,1931), 47.

16
“Theatre Receipts,” Motion Picture Herald, 103, no. 8 (May 23, 1931), 45.

17
“Theatre Receipts,” Motion Picture Herald, 103, no. 2 (April 11, 1931), 55.

6
the Orpheum Theater in Los Angeles
18
, it would be easy to say that these films were not
as profitable but that doesn’t take into account such items as film budgets and who the
actual audience was for the Spanish language films. The same week that the Spanish
language Dracula made $5,600 in Los Angeles, the Fox film Not Exactly a Gentlemen
made $2,500 in Minneapolis and First National’s The Hot Heiress made $6,500 in
Milwaukee.
19
As writer Carlos F. Borcosque points out in an article regarding this issue
of critical judgment in the Spanish language fan magazine Cinelandia:
If we were to render judgment based on what the critics in our countries have to
say, we would find more errors than successes, more failure than triumphs.
However, our critics have clearly put themselves far above the masses when
judging Spanish-speaking films. In general, a film is an entertaining show, and
not to be transcendental. Therefore, it should not be judged so strictly.
20

State of Affairs Within the Hollywood Film Industry Prior to the Coming of Sound

Before a discussion of Hollywood’s Spanish language film experiment and its
ramifications can begin, several elements leading to the creation of the films must be
introduced. These elements include, first, the fundamental developments occurring
within the film industry as it made the transition from silent films to sound. Equally
important is a consideration of what was happening with Latino representation on the
screen just prior to and during the transition. Finally, the instability of the Mexican
American community in the American Southwest and the mobility and multiplicity of
Spanish-speaking filmgoers must be factored in as well.

18
“Theatre Receipts,” Motion Picture Herald, 103, no. 4 (April 25, 1931), 63.

19
“Theatre Receipts” Motion Picture Herald 103, no. 8 (May 23, 1931), 45.

20
Carlos F. Borcosque, “The Spanish-Speaking Production of 1931” Cinelandia (1931), 23.

7
Hollywood’s transition from silent films to all-talking features between 1928 and
1933 proved a mixed blessing for actors and actresses, particularly for Spanish-speaking
actors and actresses who saw their careers dry up over night with the exception of such
stars as Dolores Del Rio and Ramon Navarro. Unfortunately, when the microphones went
on, accents became evident and no amount of costuming or dialogue could cover up the
fact that these actors were not exotic Europeans or sophisticated New Yorkers, they were
now Mexican and not believable in certain roles. Thus, after the advent of sound,
Spanish-speaking actors had limited options: they could leave Hollywood and return to
the Mexican film industry; they could work as extras in “B” pictures which exploited
Latin stereotypes or they could perform in Spanish language versions of studio films.
Before the movies learned to talk, an actress could become anyone through the
use of costume and make-up as long as the character was basically a stereotype. Dark
hair, exaggerated eye shadow and blood red lipstick could produce an exotic “other”, the
“vamp” as interpreted by someone like Theda Bara. Conversely, blonde hair, white
powder and light rouge transformed Mary Pickford into her various “America’s
Sweetheart” characters. Still, filmmakers of the time did not take any chances that these
nuances of appearance might be too subtle for audiences to appreciate and thus
introduced each character with interstitial titles to remove all doubts. Appellations such
as “Sweet Nell”, “The Vamp”, or “Cantina Girl” instructed movie viewers in which
direction their emotions should go. Also, with the type of bright lighting and makeup
used in silent films, anyone with the proper cheekbones and light enough skin could
photograph light enough to become “Sweet Nell.” While both Dolores Del Rio and

8
Ramon Novarro made no bones about being Mexican, as long as the public didn’t hear
the accent, they could be effectively from “the upper eastside” if that’s what the
interstitial title wanted them to be.
The introduction of sound, however, posed serious problems, for actresses and for
the studio system alike. The latter wanted desperately to continue dealing in stereotypes.
It simply made things easier for writers and directors. Yet, with formerly “All-American”
girls types being discovered to now have foreign accents, casting became more
complicated.
Latina actresses, in particular, were confronted with a dilemma even though they
had rarely functioned as characters within the American mainstream. They were still
somewhat in demand for the traditional “cantina” girl roles but as for their positioning as
“others”, their options were limited. They could, through their make-up and demeanor,
portray exotic Europeans, but there was no make-up in the world that was going to
remove accents and transform them into the popular aforementioned Mary Pickford.
Central to this dilemma was the relationship between the actress and her audience.
Few teenage girls, for example, aspired to become “cantina” girls particularly with
competition from screen images and fan magazines that essentially indicated that all
women should emulate Mary Pickford and her homogenized mainstream peers. In fact,
most Spanish speaking actors and actresses in Hollywood could trace their desire to be in
film back to watching American movies and following the careers of their favorite Anglo
stars in fan magazines.

9
The way that Latinas were represented on the screen, even during the silent
period, was thus crucial since Mexican immigrants to the United States were among the
largest single blocs of moviegoers from the beginning of film viewership.
21
But, how,
then, does representation relate to them? Richard Dyer has noted the complexity of issues
of representation noting there are many resonances that filter in and out of a term like
representation. He continues on by saying:
How a group is represented, presented over again in cultural forms, how an image
of a member of a group is taken as representative of that group, how that group is
represented in the sense of spoken for and on behalf of (whether they represent,
speak for themselves or not), these all have to do with how members of see
themselves and others like themselves, how they see their place in society, their
right to the rights a society claims to ensure their citizens. Equally re-presentation,
representativeness, representing have to do also with how others see members of a
group and their places and rights, others who have the power to affect that place
and those rights. How we are seen determines in part how we are treated; how we
treat others is based in how we see them; such seeing comes from
representation.
22

From the earliest years of the Hollywood film industry, Latinos have rarely been
the focus of a film but rather have found that the characters they play are on the margins
of the story. Hollywood initially introduced Latinos for the most part as villains and
violent characters. For instance, the bandit or “greaser” was an early staple of silent films
showing this male character as one of the most “vile villains who murdered, raped,
cheated, gambled, lied and displayed virtually every vice that could be shown on

21
See, among others, Rogelio Agrasanchez, Jr., Mexican Movies in the United States: A History of the
Films, Theaters and Audiences, 1920-1960, (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Co., 2006); Jan
Olsson, “Hollywood’s First Spectators: Notes on Ethnic Nickelodeon Audiences in Los Angeles,” Aztlan
26, no. 1 (Spring 1980): 181-195; George J. Sanchez, Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture and
Identity in Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).

22
Richard Dyer, The Matter of Images: Essays on Representations (New York: Routledge, 1993), 1.

10
screen.”
23
For Latinas it’s primarily been the vamp. For Latinos or Latinas there is a
dichotomy where they either pose a sexual or illegal threat to the status quo that the film
is depicting.
24

Most of these images were simply inherited by Hollywood from the stereotypes of
Mexicans created by the dime novels and pulp fiction popular at the end of the nineteenth
century. Due to the popularity of these publications, stereotypical images were already
well established in potential viewers minds at the time that motion pictures were invented
as an art form. While it has been argued that due to the new industry’s establishment by
immigrants from all over the world there was a sort of equality in early Hollywood in
terms of the studios being equal opportunity employers, that did not always prove true for
Latinos.
25
When written words were converted into images for the screen, it was simply
easier to work with the stereotypes that audiences were already familiar with so greasers,
Latin lovers and cantina girls became firmly established in film by the 1920’s.
By 1928 and 1929, however, the novelty of films originally intended to be silent
was wearing off. Films in production at the time that Warner Bros. broke the sound
barrier with The Jazz Singer were quickly refitted for sound and rushed on to the screen,
before the novelty of sound could wear off.
26

23
Allen L. Woll, The Latin Image in American Film (Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center
Publications, 1977), 7.

24
Chon Noriega in The Bronze Screen: 100 Years of the Latino Image in American Cinema. (DVD), 2002.

25
Antonio Rios-Bustamante, “Latinos and the Hollywood Film Industry, 1920’s-1950’s,” Americas 2001 1,
no. 4 (January 1988), 6.

26
Richard B. Jewell, The Golden Age of Cinema: Hollywood 1929-1945 (Malden, MA: Blackwell
Publishing, 2007), 55.

11
When producers realized that sound was not just a passing fad, they suddenly
needed to experiment with new or revived genres expressly created for sound. These
initially included gangster films, musical comedies, and plays imported from the stage.
The first two genres employed terse, fast moving dialogue and music so that audiences
were distracted from the fact that Hollywood had not yet learned the appropriate balance
between sound and action. Yet, the over-reliance on sound was most noticeable in the
films made from stage plays, which, in many cases simply talked the audience to death.
Some directors, notably Lewis Milestone and King Vidor, solved the problem by
speeding up the dialogue, keeping the camera in motion and by cutting frequently.
27

Thus, by 1932 even run of the mill films were able to manage at least one reel where the
action and dialogue were actually mutually supportive.
But, behind-the-camera techniques did not solve all of Hollywood’s problems
with the transition to sound. As directors and cinematographers gained more control of
the new medium, most of the actors and actresses imported from the stage were not able
to sufficiently overcome their Broadway experience to become convincing film actors.
Producers began to realize that the new medium must provide its own stars rather than
import them.
Adding more complexity to the problem with casting actors and actresses was the
inherent inability of sound films to reach audiences that did not speak English. Silent
film could easily transcend national and linguistic borders but the advent of sound
actually had the potential to loosen Hollywood’s hold on the international marketplace.

27
Ibid, 96.

12
The foreign markets were a huge source of revenue for the major studios and missteps
with the new medium could harm film revenues for many years if the language problem
was not solved quickly. While attempting to deal with “practical” problems of sound and
language, Hollywood studio executives were all dealing with critics and filmmakers who
were pushing to keep the status quo:
The theater and film director Max Reinhardt exemplified the most common
response among defenders of film art. Since the teens, motion pictures had been
hailed as a kind of visual Esperanto, understandable by all peoples. Now,
according to the famous dramatist,“films which are universal in appeal and really
international, can only tend to be destroyed as an international art through the
addition of the limitation of language.” Throughout Europe, critics and
filmmakers, including Rudolf Arnheim, Bela Balazs, Rene Clair, Abel Gance,
Fritz Lang, Eisenstein, and his Russian colleagues denounced synchronous sound
cinema.
28

Each major studio initially attempted its own solution to the linguistic problems and some
were quite inventive. The simplest solution, subtitling, which had become less frequently
employed as silent film acting became more expressive, was revived with mixed results.
MGM experienced success with its international distribution of The Broadway Melody
subtitling the dialogue scenes between the musical numbers and by having foreign actors
perform musical or comedic sketches in their native languages in the studios big revue
films. But, this could not sustain the entirety of the studios international output. Other
studios tried dubbing the films into multiple languages, which proved very expensive and
detracted from foreign audiences’ impressions of the real actors voices. For example,
RKO released a dubbed version of its hit Rio Rita in 1929 in 11 Spanish-speaking
countries but it effectively “bombed” as audiences admitted that they preferred the actual

28
Donald Crafton, The Talkies: The American Cinema’s Transition to Sound, 1926-1931, vol. 4 of History
of the American Cinema (New York: Charles Scribners & Sons, 1997), 422-23.

13
voices of the English-speaking actors even if they did not understand what they were
saying.
29

RKO also attempted to shoot scenes of foreign actors performing dialogue in their
native tongues on a Hollywood soundstage and then dropping them into a pre-filmed
location background in a film being produced for international release. The process
proved too expensive and was quickly dropped before it was ever used in a film.
30

Nor did the importation of foreign actors and actresses to appear in all versions of
mainstream films solve the problem because of the fact that it risked alienating audiences
in the United States. For every Greta Garbo or Maurice Chevalier whose voices were
accepted by American filmgoers, there were many other Europeans who simply
disappeared or fell into character parts to become stereotyped as mysterious foreign
exotics.
31
This particularly affected actors from Latin America.
Hollywood eventually hit on the controversial idea of shooting their important
films in multiple languages with actors reflecting the ethnicity of the countries for which
the various prints of film were intended. Each film would employ the same script and
film sets as the English language versions of the film but native speakers of French,
German, or Spanish would play the major acting roles. As actor/director William
Dieterle, who directed some of the Spanish language films recalled years later:

29
“Faked Spanish Dialogue Gets Razzed in S.A.” Variety, November 27, 1930, 3.

30
Donald Crafton, 426.

31
Ginette Vincendeau, “Hollywood Babel: Ginette Vincendeau Considers the Coming of Sound and the
Multiple Language Versions.” in “Film Europe” and “Film America”: Cinema, Commerce and Cultural
Exchange 1920-1939 edited by Andrew Higson and Richard Maltby (Exeter, Devon: University of Exeter
Press, 1999), 211 , 221.

14
I was hired to make synchronizations. Sound had just come in, and Hollywood
was afraid of losing foreign markets. So they hired German, French and Spanish
units to make foreign versions of important features…The four films we were to
make had already been completed. All the sets were still standing and dressed –
we used the same costumes and everything. The big difference was that we had
just ten days to make each picture.
32

The experiment of the Spanish language films, in particular, were deemed a failure by
critics in the 1930’s and, more recently, by current scholars and historians.
33

There were, of course, many problems with these films, particularly with the
many Spanish dialects used by the actors from all the different Latin American countries
as well as with the story content.
34
Yet, between 1930 and 1938, they found an
unexpected audience in the Southwestern United States, particularly among Mexican
immigrants in Los Angeles. Since then, however, little serious exploration has been
conducted into the root cause of why these films were so popular and how they affected
the popularity of the actors who performed in them. In particular, their impact on
Spanish-speaking film goers, particularly young Latinas, has remained largely
unexplored.
Until the appearance of the Spanish language films the predominant screen role
models for Latinas had been primarily Anglo actresses. The major exception was Dolores

32
Tom Flinn, “William Dieterle: The Plutarch of Hollywood” Velvet Light Trap, 15 (Fall, 1975), 24.

33
See, among others, George Hadley-Garcia. Hispanic Hollywood: The Latins in Motion Pictures (New
York: Carol Publishing Group, 1990), Gary D. Keller. Hispanics and United States Film: An Overview and
Handbook (Tempe, AZ, Bilingual Press: 1994) and Carl J. Mora. Mexican Cinema: Reflections of a
Society, 1896-1988 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999).

34
See, among others, Colin Gunkel. A Theater Worthy of Our Race: The Exhibition and Reception of
Spanish Language Film in Los Angeles, 1911-1942 (Dissertation: University of California, Los Angeles),
2009 and Lisa Jarvinen. Hollywood’s Shadow: The American Film Industry and its Spanish Speaking
Markets During the Transition to Sound, 1929-1936 (Dissertation: Syracuse University), 2006.

15
Del Rio who became a major star during the silent period by playing essentially the same
roles as Anglo actresses. Other Latina actresses, however were not as fortunate.
The Spanish language films presented Mexican, Spanish and Latin American
actresses in a positive context, as both a Latina star and the heroine of the film. It seems
likely these Hollywood Spanish language films had a brief but significant impact and
provided a short-lived respite for Latina actresses from the stereotyped roles – mostly
prostitutes, peasant girls and European exotics – that they were being forced into by
Hollywood during the 1920’s, 1930’s and beyond. For a brief period, they were given
the opportunity to play leading roles in major films and to develop fan followings
previously reserved for Anglo actresses. For the first time Latinas had “larger than life”
role models who were shown as smart, capable and beautiful and who could influence
their choices in fashions, hair products and cosmetics.
With travel between Mexico and the United States more easily accomplished in
the early 1930’s , the mobility offered actresses more opportunities to move between
roles on the Hollywood screens to starring roles on the stage and screens of Mexico City.
The advertising, public appearances and promotional articles used to advertise the
Spanish language films additionally boosted the careers of the actresses in their native
countries. It also allowed significant groups of Latinas both countries to be as immersed
in new cultural artifacts as their family situations would allow them to be.
This new mobility between English and Spanish speaking countries also applied
to image-based media. The 1930’s was a period when both the advertising and film
industries discovered women were the primary movie goers in both countries and began

16
the practice of creating “tie-ins” with consumer culture in terms of fashion and beauty.
35

Fan magazines were big with women with features on celebrities and how to dress and
entertain like they did and, in a sense, how to become just like their favorite stars.
While the Spanish language performers barely made a whisper in fan magazines
such as Photoplay, they were featured prominently in such Spanish language fan
magazines such as Cinelandia and Cine-Mundial. In addition, Los Angeles’ Spanish
language newspaper La Opinion started a society section which included not only current
film showings but also aspects of fashion and beauty as well as domesticity. It is within
these spaces that the Spanish language actresses were featured prominently. Mexican
women coming of age on both sides of the border during this period could not help but be
exposed to new ideas in all areas of being a woman.
Also, paralleling the rise in popularity of motion pictures at this time, was the rise
of the fashion and cosmetic industries in the United States. At the turn of the century
these industries had played a crucial role in popularizing cosmetics and shaping gender
definitions. For example, prior to the twentieth century, a woman’s use of make-up was
seen as a physical sign of disrepute and immorality in both the United States and
Mexico’s religious-dominated societies. However by the turn of the century, cosmetics
took on new meaning in American culture. Women began to look at their faces

35
See, among others, Sarah Berry. Screen Style: Fashion and Femininity in 1930’s Hollywood
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000), Joanne Hershfield. Imagining La Chica Moderna:
Women, Nation and Visual Culture in Mexico, 1917-1936 (Durham: Duke University Press, 2008) and
Kathy Peiss. Hope in a Jar: The Making of America’s Beauty Culture (New York: Henry Holt and
Company, 1998).

17
differently through the new cultural mirrors provided by motion pictures, women’s
magazines and advertising, department store windows and fashion runways.
36

Kathy Peiss states that in the twentieth-century, the use of cosmetics has been
inextricably tied to the emergence of a mass consumer society. To effectively market
their products, cosmetic companies fueled the notion that women needed to use their
products to be beautiful by associating make-up with glamour. Partly due to the
industry’s immense Fifth Avenue advertising campaigns, cosmetics soon became
ubiquitous, as the number of women using lipstick, rouge and foundation increased
dramatically.
37

Responsibility for the dispersal of gendered constructions, however, did not rely
completely on Fifth Avenue ad campaigns. As mass culture spread through all mediums,
Hollywood movies, newspapers, fan magazines and the nascent radio industry during the
1920’s played an immense role in constructing notions of gender that affected everyday
life. Hollywood and its publicity mechanisms like fan magazines urged the female
filmgoer to participate vicariously by purchasing cosmetics and clothes endorsed by the
stars.
38

Mexico lagged somewhat behind the United States in the explosion of women’s
fashion and cosmetic advertising. Strong religious, cultural, and family traditions within
the country kept many mothers from allowing their daughters the freedom to experiment

36
Kathy Peiss, “Making Faces: The Cosmetics Industry and the Cultural Construction of Gender, 1890-
1930,” Genders no. 7 (Spring 1990), 143.

37
Ibid, 144.

38
Samantha Barbas, Movie Crazy: Fans, Stars and the Cult of Celebrity (New York: Palgrave, 2001), 5.

18
experienced by women of their age in Los Angeles. That does not mean, however, that
young women were not interested in the new ideas that they were being bombarded with
in connection to American films.
39

While it didn’t take advertisers or studio publicists long to figure out ways to
market their products, it has caused problems for historians and scholars who are trying
to sell theories rather than products. Usually films are discussed in terms of a national
project, but these films don’t promote a single national identity. They are “Hollywood
bastards” belonging neither to one country or the other. While Mexico was promoting a
national identity, with all else that was going on, popular culture opened up the
possibilities for imagined multiple identities on top of a national identity. We’ve been led
to believe that at this time the only movie star that a Latina could relate to was Dolores
Del Rio and to some degree Lupe Velez during the 30’s, but there were several actresses
that appeared in starring roles in films and in newspapers and fan magazines that also
revealed numerous other possibilities in the realm of beauty and fashion.
Approach of this Project
With the lack of historical research and discussion on Hollywood’s Spanish
language films, this project can be viewed as an attempt at a historical recuperation using
the films themselves as well as their ancillary attachments including fan magazines,
newspapers, film reviews and studio produced publicity as the primary materials to piece
together this time in film history and to garner new insights.

39
Joanne Hershfield, “The Hollywood Movie Star and the Mexican Chica Moderna” in Fashioning Film
Stars: Dress, Culture, Identity edited by Rachel Moseley (London: BFI Publishing, 2005), 100.

19
This project began with a moment of curiosity. After reading a line or two about
the Spanish language films in several books and articles primarily about how awful they
were, I wanted to know what was so bad about them. Were there any still available in
film archives that could be looked at? While so many films from this time period have
either disappeared or disintegrated, I was surprised and excited to find that enough were
around to be able to get a good idea of what these films consisted of. Interestingly, while
many historians and scholars have heavily criticized the films, no one seems to have
mentioned actually watching any of them. The project took off from there by providing
me the opportunity to watch the films and to offer a textured reading not only about what
is on the screen and how, if at all, it blends in with the cultural climate of the time.
Since the Spanish language experiment was disorganized at best, many of the
production materials were not seen as important and were not saved. What has been
saved has not been collected or preserved in any systematic ways and are scattered
around in different countries. But what is available offers are vignettes of a rich and
colorful history. Projects like this dissertation highlight why archival collections are so
important. Having these collections preserved allow researchers and scholars to discover
hidden stories that expand our knowledge of Hollywood history and these nuances further
film scholarship by opening new avenues for research. I found many of these snippets in
the of shadows of archival collections much like the contributions these actresses made to
the film industry. This seems to be one of the reasons that current work on Latinas in film

20
has revolved around a few actresses such as Dolores Del Rio, Carmen Miranda and Rita
Hayworth, none of which appeared in the Spanish language films.
40

Employing a Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez continuum as a starting point and
using their different star texts to examine where Hollywood’s treatment of the actresses
in the Spanish language films 1930’s fits within this continuum. I will compare and
contrast their work and star texts with what the actresses who were brought to Hollywood
were doing in the Spanish language films on screen and how they were presented off
screen. I will also talk about star construction and mainstream representation. If Dolores
Del Rio and Lupe Velez are on the two opposite ends of this continuum in terms of star
construction and representation, where will these other Latina actresses fit into this
Hollywood story?
The methodology used for this project is one of historical reconstruction. I plan to
use the films Hollywood produced and the popular culture supporting them to see what
meaning Latinas might have found in the films. While other projects that mention these
films have focused primarily on the discourse surrounding the films, the production,
consumption and distribution, this project will look beyond at the performances, narrative
construction, lighting and setting as possible moments of identification for filmgoers.
Beyond the films themselves, I will look at materials surrounding their production
by looking at press books and publicity materials such as photographs, reviews, contracts

40
See, among others, Mary Beltran. Latina/o Stars in U.S. Eyes: The Making and Meanings of Film and TV
Stardom (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2009), Joanne Hershfield. The Invention of Dolores Del Rio
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000), Ana M. Lopez, “From Hollywood and Back: Dolores
Del Rio, a Trans(National) Star.” Studies in Latin American Popular Culture 17 (1998): 5-32, and Priscilla
Ovalle. Dance and the Hollywood Latina: Race, Sex and Stardom (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press, 2011).

21
and fan magazines as well as newspapers to track the career trajectory in Hollywood and
see how films roles, studio publicity and biographical materials reinforce their public
personas. It then might be possible to see how the persona is constructed and presented
for mainstream representation. Do English language fan magazines and newspapers have
different views or ideas than the Spanish language media?
This dissertation is an interdisciplinary project crossing through the fields of Film
Studies, Women’s and Latina Studies and Popular and Visual Culture. This project builds
on several recent dissertations that take Hollywood’s Spanish language films into account
to add a fuller record of this interesting phenomenon. Lisa Jarvinen discusses what these
films meant to the international Spanish speaking markets in her dissertation entitled
Hollywood’s Shadow: The American Film Industry and its Spanish speaking Markets
During the Transition to Sound, 1929-1936 (2006). Laura Isabel Serna mentions them in
her dissertation “’We’re Going Yankee’: American Films, Mexican Nationalism,
Transnational Cinema 1917-1935 (2006) as part of the package the Hollywood studios
included for film exhibition for the Mexican people on both sides of the United States
and Mexican borders. The most recent work is the dissertation by Colin Gunkel entitled
“A Theater Worthy of Our Race: The Exhibition and Reception of Spanish Language
Film in Los Angeles, 1911-1942 (2009) which places these Spanish language films from
Hollywood as a stop gap measure between live theater and when films from the Mexican
film industry began to be exhibited in Los Angeles.
41
My plan is to reintroduce some

41
Colin Gunkel, A Theater Worthy of Our Race: The Exhibition and Reception of Spanish Language Film
in Los Angeles, 1911-1942 (Dissertation, University of California Los Angeles, 2009); Lisa Jarvinen,
Hollywood’s Shadow: The American Film Industry and its Spanish Speaking Markets During the

22
Latina actresses who are part of this expanding Hollywood narrative. Questions will
necessarily have to be left unanswered, but this dissertation can begin to look at Latina
stardom and contributions beyond Dolores Del Rio, Rita Hayworth and Carmen Miranda
since up until now have made barely a whisper in the record.
Chapter two examines how Latino/as were typically portrayed in the early days of
the Hollywood film industry and how various stereotypes of Latino/as were established.
While some published articles have viewed the issue of stereotypes as simply relating to
gender (males were usually banditos while females could be cast both as cantina maids or
as aristocrats), it was not as simple as that. Much depended instead on the whether you
looked European or Mexican.
I will then move into an examination of the manner in which Dolores Del Rio and
Lupe Velez, the two major Latina stars of the 1920’s and 1930’s, were established within
the American film industry in the time that Hollywood was transitioning from silent film
to sound. I will set up a continuum with Dolores Del Rio as the light upper class
European on one side and on the opposite end is Lupe Velez as the “Mexican Spitfire”
and how the roles they performed on and off the screen played into these stereotypes with
the help of studio executives. A later chapter will then delve more deeply into how the on
and off screen roles of Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez were shaped within the industry
landscape.
The third chapter will look at what was happening in Hollywood as the film
industry was transitioning from the silent into the sound era. While the American film

Transition to Sound, 1929-1936 (Dissertation, Syracuse University, 2006); ’We’re Going Yankee’:
Transnational Cinema, 1917-1935 (Dissertation, Harvard University, 2006).

23
industry was one of the leaders in the business, there was the fear the studio executives
had about losing their international audiences and more importantly, the revenue that
came from those audiences. There was a perception that the executives at each studio had
a good idea of what they were doing in this new phase of the industry and it becomes
clearer they were as much in the dark about how to handle the transition from silent to
sound film. One of the options selected was to make films in multiple languages and out
of that came the Spanish language film experiment. These multiple language films truly
were an experiment and as far as the Spanish language films and their imported talent
were concerned, the studios worked off and on throughout a good portion of the 1930’s to
try and make them a viable product.
Chapter four will focus on the types of publicity such as newspapers and fan
magazines that were employed to present the actresses to the public and investigate how
they were represented. The distinction between Lupe Velez, who had much to overcome
in reaching a certain stardom than Dolores Del Rio did, proves crucial to an
understanding of the relationship between the two representations of Latina actresses.
Chapter five will examine how the studios decided to approach presenting the
actresses who appeared in the Spanish language films to the public and how it was
similar or different than what was done for Velez and Del Rio. I will then take a more in-
depth look at a few of the actresses and their roles in the Spanish language films and how
their characters differed when they appeared in some English language films. For
example, many purists, even today, consider the Spanish language version of Dracula to
be superior to the English language one with Bela Lugosi and most of the difference rests

24
with the performance of Lupita Tovar who still receives fan mail for the performance
today at the age of 101. Yet in English language films, she was pretty much relegated to
playing supporting roles in “B” grade westerns.
Hollywood’s Spanish language films, though intended to solve problems of
international distribution ultimately did serve as a brief re-boot of the studios attitude
toward putting Latinas in leading roles. However, it served as a kind of segregation in
that they could star in films as long as they were in the Spanish language and aimed at a
Latin American audience. In English language films, they were still cast as barmaids and
peasant girls. Only Lupe Velez was able to continue in prominent roles, appearing in
both the English language originals and in the Spanish language remakes. She did it by
being an original and flaunting her “Mexican-ness” into a larger-than-life vamping that
while it did help her career for a brief period, probably did not help Latina actresses
overall.
Motion pictures have been one form of media that women have identified with a
movie star or have imagined the lifestyle of a celebrated actress. Unfortunately for
Latinas there have been many a dry spell in history for finding actresses in starring roles
that might be seen as something of a role model or someone to identify with. There have
not been many spaces in Hollywood history for Latina actresses in starring roles. As I
will show, the Hollywood produced Spanish language films provided the only brief
opening in the studios’ stereotypical depiction of Latinas and were able to provide some
type of ethnically appropriate role models for young Latinas as they transitioned to
“modern” women during the 1930’s.

25
CHAPTER 2
LATINA STEREOTYPES IMPRINTED ON CELLULOID

In May, 1931, La Opinion, the Los Angeles-based Spanish language newspaper,
reported that Delores Del Rio had turned down a role in the feature film The Broken Wing
“because she found the role denigrating to Mexican identity.” According to the article,
the role that she rejected was that of a cantina girl who jilts a Mexican bandit for a white
airline pilot. At that time, Del Rio was one of the very few Latina actresses with
sufficient star power to refuse roles that effectively reduced their characters to negative
stereotypes.
Not as fortunate was a newly emerging actress named Lupe Velez who perhaps
had little choice but to accept the role.
42
Few roles (mostly cantina girls in various
guises) were offered to her early in her career and the ones that she received after
achieving star status later in the decade were not much better. Despite a significant list of
credits in serious roles in well-regarded Mexican films during the 1930’s, the roles that
defined her career in Hollywood during the same period cast her as “The Mexican
Spitfire”, a stereotyped image of a beautiful, emotionally volatile, Latin woman of easy
virtue. Thus, despite the rare exceptions of prominent Latino actors such as Dolores Del
Rio and Ramon Navarro who were permitted to play European or Latin lover type
characters during the silent period, most Latino actors and actresses would be confined to

42
Antonio Rios-Bustamante, “Latino Participation in the Hollywood Film Industry,” in Chicanos and Film:
Essays on Chicano Representation and Resistance, edited by Chon Noriego (New York: Garland
Publishing, 1992), 24-25.

26
portraying stereotypical, generally negative characterizations on screen if he or she
wanted to survive in Hollywood and that is what this chapter will delve into. It will
provide the historical background and look at how Latina actresses were surviving in
Hollywood, how they were portrayed in the screen and how some of the stereotypes came
to be established.
For Latina actresses in Hollywood, the situation was particularly desperate
because the available roles were primarily related to being a love interest for an Anglo
character on the assumption that audiences in the United States would not flock to movie
houses to see relationships between two Mexican characters. However, because of
prevalent stereotypes about Mexican female sensuality, a relationship between an Anglo
leading man and a Latina could be both intriguing and tempestuous.
Intertwined with the stereotypes of ethnicity and sexuality was the notion of class.
Although Dolores Del Rio spoke of herself as being Mexican, the studios promoted her
as being Spanish and coming from elite origins. Once again she was set up in opposition
to Lupe Velez who was never promoted as anything other than Mexican from her first
introductions in Hollywood.
43
The idea of “good” Spanish and “bad” Mexican images
(or an upper Spanish class and a lower Mexican class with quite a chasm between them)
is deeply rooted in American history and that “history” has been extended on the screen
by Hollywood and has been a powerful global tool in presenting and then enforcing
stereotypes. When it comes to how Hollywood has portrayed Latinos, there has been

43
Alicia Rodriguez-Estrada, “Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez: Images On and Off the Screen, 1925-1944”
in Writing the Range: Race, Class and Culture in the Women’s West, edited by Susan Armitage and
Elizabeth Jameson. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997), 485.

27
little complexity. It has been rather straightforward and simplistic. Too often, audiences
attach “real world” identities to characters, so if Mexicans plays villains they must be
villains in real life.
44
As Chon Noriega says in the Bronze Screen documentary, “one of
the biggest impacts that the cinema has on viewers is when it’s telling them about
something they don’t know, that they don’t have direct experience of. Since we live in a
fairly segregated society, when cinema tells us about other racial groups we are more
likely to believe it than when it tells something about our own group that doesn’t match
with our experience.”
45

Given this state of affairs, a subgroup of films created during the early 1930’s as a
byproduct of Hollywood’s conversion to sound poses an intriguing question for scholars
studying the use of Latino/a actors in films produced in Hollywood. These films, which
have become known as multiple language films, were replications of English language
films made in such languages as Spanish, French, Italian, and German to bridge the
transition from the silent to the sound era while the Hollywood film industry figured out
the best way not to lose their European and Latin and South American audiences. The
largest subset of the multiple language films was “The Spanish Language Films,” which
were versions of popular Hollywood products made for Spanish-speaking audiences
around the world. The experiment, while short-lived, briefly enlarged opportunities for
Latinas to appear in roles that defied conventional ethnic stereotypes. Like mainstream

44
Arau in Bronze Screen

45
Noriega in Bronze Screen

28
Hollywood product, the stories ranged from domestic comedies to horror to historical and
contemporary musicals and, of course, westerns.
Since the impact of these films on ethnic stereotypes has been little explored by
most scholars, I propose to employ the Delores del Rio – Lupe Velez continuum as a
starting point for an examination of the plight of their stereotyped counterparts and to use
the different star texts to examine the brief change in Hollywood’s treatment of Latina
actresses due to these Spanish language films. Since the careers of Del Rio and Velez
were running on a parallel track with these actresses, I will, in a subsequent chapter,
compare and contrast their work with what these actresses were doing on-screen in the
Spanish language films and also examine how they were promoted off-screen in terms of
establishing their star status and possible crossover appeal to English speaking audiences.
I will also look at the leveling effect of Hollywood’s transition to sound on the careers of
Del Rio and Velez and the career trajectory of the actresses appearing in the Spanish
language films in the 1930’s.
But before doing this, I will first set the stage as to what was happening with
Latina actresses as the silent film era was transitioning into sound. Dolores Del Rio’s
predecessors from Mexico had, in fact, begun to establish themselves in large numbers in
Southern California during the 1890’s initially seeking low paid employment in
agriculture and related fields. By the early 1900’s, their expanding technical expertise
and competence created more opportunities for many in larger urban centers such as Los
Angeles and inevitably Hollywood where they could obtain employment as technicians,
cameramen, stuntmen and even actors. Due to the expansion of the motion picture

29
industry from the east coast to the Los Angeles area in the teens, more and more
opportunities arose for Latinos and Latinas to climb the ladder in the fledgling industry
which appeared remarkably democratic in its early hiring policies as discriminatory
barriers had not yet hardened and become systematic.
46

Yet, from the beginning the image of Latinos and Latinas as portrayed on screen
was anything but democratic. In the early 1900’s, American filmmakers and their white
audiences alike had very little substance on which to base their opinions of Mexicans.
Dime novels in the preceding century had portrayed Mexicans as banditos and “greasers”
in lurid tales of the western frontier. This image was further reinforced in the public
mind when Mexico erupted in revolution in 1910 and bandits such as Pancho Villa made
incursions into the Southwestern part of United States to escape from the authorities and,
in doing so, began to rob and pillage, stirring up the enmity of the local citizenry. As
news of the revolution began to receive heavy coverage in North American newspapers,
citizens of the United States had conflicting opinions of their neighbors to the south.
The key to the true nature of the Mexican can be found in his relation to North
Americans. If the greaser is loyal and brave, he is good. If he robs and pillages,
he becomes an object of scorn. Whenever Mexicans are placed in conflict with
North Americans, the Yankee always wins, owing to his superior moral quality
and innate intelligence. The Mexican can never hope to conquer even if he
possesses superior military might…
47

While it can be argued that any documentary filmed images of Mexicans made during the
revolution were going to be violent and place all parties in a bad light, Hollywood further
perpetuated the bandito/greaser image in its early fiction films such as Broncho Billy and

46
Antonio Rios-Bustamante, “Latino Participation in the Hollywood Film Industry”, 23.

47
Allen L. Woll, 9.

30
The Greaser (1914) and The Greaser’s Revenge (1914). At the same time, producers
brought along the accompanying persona of the “cantina” girl into these early films, and
a celluloid stereotype was born.
48

Not ones to blaze new trails when it came to overcoming stereotypes, early
producers found it easier to build on already existing preconceptions of Mexicans as
potentially evil “stock characters” that would populate film after film. They initially
introduced dark-skinned non-European appearing Latinos and Latinas, for the most part,
as villains and violent characters. The bandit or “greaser” character became an early
staple of silent films depicting this male character as one of the most “vile villains who
murdered, raped, cheated, gambled, lied and displayed virtually every vice that could be
shown on screen.”
49

Due to the fact that Hollywood could not quite figure out how else to depict a
male Mexican character on the screen if he was not a bandit, the character of the Mexican
male began to fade from the screen in the late twenties, and then completely disappeared
from films for a time. But the stereotype of the sensual Mexican female prevailed. Gary
D. Keller in his book Hispanics and United States Film: An Overview and Handbook
identifies three categories of characters open to Latina actresses during the 1930’s. The
first as mentioned earlier, is that of the “cantina” girl especially if her role is primarily
focused on her dancing during a peak scene in the film, perhaps on a table in the bar. The
dance, performed with great sexual flair and allure, is the essential trait of this character.

48
Ruth Vesey, The World According to Hollywood, 1918-1939 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin
Press, 1997), 170.

49
Allen L. Woll, 7.

31
The character was usually featured in a traditional costume of full skirts billowing with
petticoats topped by a peasant blouse. Make-up was thick and exaggerated.
Accordingly, she remained a stereotype, which, was rarely fleshed out.
A second type is the faithful, moral or self-sacrificing senorita. This character
often fluctuates between “bad/good” in the sense that she goes wrong in the middle of the
film and realizing her poor behavior, places her body in front of a knife or bullet intended
for her Anglo love interest. Again, stereotypical dress and behavior were observed.
There was no doubt that she was a Mexicana who was measured only in the sense of her
relationship to the Anglo boyfriend. There is also the sense that while she is somewhat
ennobled by her feelings for him, while he is taking a walk on the wild side through his
flirtation with the dark-eyed beauty.
The third type of character is a “vamp” that pursues her love for her Anglo love
interest to its logical conclusion. Whereas the cantina girl is simply represented as a
sexual object, the vamp uses her wiles. She is a psychological menace to the male she is
involved with, who is usually a white male ill equipped to defend himself. This is a bit of
a reversal on the “senorita” motif. The vamp is predatory, dressed in dark tones and dark
exotic make-up. In a sense she is out to avenge the senorita by destroying every Anglo
male that she comes in contact with. The males, of course, are depicted at innocent
lambs being led to the slaughter by the evil siren song of the vamp. Outside the
parameters of romance or sex, there were virtually no other roles for Latinas.
50

50
Gary D. Keller, Hispanics and United States Film: An Overview and Handbook (Tempe, AZ: Bilingual
Press, 1994), 40.

32
But Hollywood needed Latino and Latina actresses as long as they would consent
to playing ethnically degrading roles or ones that were part of the scenery rather than part
of the main action on the screen. It has been argued by some scholars that this was due to
the humble lower class origins of the motion picture growing out of vaudeville and the
nickelodeon.
51
Latina actresses were not discriminated against since they didn’t stand out
in a profession dominated by people of various ethnic origins who were roughly of the
same social class. Others have attributed the relative lack of prejudice against performers
of Latin descent in the early days of films as due to the fact that early cinema was an
immigrant medium controlled by expatriate European filmmakers who were not yet
caught up in America’s existing racial and ethnic prejudices and were thus free to make
casting choices according to what the part demanded.
52

There are also those who believe that the high contrast in early black and white
films actually made the bronze skin of Latinas even whiter. This trait would allow Latina
actresses of non-Indian descent the versatility to play a variety of exotic Europeans and
some Anglo roles. This also fits in with what Richard Dyer talks about in his book White
regarding lighting in film in general and especially in Hollywood films. He discusses
how light is used to construct an image of an ideal woman. He goes on to say that
idealized white women are bathed in and permeated by light.
53
More importantly, the

51
Clara E. Rodriguez, Heroes, Lovers, and Others: The Story of Latinos in Hollywood (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2004), 27.

52
Ibid., 27.

53
Richard Dyer, White (New York and London: Routledge, 1997), 122.

33
commercial aspects of having Latins and Europeans in films did not go unnoticed.
Having various ethnicities in one’s film greatly enhanced its marketability overseas.
By the 1920’s, when Delores Del Rio and her family arrived from Mexico, the
Hollywood establishment had developed its own hierarchy of Spanish-speaking actors
and actresses. Indian-featured Latinos, while much in demand for “greaser” roles, could
not cross over into featured roles in mainstream films. On the other hand, actors and
actresses with light skins and more European looking features were prime candidates for
a variety of roles.
During the 1920’s with the normalization of relations along the Mexican border,
the United States was becoming fascinated with all things Mexican as long as it was a
sanitized and non-threatening version.
54
While much good feeling was due to the recent
end of the revolutionary fervor below the border and the initiation of cultural initiatives
with the United States, the appearance on the screen of Rudolph Valentino popularized
the “Latin lover” as a sex symbol and brought audiences to theaters in record numbers.
Indeed, such films as The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (1921) and The Sheik
(1921) created a panic among female filmgoers.
55
Valentino’s somewhat androgynous
Latin lover characterization became so popular it was adopted by white actors (Douglas
Fairbanks in The Gaucho (1928) and Latino actors, alike. Valentino’s death in 1926,
enflamed the phenomenon even more - much like James Dean’s 1955 death in a car crash
made him a cult figure, as well.

54
Clara E. Rodriguez, 29; Helen Pelpar, The Enormous Vogue of Things Mexican: Cultural Relations
Between the United States and Mexico, 1920-1935 (Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 1992).

55
Miriam Hansen,”Pleasure, Ambilvalence, Identification: Valentino and Female Spectatorship” in
Stardom: Industry of Desire edited by Cristine Gledhill (London: Routledge, 1991), 259.

34
Valentino’s overwhelming success prompted other studios to find their own Latin
Lovers and led to the discovery and promotion of such stars as Antonio Moreno and
Gilbert Roland. However, the male actor benefitting most from the Valentino effect was
Ramon Novarro.
56
Among the Latinas, Delores Del Rio was the one who saw her career
take off. Interestingly, both Novarro and Del Rio were packaged with primarily “white”
audiences in mind. They were not cast as Mexicans during the silent period, a fact that
Del Rio lamented in an interview with a Mexican newspaper in 1925. “It is my dearest
wish to make fans realize [Mexicans’] real beauty, their wonder, their greatness as a
people. The vast majority seems to regard Mexicans as a race of bandits, or laborers,
dirty, unkempt, and uneducated. My ambition is to show the best that’s in my nation.”
57

The early film industry with its lack of sound, effectively removed the ethnicity of
relatively light-skinned, non-Indian Mexican actors such as Del Rio and Novarro and
lumped them together with southern European immigrants into a loose-knit vaguely Latin
family that provided raw material for Hollywood filmmakers to layer them with exotic
new identities in film after film. In general, this family image would consist of upper
class, Spanish (not Mexican) individuals, well bred regardless of their financial situation,
and generally almost “white.”
58
Interestingly, there was no attempt made to conceal their
Mexican sounding surnames. Quite the contrary, their Mexican origins were never
denied nor denigrated. It was just that Latino/a actors were separated in the public’s

56
George Hadley-Garcia, Hispanic Hollywood: The Latins in Motion Pictures, (New York: Carol
Publishing Group, 1990), 29.

57
Larry Carr, More Fabulous Faces: The Evolution and Metamorphosis of Dolores Del Rio, Myrna Loy,
Carole Lombard, Bette Davis and Katherine Hepburn (New York: Doubleday, 1979), 42.

58
Clara E. Rodriguez, 28.

35
mind from all of that. They were not allowed to play Mexican roles in film and since
there was no sound to tie them to their roots, they crossed ethnic and social borders with
ease.
Ironically, it was playing a French innkeeper’s daughter in Fox’s 1926 comedy
What Price Glory? that made Del Rio a star. Utilizing every bit of her exoticism and fiery
sex appeal, she came to dominate much of the film. Yet, despite playing a character who
was not much more than a French version of the stereotypical Mexican cantina girl, Del
Rio’s publicist promoted her successfully as a member of the highest ranks of Mexican
society. As Photoplay described her following the film:
She was rich. She was happily married. She had everything she wanted. Delores
Del Rio came to Hollywood seeking neither fame nor romance, nor money. She
went into the movies “just for fun.”But the movies refuse to let her go, because
she is one of the great discoveries of the year.
59

Other words used to describe Del Rio in the press included “sophisticated”, “aristocratic”,
and “refined elegance.”
60

Though she never got to play a Mexican during the silent period, she played a half
breed native American in Ramona (1928) and a Spaniard in The Loves of Carmen (1927).
But, by 1930, little remained of the soft upper class Mexican elegance that had brought
her to fame. Her “look” going into the emerging sound era was one of chiseled exoticism
that removed her even further form her roots.
For the actors of Mexican Indian appearance, the road was much bumpier. Though
as much in demand to appear in early films as Delores Del Rio, their roles were much

59
Mary Beltran, “Dolores Del Rio, the First “Latin Invasion” and Hollywood’s Transition to Sound,”
Aztlan 30:1 (Spring 2005), 61.

60
Clara E. Rodriguez, 54.

36
more restricted. They did get to portray Mexicans in films but mostly in a negative and
stereotypical context.
With the exceptions of Del Rio and Novarro, during the earliest years of the
Hollywood film industry, Latino characters of both sexes were rarely the focus of an
American film but instead were usually on the margins of the story. According to
Charles Ramirez Berg, one of the primary reasons for this occurrence is:
This great white hero is the sun around which the film narrative revolves, and the
rationale of a typical Hollywood story is to illustrate how moral, resourceful,
brave and intelligent – in a word, superior – he is. It follows that the rest of the
characters must necessarily be shown to be inferior in various ways and to
varying degrees. In order to prop the protagonist up, characters of
cultural/ethnic/racial/class backgrounds different from the hero’s are therefore
generally assigned sundry minor roles: villains, sidekicks, temptresses, the “other
man.” Their main function is to provide opportunities for the protagonist to
display his absolute moral, physical, and intellectual preeminence.
61

The racial and ethnic breakdowns of the character actors who surrounded and propped up
the leading man were arranged according to the following hierarchy.
White actors played racial, ethnic and “half-breed characters”; Asian actors
played American Indians and Mexicans; and Mexicans portrayed half-breed
Indians and Polynesian princesses. However, as a rule, whereas both white actors
and ethnic actors could portray ethnic and racial others, Mexican and other actors
coded “nonwhite” never played “white” characters or assumed the same kind of
roles as designated “white” actors.
62

Latinas with darker skin were heavily affected by the same rules. Their roles were
largely relegated to playing women of loose morals, cantina girls and unsavory types who
briefly tempt the hero away from the wholesome Anglo heroine and lures him into her

61
Charles Ramirez-Berg, Latino Images in Film: Stereotypes, Subversion, Resistance. (Austin: University
of Texas Press, 2002), 67.

62
Daniel Bernardi, “The Voice of Whiteness: D.W. Griffiths Biograph Films (1908-1913) in The Birth of
Whiteness: Race and the Emergence of U.S. Cinema edited by Daniel Bernardi (New Brunswick, New
Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1996), 125.

37
den of iniquity. In creating this female character, filmmakers were not only dealing with
nineteenth century stereotypes but were also, in part, playing off the changing roles and
norms for women in American society.
The early development of the motion picture industry coincided with the
emancipation of women and their gaining the right to vote in the early 1900’s. More
significant, however, was the gradual loosening of many of the restrictions that had
historically been placed on female behavior. As many women began to wear shorter
skirts, drink alcohol, and become more promiscuous, other women who were less
adventurous were equally tempted by the changing role of women. Ethnic actresses were
interestingly positioned in this regard:
A number of interesting possibilities suggest themselves in relation to female
spectators and the potential ability of the ethnic female star to catalyze
spectatorial fantasies of resistance and agency. In many of the narrative forms in
which she appears, the figure of the ethnic woman is located (even if in
apparently minor ways) outside of dominant American cultural values. What this
may have meant for female filmgoers was the opportunity to engage and identify
with a figure uniquely privileged to defy the social order of white, patriarchical
capitalism. The ongoing association between ethnic femininity and disruption,
unruliness, excess, and innovation makes it more likely that
female spectators could enjoy such representations from a safe distance—that is,
without ever having to interrogate the dominant culture into which ethnic
femininity did not quite fit.
63

In her analysis of Hollywood’s representation of Mexico and Mexicans in early
cinema, however, Margarita de Orellana argues that Hollywood was not “trying to
suggest that all Mexicans were like those represented on the screen.” Their object rather
was to present the Mexican as a representative foreigner, to give the ‘other’ a shape and

63
Diane Negra, Off-White Hollywood: American Culture and Ethnic Female Stardom (New York and
London: Routledge, 2001), 11.

38
form.
64
But the “shape and form” of the “other” was predicated on dominant ideologies
of race and perceived characteristics of “the Mexican” and was represented in Hollywood
films in terms of a racialized sexuality. The male characters have been introduced into
Hollywood cinema as dark-skinned bandits of mixed blood or “greasers” while Latinas,
in contrast, were generally docile, sensual and light-skinned with European features.
65

But Orellana doesn’t account for the fact that early Hollywood was not populated
by one type of Latina, but instead by two distinct types. The light skinned women with
European features that she describes was, of course, embodied by Delores Del Rio but the
other ones (who actually play Mexicans on screen) are represented by “the Mexican
Spitfire”: Lupe Velez. Both were equally important to Hollywood. The star power of the
former garnered the domestic and European markets while the latter, at least until the
negative stereotyping became too much, ensured entry into the Latin American markets.
Although there are conflicting accounts of Lupe Velez’ entrance to Hollywood, it
was the complete opposite of Del Rio’s. An influential producer did not discover her. In
fact, she experienced considerable difficulty in even entering the United States.
66
Once
in Los Angeles, she took whatever work she could get before landing a job in the Los

64
Margarita de Orellana, “The Circular Look: The Incursion of North American Fictional Cinema 1911-
1917 into the Mexican Revolution” in Mediating Two Worlds: Cinematic Encounters in the Americas
edited by John King, Ana M. Lopez and Manuel Alvarado (London: BFI Publishing, 1993), 10.

65
Joanne Hershfield, “Dolores Del Rio, Uncomfortably Real: The Economics of Race in Hollywood’s
Latin American Musicals” in Classic Hollywood, Classic Whiteness edited by Daniel Bernardi
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2001), 139.

66
Rosa Linda Fregoso, meXicana Encounters: The Making of Social Identities on the Borderlands
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), 113.

39
Angeles Music Box Revue where Hal Roach spotted her and signed her to a contract in
1926 and cast her in a Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy short, Sailors Beware.
67

She was immediately cast, the following year, in The Gaucho with Douglas
Fairbanks as a “Wild Mountain Girl” who steals the hero away from his more saintly and
sedate girl friend played by Eve Southern. In some respects this role of two
fundamentally different women vying for the same man showcased the major differences
between Velez and the reigning Latina film star Dolores Del Rio. Velez, according to
Rosa Linda Fregoso, in her book Mexicana Encounters: The Making of Social Identities
on the Borderlands, was the classic commoner in comparison to the aristocratic Del Rio:
At the time critics in Mexico often measured Velez against another exotic
Mexican star in Hollywood of the period, the sedate and lady-like Dolores Del
Rio, who was carefully crafted by the industry as a high class ethnic woman of
impeccable morals. They vilified Lupe Velez as a commoner (populachera),
vulgar and unmannerly (una chica incorrigiblemente vulgar) or, as one Mexican
critic would write, Velez had traces we notice solely in lower class people,
without culture, nor ideals, nor patriotism.
68

Yet, while the patrician Del Rio was always cast as European or Spanish in her film roles,
Velez was identifiably Mexican. It’s undeniable that both represented role models to
young Latina moviegoers but therein lays a conflict. The whitened Del Rio was aimed at
Anglo and European audiences in mainstream Hollywood films during the silent period.
She became a role model for young American and European girls in much the same sense
as any of her Anglo counterparts. She was a role model for Latinas who saw her message
that they too could become “whitened” if they bought the clothes and make-up that she

67
Victoria Sturtevant, “Spitfire: Lupe Velez and the Ambivalent Pleasure of Ethnic Masquerade,” The
Velvet Light Trap 55(Spring 2005), 19.

68
Rosa Linda Fregoso, 112.

40
wore and if they aspired to traditional American versions of femininity and social roles.
In other words, they could rise above the bonds of their ethnicity and culture.
Velez, according to Fregoso presents an alternative vision for Latinas:
In Lupe Velez, Mexican American young women found alternatives to a
femininity circumscribed by marriage and masculine authority: "I’ve always been
afraid of marriage, Velez explained in 1934. It seems to me like being imprisoned
in an iron cage…I do not tolerate anyone telling me what I can and cannot do.
Velez was also a model for female independence and autonomy: “Do you want to
know Lupe, the real Lupe? I love freedom. I want to be free to sing and dance
always when I so desire. And through her public persona and movie characters,
Lupe Velez portrayed strong women who were active agents in public spaces both
as career women and as players in romance and courtship. In this manner, she
provided young women with an alternative model of female behavior and
identity.
69

Yet, there was something of a dichotomy in the public’s perception of Velez.
Yes, she was, Fregoso suggests, free and independent, but with this trait being
demonstrated in a variety of film roles designed to carry this quality to such an extreme
as to earn her the title of the “Mexican Spitfire”, she was never elevated above her
ethnicity in the manner that Del Rio was. Del Rio played seductive and sensuous but
terms like “wildcat” and “vixen” were never applied to her by studio publicity or by the
press. Delores Del Rio was exotic in a mysterious European way. Velez was sexualized
in a lower-class Mexican way.
70

Lupe Velez’s silent career and those of other Latinas with darker skin and the
Mexican Indian features were on the fringes of the motion picture industry. As
mentioned above, they served to support and prop up the predominant Anglo heroes and

69
Ibid., 114.

70
Alicia I. Rodriguez-Estrada, 475-492.

41
heroines by playing barmaids, mountain girls and women of easy virtue. While
Hollywood loved Dolores Del Rio and her sophistication, it loved greasers and fiery,
engagingly sexy Mexican vamps equally well.
The only interruption to Hollywood’s use of these anti-Mexican stereotypes
occurred during the teens with the emergence of the Latin American market. By 1916,
World War I was taking a toll on exports of American films to Europe leaving South
America as one of the few viable venues for the export of Hollywood’s product. Without
missing a beat, the studios redirected American mainstream films south of the border by
making one concession to Latin American tastes. Greasers and cantina girls were out,
replaced by Germans as the film’s villains. Unfortunately, the opportunity to portray
Latinos in a favorable light for Spanish speaking audiences was ignored. They were
simply temporarily removed from the screen.
71
A positive benefit of all of this was that
the improving relations between the United States and Mexico as a result of the end of
the Mexican revolution continued to flourish until 1919 as Hollywood, ever conscious of
the importance of the Latin marketplace, opted not too rock the boat with unfortunate on-
screen depictions of its neighbors.
However, after the end of the war, the cantina girl and the greaser returned with a
vengeance. Leading off with Rio Grande (1919), whose advertisement noted: “Take the
hot blood of Mexico and mix it fifty-fifty with the cooler, calmer strain of the Northern
neighbor and what happens? You can gamble on it that the daughter of the union will

71
Ruth Vesey, 119.

42
blow hot, blow cold….that she will be passionate, revengeful, brave, unreasonable, and
most cussedly loveable.”
72
In other words, a “Mexican spitfire.”
This new round of defamatory depictions of Mexicans was the last straw for the
government of Mexico. After observing Hollywood’s slanted portrayal of their country
and its people during the silent period, virtually from the beginning of cinema, the
secretary of the Mexican Embassy sent a formal letter to the studios in 1919 protesting
the negative representations in films made in the United States. He charged that “the
films did not portray the average conditions of the country” and had “hurt the sentiments
of the Mexican people.”
73

The Hollywood studios responded immediately with a letter stating:
We do not hold with the contention of the Secretary that the use of the Mexican
character is willfully designed to hurt the reputation of the Mexican people. It is
more largely the result of thoughtlessness, coupled with pictorial appeal. The
costuming of the character is more picturesque, the selection of the type makes for
more definite identification, and so the directors, thinking only in picture, have
clung to the type. The Mexican bad man is more striking in appearance on the
screen than the more abundant native of the same moral fiber.
74

This response did little to help the situation. The studios did not change the subject matter
of their productions and thus continued to alienate the Mexican government.
For the most part, studios ignored these protests until 1922, when the Mexican
government threatened to ban all films from any studio that produced offensive films

72
Allen L. Woll, 17.

73
Ruth Vesey, 170.

74
Gaizka S.Usabel, The High Noon of American Films in Latin America (Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI
Research Press, 1982), 79-80.

43
about Mexico and its people.
75
This finally caused the Hollywood studios to take notice
since they had quite a bit of money at stake with the distribution of their films in Mexico.
However, as much as Hollywood wanted to avoid offending its southern neighbors,
filmmakers continued to love the easy “exoticism” of Spanish names, dusty streets,
donkeys, haciendas, sombreros and erotic Spanish women and the Mexican bad man.
76

Thus, while they pulled the offending films from Mexico, they continued to distribute
them throughout Latin America and Europe, which offended the Mexican government
even more.
The situation became more complicated in 1928, as the first sound films were
beginning to appear. The Los Angeles Spanish language newspaper La Opinion, in its
coverage of the first Congreso de Cine in Spain, charged that “the cinema audience is the
most innocent and susceptible; (and) the dominance of Hollywood contributes to the de-
nationalization of the people and accustoms them to ideas, concepts and customs that are
foreign and harmful.”
77
So not only was the American film industry portraying Latinos
in an unfavorable light, it was actually sabotaging the cultures of the Spanish-speaking
countries where the films were shown.
Of major concern, was the fact that much of the controversy within Mexico and in
Mexican Los Angeles, as noted by Vicki L. Ruiz in her article “Star Struck:
Acculturation, Adolescence and the Mexican American Woman 1920-1950,” was
focused on young women, who were increasingly being influenced and potentially de-

75
Woll, 17.

76
Vesey, 171.

77
“Va a reunirse proximamente el primer Congreso de Cine,” La Opinion , April 16, 1928, 4.

44
Mexicanized by factors outside the home through their access to more disposable income
for entertainment, clothing and the like. To their parents, they were being viewed as
victims of the American popular culture’s corrupting influence as embodied in their
fashion choices and other behavior that differed from their parents’ Mexican-bred values.
The American cinema …made an impression. Although times were lean, many
southern California women had dreams of fame and fortune, nutured, in part, by
the proximity to Hollywood. Movies, both Mexican and American, provided a
popular form of entertainment for barrio residents. It was not uncommon on
Saturday mornings to see children and young adults combing the streets for
bottles, so they could afford the price of admission—ten cents for the afternoon
matinee. Preteens would frequently come home and act out what they had seen
on the screen. “I was going to be Clara Bow,” remembered Adele Hernandez
Milligan. Another woman recounted that she had definitely been “star struck” as a
youngster and attempted to fulfill her fantasy in junior high by “acting in plays
galore.” The handful of Latina actresses appearing in Hollywood films, such as
Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez also whetted these aspirations.”
78

Ruiz also notes that, ironically, both the Anglo and the Mexican American
communities had almost identical stereotypes of each other’s young female population.
Mexicans viewed Anglo women as morally loose, while Latina actresses in Hollywood
were finding themselves continually typecast as “hot-blooded” women of low repute.
Ruiz cites Lupe Velez, in particular, who appeared in a string of films with such titles as
Hot Pepper, Strictly Dynamite, and The Mexican Spitfire.
79

Nor, was La Opinion always the cultural watchdog that Mexican American
parents expected it to be. While editorially bemoaning the de-Mexicanization of the
barrio’s youth, its advertisements and entertainment pages pandered for Hollywood.

78
Vicki L. Ruiz, “’Star Struck: Acculturation, Adolescence and the Mexican American Woman 1920-
1950” in Between Two Worlds: Mexican Immigrants in the United States edited by David G. Gutierrez
(Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources, Inc., 1996), 129-130.

79
Ibid., 137.

45
Nowhere was this more evident than in the paper’s advertisements for fashions and
cosmetics. Employing testimonials from movie actresses, ads for Max Factor products
in particular urged girls to “follow the stars” and purchase Max factor’s society
makeup.
80

Joanne Hershfield asserts in her article “The Hollywood Movie Star and the
Mexican Chica Moderna” that the influence of Mexican film culture for women in that
country during the 1930’s was quite powerful. Similarly, Vicki Ruiz agrees in regards to
the influence of popular culture especially for young Mexican women in the United
States. With the exposure to both Mexican and Hollywood films, Hershfield introduces
the idea of a “transnational femininity” that exposed young women to “different worlds
and new ways of being”.
81
While Hershfield and Ruiz are talking about Mexican and
Hollywood films in general, exposure to the Spanish language films which ran in both
Mexico and various cities in the United States, seeing Latinas in starring roles on the
screen would be another strong factor in creating a more complex and layered sense of
identity.
Mexico followed up its ban on all films depicting Mexicans in a bad light in 1923
by restricting all films made by the company that had produced the offending feature.
That same year, Panama followed suit and the Latin American market began to crumble.
By the advent of sound, it was obvious that the studios were in danger of slowly losing
Spanish-speaking audiences or finding their access to Latin markets impeded and that

80
“Max Factor” Ads, La Opinion (September 18, 1926, May 3, 1927 and June 5, 1927).

81
Joanne Hershfield, 100.

46
was something the Hollywood film industry could not afford to do. They were
determined not to lose that international audience and more importantly, the revenues that
came with those audiences going to the movies. The next chapter will focus on an option
the Hollywood film industry chose and that was the introduction of the Spanish language
film experiment.

47
CHAPTER 3
THE FILM INDUSTRY’S TRANSITION FROM SILENT TO SOUND AND
HOLLYWOOD’S INTRODUCTION OF THE SPANISH LANGUAGE FILM
EXPERIMENT

There was a feeling of excitement at the California Theater in downtown Los
Angeles. That evening the Paramount studio would be premiering a new film and many
of the Paramount stars would be in attendance. What was different about this premiere
was the fact advertisements had appeared in the newspapers inviting fans to come to the
theater and meet the stars before watching the film. This sounds just like one of the many
Hollywood premieres that are featured on On the Red Carpet and Access Hollywood,
except this premiere took place over seventy-five years ago and the film was in Spanish.
On August 29, 1930, the California Theater in downtown Los Angeles premiered
its first Spanish language film, El Cuerpo del Delito, featuring two virtually unknown
Latina actresses Maria Alba and Maria Calvo. The film, which was produced by
Paramount, is regarded as the first film to be produced entirely in Spanish by a major
Hollywood studio to be exhibited in the United States. Prior to El Cuerpo, there had been
some Spanish language films produced by small independent companies for local
Mexican-American constituencies, but the major studios deemed the domestic Spanish-
speaking audience insufficient to support a larger effort. As Colin Gunckel notes:
Aside from the occasional screening of independently produced silent films from
the struggling Mexican industry, all downtown (Los Angeles) venues relied
almost exclusively upon films produced in Hollywood or, less frequently, Europe.

48
Consequently, the content of these films did not specifically address Mexican
immigrants as an audience, and did not sustain a direct dialogue with their
collective experiences as theater often had.
82

Despite its strong reception in Los Angeles, with an audience comprised largely
of Mexicans, Paramount did not consider El Cuerpo del Delito anything more than a test
run for a possible solution to some problems that the studio was having with early
attempts to distribute “talking” films internationally. With the film industry transitioning
from the silent era into the unknown sound era, this chapter will give an overview of
what was happening in the film industry during that period and move on to discuss one of
the choices the industry moguls opted for in their attempt to keep from losing their large
international audiences as well as their share of the monetary rewards with the
introduction of the Spanish language film experiment. The last part of the chapter will
discuss the “unexpected” domestic audiences in select cities such as Los Angeles.
The Hollywood Film Industry at the Crossroads Between the End of the Silent and
Beginning of the Sound Era

From the standpoint of the studios and prior to the coming of sound, silent films
had provided vast amounts of money for their investors because they could be distributed
in any country in the world by simply inserting a number of inexpensive subtitles in
Spanish, French, German, Italian or practically any other language that was needed. With
the arrival of sound to the motion picture, however, the Hollywood film industry, in
addition to having to find actors and actresses who could talk, also became fearful of
losing their enormous non-English speaking audience. The early practice of dubbing into

82
Colin Gunckel, “War of the Accents: Spanish Language Hollywood Films in Mexican Los Angeles,”
Film History 20 (2010), 329.

49
various languages was a painstaking process compared to today with usually
unsatisfactory results and subtitles were not feasible to cover the amount of dialogue
uttered in the new films.
83
Moviegoers in the Americas and Europe were very important
customers for Hollywood and it was imperative for the industry not to lose the revenue
those audiences generated.
Indeed, the major studios considered South America as their most receptive
market during the silent era with south-of-the-border consumers clamoring for more
products than most European markets put together and it was expected to continue to
grow during the emerging sound era. Gaizka Usabel denotes the extent of the market:
During the early sound era, Latin America was the leading market for Hollywood
films. It consumed 37 percent of about 230 million linear feet of film and, in
1927 and 1928, due to the film restrictions of Europe, Latin America returned to
Hollywood companies more revenues than Canada, the Far East, or Europe—
about 31.5 percent of 7.5 million, which was the yearly total foreign return. The
film division of the U.S. Commerce Department disclosed that Latin America was
ahead of Europe and other continents in number of big capacity theaters. While
Europe had only 20 with more than 2,500 seats, Latin America had built over 20
such houses including several with 5,000 seats and one with 6,000. “Deluxers”
with 1,000 seats or more were numerous in Latin Americn republics: 67 in Brazil,
35 in Argentina, 35 in Mexco, and 39 in Cuba.
84

However, this potentially lucrative market was also beset with a number of
ongoing problems. Spanish language films such as El Cuerpo del Delito were thus a
belated attempt by Hollywood to address these problems through films made specifically
for Latin American and South American audiences. Given Hollywood’s problems with
accurately representing various aspects of Mexican and Latin American culture during

83
Donald Crafton, 425.

84
Gaizka S. de Usabel, 80.

50
the 1920’s, the industry’s transition to sound at the end of the decade seemingly
represented an opportunity for the studios to rethink their products not only in how a film
is constructed technologically but also in how its subject matter is culturally portrayed.
Yet, most of the film industry’s leaders were totally ignorant of the opportunities and
potential presented to them by the new medium and were at a loss in knowing what
would work with the public and why.
Most studios had been caught by surprise by the enormous popular success of
Warner Bros’ partial sound production The Jazz Singer in 1927 and, by the end of the
decade, they were all working to convert their own productions to sound without much
rhyme or reason. In fact, all of them - even the trailblazer of sound, Warner Bros.
initially overlooked the human voice as the single most important cause of the enormous
worldwide popularity of the technology they introduced.
85
According to film historian
Richard Jewell, Warner Bros. first began to experiment with sound in film in 1926
primarily as a means for eliminating vaudeville acts and live musical accompaniment in
theaters and to allow audiences to experience a consistent level of entertainment quality
in both large and small venues.
86

Sound, had, in fact, been a component of silent films from the beginnings. Sound
effects provided by sound effects machines or by off-screen performers improvising
noises while watching the screen were a regular part of the film-going experience.
Similarly, music, usually performed on a piano, or occasionally a small orchestra

85
Richard B. Jewell, 55.

86
Ibid., 91.

51
accompanied most films, and often composers were commissioned to create original
scores for important productions.
As might be imagined, the audience’s experience of a performance was radically
different if the film was viewed in a small nickelodeon type theater or a large dream
palace. If Warner Bros. could make the viewing experience identical in all theaters, it
would translate into higher film rentals for their company. That was the original intent of
turning to sound. As Richard Jewell notes weren’t exactly leading the way:
Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the passage from silent to sound pictures
was that none of the true pioneers foresaw how their efforts would turn out.
Neither Dr. Lee DeForest, whose inventions helped surmount the technical
barriers to true sound movies, nor the Warner brothers, the movie moguls who
would profit most handsomely from taking a leadership position with respect to
sound, nor William Fox, another entrepreneur who had the good sense to steer the
industry toward the sound-on-film option, realized the extent to which audiences
would fall in love with motion pictures containing the sound of human voices.
They believed in the advantages of marrying music and sound effects to film,
even giving voice to musical performers and newsreel subjects, but they did not
envision the commercial power of feature films with dialogue.
87
.

As popular as The Jazz Singer was, however, it was a relatively short 1928
Warner Bros. feature, Lights of New York, that demonstrated that it was not necessarily
the novelty of sound that audiences craved but dialogue. It was the first film to use
people speaking to people to sustain its narrative. The July 11, 1928 Variety review
stated:
Lights of New York may be called a pioneer in the real sense as an all-talker.
Though this 100 percent talking is 100 percent crude, so much so, its
conventionalism is tiresome. There are 1,000 holes in it along side of what it
should have, from standards adopted or about to be adopted by the Warners

87
Ibid., 91-92.

52
themselves in other talkers, among others-but still this talker will have pulling
power, and the Warners should get credit for nerve even if they didn’t do it with a
polish.

The widespread popularity of this crudely made film among theater audiences
proved that dialogue was the draw and that if you wanted to succeed in Hollywood in the
1930’s, your film had better talk. Although some silent films would continue to be made,
that medium was effectively dead with the movie-going public after The Lights of New
York.
Film historian Harry M. Geduld notes in his book The Birth of the Talkies that
It was, of course, the sound not the story that distinguished Brian Foy’s picture.
And in this respect alone it was truly a remarkable film. Lights of New York ran
for a mere fifty-seven minutes, but twenty-two of its twenty-four sequences
contained recorded dialogue. These passages were consistently audible, generally
very well synchronized, and often lasted for several minutes at a time. Except for
the opening intertitle and a later title introducing the Night Hawk club, the movie
relied on the spoken-not the written-word. It would have been meaningless if
shown as a silent picture.
88

Yet, if the early experiments with sound proved anything, it was that not all sound was
the same. Different technologies affected the audience in different ways. More
significant, however, were the tonal qualities of the actors’ voices that were being
recorded.
89

Hollywood’s conversion to sound from 1928 to 1930 was, in fact, a mixed
blessing for the actors and actresses upon whom the studios were counting to provide the
voices for their new sound films. As would later be exemplified by MGM’s 1952
musical satire of the transition, Singing in the Rain, many previously prominent stars of

88
Harry M. Geduld, The Birth of the Talkies (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975), 204.

89
Richard B. Jewell, 94.

53
the 1920’s were left by the wayside when their voices proved too reedy or high pitched.
Major silent star Norma Talmadge’s career effectively came to an end because producers
found her voice too discordant. Even swashbuckling John Gilbert whose voice was fine
by normal standards saw his career destroyed by talkies because it did not fit the heroic,
larger than life, image he portrayed on the screen. Others who saw their careers decline
were Lillian Gish, Gloria Swanson, Colleen Moore and even Hollywood’s golden couple
Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford.
90

More seriously, studio heads now began to notice that once they spoke, some
previously “all-American-appearing” actors were now too foreign or ethnic sounding for
mainstream audiences. Swiss actor Emil Jannings was a good example of this
phenomenon. Generally considered the one of the greatest actors in the world during the
1920’s, his early 1929 sound film The Betrayal was a disaster because his English was
deemed incomprehensible to most Americans. In an attempt to redeem himself, he
retreated to Germany in 1930 and acted in The Blue Angel in both a German and an
English version. While the German version was considered a major success, the English
language version proved once again the incomprehensibility of Jannings’ English and
was notable only for the introduction of Marlene Dietrich to audiences in the United
States. She was immediately signed by Paramount who passed on the opportunity to
resign Jannings.
91

90
David Thompson, A Biographical Dictionary of Film, 3
rd
Edition (New York: A. A. Knopf, 1994), 288-
289.

91
David Shipman, The Great Movie Stars: The Golden Years (Boston: Little Brown & Co., 1995), 322-
323.

54
Interestingly, as foreign actors such as Jannings were retreating to their own
shores after the introduction of sound, a number of the studios were anticipating the
international distribution challenges posed by the new sound films and began to actively
recruit foreign actors and directors in 1928 with the intention of forming foreign language
production units on their own lots.
92

The signing of Dietrich demonstrated that some of the studios were willing to take
a chance on foreign sounding actresses if their films could be re-written to typecast them
as upper-class foreign exotics (Olga Baclanova who played a Russian femme fatale in her
talkie debut), European refugees, or immigrants trying to make ends meet in America by
performing menial jobs on the fringes of society. Samuel Goldwyn’s Hungarian protégé
Vilma Banky was a good example of the latter type of character.
Vilma Banky put up stiff resistance to a talking picture. She had refused to submit
to voice tutoring and now turned down, point blank the vehicle that Goldwyn had
constructed for her debut, Child’s of Fifth Avenue because she thought her accent
would be submerged in an accentless (i.e. American) cast. Goldwyn, who was
paying her $250,000 a year on a contract that had the most of two years to run,
presented her with a choice of evils. Either talk or quit. Banky talked. Actually
the film had been cleverly devised to exploit her ‘foreign-ness’. She played a
Hungarian immigrant working as a short-order cook in Child’s Restaurant,
flipping buckwheat cakes on to the waitresses’ plates with the best of the local
girls and soon flipping small-talk more rewardingly in the direction of a
millionaire’s son whom she has mistaken for a chauffeur. Yes, it was a very
American plot. As far as her voice went, Banky was more than passable.
93

The use of these actors would also enhance the potential for these films to do well in
foreign countries, particularly if the European actors could later dub their voices back
into their own tongues for international distribution.

92
Natasa Durovicova, 143.

93
Alexander Walker, The Shattered Silents (New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1979), 130.

55
The situation was even more complex for Spanish speaking actors and actresses
who also saw their Hollywood careers dry up over night when sound came in. Latino
performers such as Ramon Navarro had experienced widespread popularity during the
silent period thanks to the influence of Rudolph Valentino and the public’s fascination
with films featuring exotic actors and locales. During the silent period, a Latino actor or
actress could portray almost any European nationality as long as no one heard them
speak. According to film historian Jeanine Basinger, “a number of men and women were
given contracts at least in part because industry professionals felt they possessed qualities
reminiscent of Valentino. These new Latin lovers included Navarro, Antonio Moreno,
Gilbert Roland and Delores Del Rio.
94

After the advent of sound, however, Spanish speaking actors had limited options:
they could leave Hollywood and return to their own film industries; they could work as
extras in “B” pictures which exploited Latin stereotypes or they could eventually perform
in the newly emerging field of producing Spanish language versions of studio films.
For Latina actresses the transition to sound was much more complex. Before the
movies learned to talk, an actress could transform herself into anyone through the use of
costume, wigs, and make-up—as long as the character was basically a stereotype. Dark
hair, exaggerated eye shadow and blood red lipstick could produce an exotic “other”,
typically a “vamp” as interpreted by someone like Theda Bara or Olga Baclanova
(mentioned above). Conversely, blonde hair, white powder and light rouge transformed
an actress into Mary Pickford and her various “America’s Sweetheart” characters. Still,

94
Jeanine Basinger, Silent Film Stars (New York: Knopf, 1990), 10

56
filmmakers of the time did not take any chances that these nuances of appearance might
be too subtle for audiences to appreciate and thus introduced each character with
interstitial titles to remove all doubts. Appellations such as “Sweet Nell”, “The Vamp”, or
“Cantina Girl” instructed movie viewers in which direction their emotions should go.
The introduction of sound, however, posed serious problems, for actresses and for
the studio system alike. The latter wanted desperately to continue dealing in stereotypes.
It simply made things easier for writers and directors. Yet, with formerly “All-American”
girl types being discovered to now have foreign accents, casting became more
complicated. Latina actresses were confronted with a dilemma even though, with the
possible exception of Delores Del Rio, they had rarely functioned as characters within the
American mainstream. They were still somewhat in demand for the traditional “cantina”
girl roles but, as for their positioning as “exotic others”, their options were now more
limited.
Ironically, the way that Latinas were represented on the screen, even during the
silent period, should have been crucial to the studios since Mexican immigrants to the
United States were among the largest single blocs of moviegoers from the beginning of
film viewership.
95
But, initially, the movies were not being made for them although this
would soon change as the ownership of the studios began to notice the huge Latin
American market slipping away because their films could not speak the language.

95
See, among others, Rogelio Agrasanchez, Jr., Mexican Movies in the United States: A History of the
Films, Theaters and Audiences, 1920-1960, Jan Olsson, “Hollywood’s First Spectators: Notes on Ethnic
Nickelodeon Audiences in Los Angeles” and George Sanchez, Becoming Mexican-American: Ethnicit,
Culture and Identity in Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945.

57
During the 1920’s, most of the major studios had quietly passed into the hands of
banks and other financial corporations whose financial support had been instrumental in
getting their films made. These financial concerns, which were based primarily on the
East Coast, viewed the film industry’s conversion to sound with mixed feelings. From a
“bottom line” point of view, they were pleased with the domestic success of Hollywood’s
new talking product, but they were distressed by the potential loss of the lucrative
international market. Producer Louis B. Mayer announced in 1929 that one fifth of the
international market had already been lost and that the percentage would only increase as
the output of “talkies” increased.
96

While a number of film people used this statistic as an argument for reducing the
number of sound films going into production and increasing the number of silent
productions, more forward thinking producers attempted to find ways around this
linguistic stumbling block. As Durovicova notes:
As soon as the prospect of sound cinema began to be developed systematically, it
became evident to all the major studios that while sound in general would be a
costly but profitable investment, the newly revealed problem of language would
seriously endanger the American cinema’s world markets. This problem was, for
instance, the key topic of several Academy of Motion Pictures debates in April,
July, and September of 1928. Perhaps more importantly, in the already ongoing
confrontations with countries outside the USA, language would prove an
exceptionally fierce instrument.
97

The dilemma faced by the Hollywood studios was at once both marketing and
cultural. Should they simply distribute English language films in the same form that they

96
Alexander Walker, 125.

97
Natasa Durovicova, 139-140.

58
were released in the United States and count on the fact that Hollywood stars were adored
all over the world or should they try some form of voice dubbing in other languages
concurrent with the English version being produced? Should separate foreign language
versions be made either in the United States or overseas? There were no easy answers
and contrary to what is believed about the studio executives at this time, sometimes they
didn’t even know the questions. With such headlines as “Multi-lingual Production in
U.S. Has Too Many Drawbacks”
98
and “Par Heads Deciding in Europe Where Foreign
Tongue Films Will Be Made—Over There or Coast?”
99
being reported in Variety it
seems even where to begin to make these films was one of the first questions that needed
to be answered.
Further clouding the picture was the fact that many film industries in other
countries were emerging from the shadow of Hollywood’s hegemony and their
governments were enacting stiff regulations to restrict the import of products made in the
United States to protect their domestic product.
According to film historian, Alfonso Pinto,
When sound arrived, Germany and France were at the height as silent filmmakers.
However, the films made until then in Spain and the Latin American countries
were very minor. Regular production was almost non-existent and their films
were unable to compete with the American ones. Madrid, Buenos Aires and
Mexico were not completely equipped technically for silent films, let alone sound.
The chance to export American-made Spanish language versions to the entire
Spanish-speaking market was unrivaled.
100

98
“Multi-lingual Production in U.S. Has Too Many Drawbacks,” Variety, July 2, 1930, 7.

99
“Par Heads Deciding in Europe Where Foreign Tongue Films Will Be Made—Over There or Coast?,”
Variety, April 30, 1930, 7.

100
Alfonso Pinto, “Hollywood’s Spanish Language Films” Films in Review 24, no. 8 (October 1973), 474.

59
The studios’ initial attempt to invade the international marketplace with their new
sound films was simply an extension of what they were doing domestically with the huge
stockpile of silent films deemed unreleasable after sound came in. That was basically to
re-shoot certain scenes with sound but keep the film predominately silent. Some
actresses were versatile enough to speak in other languages enabling two or three
versions of the talking scenes to be shot. If not enough bi-lingual actors were available,
then the speaking scenes could carry the same inter-titles as all silent films.
In a first attempt, in 1929, Universal released a Spanish language version of
Broadway combining lengthy inter-titles and some of the English speaking scenes
dubbed into Spanish, simultaneously in Los Angeles, Mexico and Buenos Aires. The
film was soundly rejected in all three locations, with the reaction being so strong in
Buenos Aires, in particular, that Variety commented that the poor quality of the dubbed
Spanish caused “unseemly behavior by the audiences all over the house.”
101
The result of
this fiasco sent the industry executives back to the drawing board.
That same year, RKO dubbed a film Rio Rita, into Spanish and Pathe followed the
same year with Her Private Affair. Yet, instead of sating the demand for Spanish
language products, these two films demonstrated that there was an audience for such
films.
102
While the studios were still trying to figure what direction to go with the films
for foreign audiences, an American independent company Sono Art-World Wide
produced the first Spanish language film. The company took the script of one of their

101
“Faked Spanish Dialogue Gets Razzed in S.A.” Variety, November 27, 1930 , 3.

102
Alfonso Pinto, 474.

60
properties, a B-film called Blaze of Glory and simultaneously shot the film with a
Spanish speaking cast which became the film Sombras de Gloria.
103
The plot, which
unfolds through a series of flashbacks, allows Broadway star Eddie Williams (Joes Bohr)
who is on trial for the murder of a former German soldier Carl Hummel (Demetrius
Alexis), to tell his side of the story. According to the description in The American Film
Institute Catalog, Within Our Gates: Ethnicity in American Feature Films, 1911-1960,
Eddie, a Broadway star married Helen (Mona Rico) and almost immediately goes
to the front (World War I) is gassed while saving the life of a German soldier
(Hummel). Eddie cannot find work when he returns. Helen finds a job and Eddie
grows more despondent. One day he finds Helen in Hummel’s arms and, in his
rage, Eddie shoots the man. The trial proceeds with the revelation by his Defense
Attorney (Francisco Maran), Eddie’s wartime commander, of Helen’s secret. She
had pretended to be single so as to get work. Hummel who was searching for
Eddie, really loved Helen and was ignorant of her relationship with Eddie. The
jury finds Eddie not guilty.
104

103
Ibid., 475.

104
American Film Institute Catalog, Within Our Gates: Ethnicity in American Feature Films, 1911-1960,
edited by Alan Gevinson. (Los Angeles: University of California, 1997), 946-947.

61

Figure 1: Sombras de Gloria Advertisement

Since the actors and the behind-the-camera personnel used the original scripts
from Blaze O’ Glory as well as the sets and dialogue, the immediate effect was to free the
Latino cast from the prevalent stereotypes confronting them in English language films.
Eddie is certainly not a bandit, and Helen is a working wife, not a “cantina” girl vying for
the attentions of an Anglo male.

62
Around this same time, it was announced another independent production
company had signed to release Alma de Gaucho another “first” all-Spanish picture
produced in Hollywood. The industry paper Hollywood Filmograph proclaimed,
The cast includes some of the finest talent procurable. There is no doubt “Alma de
Gaucho”will be a sensation. Careful direction, native scenery and a good theme
place this picture among the notable productions of the year.
105

While critics were not kind to either film, they were successful enough with audiences
that Hollywood executives realized they better make some decisions regarding how to
produce films for the foreign markets or they would get left behind, and they weren’t
about to let that happen. The movie executives would be hearing and reading reactions to
these first films and the Hollywood Filmograph had this to say:
Spurred on to future productions because of the fine reception of several
successful Spanish versions productions in the past few months, prominent
producers have signaled their intentions of making more pictures on the order of
Alma de Gaucho, Sombras de Gloria and others which have enjoyed successful
runs and which promise to be appreciated by the Spanish public.
106

Even though the Hollywood film industry was the leading industry at this time,
they too were equally confused as to what exactly the answer to the types of films to
produce for their myriad of audiences as the industry was transitioning to sound. As the
New York Times reported,
The most interesting topic today in Hollywood screen circles is the foreign
audible situation. Opinion is well divided on the practicality of Hollywood
making talking pictures in foreign languages, and yet, in the light of the
increasingly cosmopolitan atmosphere and make-up of the world’s leading film
community, it would seem the next move. Making pictures for overseas
consumption in the leading languages is by no means an insurmountable task and

105
“All Spanish Cast Released” Hollywood Filmograph vol. 10, no. 19 (May 24, 1930), 7.

106
“Spanish Producers Optimistic Over Future” Hollywood Filmograph vol. 10, no. 20 (May 31, 1930), 7.

63
today many of the studios are experimenting in this new department, a
development that is proving a boon to many in the Hollywood screen colony who
are linguistically equipped. Paramount is on the verge of taking this bull by the
horns.
107

Perhaps the phrase “taking this bull by the horns” was overstating it at this
moment in time, which becomes quite clear when reading the words of then Paramount
executive Geoffrey Shurlock who talked about the considerable confusion that the
industry was facing with the coming of sound.
108
Shurlock was looking to produce films
for the company during this transition but couldn’t quite get the promotion he was
looking for until he was approached by B. P. (Bud) Schulberg who was the General
Manager of West Coast Production for Paramount:
“You want to be a producer?Yes, sir. Well I’m about to make you a producer.
You are going to be a producer of foreign language films.I understand you speak
Spanish and at least you understand French.”
109

Shurlock continued,
“Now this was at the time when they were moving into talkies. The panic that
swept Hollywood then was that we would lose our foreign markets. We couldn’t
flood them with pictures in the English language. We would lose our grip on the
market.
110

Schulberg told Shurlock that,
“the people in New York—Jesse Lasky and Walter Wanger—think we ought to
make pictures in foreign languages. I think it’s a lot of nonsense. Personally, I

107
New York Times, June 1, 1930, 113.

108
Geoffrey Shurlock, Oral History, American Film Institute (1970), 46.

109
Ibid., 40-41

110
Ibid., 41.

64
don’t want to have anything to do with a doomed operation like this, but they are
the bosses and they say we have to go into it.”
111

But as Shurlock was told there was a condition to his being the producer of these
new foreign language films. “You don’t come to me with your problems—you do it
somehow on your own.”
112

As Shurlock said, as far as these foreign language films were concerned, there
was no one to turn to, and he was simply turned loose. He says, “I was lucky. No
producer or director wanted to waste his time or reputation making pictures in a foreign
language. How could he? He couldn’t talk to the actors.”
113

Robert M. W. Vogel, who was head of the international department at M.G.M. at
this time, when talking about production personnel and the Spanish language films,
concurs:
Cameramen and editors disliked having to do it [work on the Spanish language
films] because they could get possible Oscars on a domestic project. These films
were just time consuming and kept you from getting credit for what you wanted to
do.
114

And Shurlock and Vogel knew of what they spoke. It was reported in Variety that
many jobs in studio foreign departments went begging because those who could fill them
steered clear of what were being called the “blind-alley” berths of Hollywood. As could
have been said of B. P. Schulberg, studio bosses rarely knew the ins and outs of their

111
Ibid., 41.

112
Ibid., 41.

113
Ibid., 43.

114
Robert M. W. Vogel, Oral History, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences (1990), 48-49.

65
foreign departments. Not understanding the language, they left it all up to their foreign
department head someone usually trying to get into the domestic field himself.
115

So the major studios in Hollywood—Paramount, MGM, Universal, Columbia, Fox and
Warner Bros.—each decided to start a little subsidiary production nest of their own in
each studio. Shurlock explains about the foreign department at each studio:
Each studio has a man corresponding to me. Some of them were better equipped than
I was—I think they spoke more languages. Henry Blanke at Warner Bros. had come
from Germany and had been Ernst Lubitsch’s assistant. Paul Kohner did the same
thing at Universal. A wonderful producer named John Stone was at Fox, Frank Davis
was at MGM, and Ben Pivar and somebody else was at Columbia. All the small units
had a friendly rivalry to grab whatever foreign speaking talent we could to make our
pictures. Of course, each studio developed in a different fashion.
116

The first attempts at these films were shorts with very little story and plot but ones
filled with lots of singing and dancing in them which the studio executives thought would
have international appeal.
117
But then it came time to make a decision about what should
be Paramount’s first Spanish language film “talkie”. While there were complaints from
critics about the subject matter of the films that were chosen to be made, it is clear that
these producers knew they had to step very carefully. As Shurlock explains about the
decision making process:
We could not possibly make a picture dealing with the native customs of any of the
Spanish countries, whether it’s Mexico or Spain or Argentina. We know nothing
about it. We would look like first class idiots, obviously. So we decided to take a
typical American subject—after all, American subjects were of great interest abroad

115
Variety (October 6, 1931), 15.

116
Geoffrey Shurlock, 47.

117
The Los Angeles Times (July 15, 1929), A9.

66
when they were in English, they might be of equal interest in Spanish. So we chose a
melodrama, one of the Philo Vance melodramas that Bill Powell was making at that
time, the famous detective Philo Vance, the S.S. Dine stories. It was called The
Benson Murder Case originally. It started with the stock market crash, which seemed
a topical subject and went from there.
118

While El Cuerpo del Delito was well received abroad and here in the United States,
there were a series of hits and misses for the studios especially for Warner Bros., the last
of the major studio to take the plunge into producing foreign film versions.
119
The studio
took a big negative hit with their film El Hombre Malo
120
so it was reported that:
After a year of foreign production in Hollywood, it’s anybody’s guess as to where the
bulk of the future multi-linguals will be made here or in Europe. It’s still pro and con
status, as is virtually every phase of foreign production. It is still too early for the
producers to figure just what the foreign will mean to their business. As for now, this
activity can be seen as experimentation.
121

It is interesting what the perceptions outside the studio were regarding the situation
with the Spanish language films. While inside the studios, this situation was seen as still
being in an experimental stage. But the editor of one of the leading Spanish language fan
magazines had a different take. As Juan J. Moreno wrote in Cinelandia in June 1931,
The Spanish talkie seems to be muddled…everyone seems to have a pet theory for the
solution of this annoying problem…One would think that a well-organized industry
would consider many points of action before setting out on an expensive campaign of
production.
122

118
Geoffrey Shurlock, 48.

119
Variety, February 12, 1930, 4.

120
The making of the Warner Bros Spanish language film El Hombre Malo is discussed extensively from
different angles in Lisa Jarvinen, Hollywood’s Shadow: The American Film Industry and its Spanish
Speaking Markets During the Transition to Sound, 1929-1936 and Colin Gunckel, A Theater Worthy of Our
Race: The Exhibition and Reception of Spanish Language Film in Los Angeles, 1911-1942.

121
Variety (December 31, 1930), 6.

122
Juan J. Moreno, Cinelandia (June 1931), 7.

67

For many studios, the most practical solution was to shoot the same film
simultaneously on Hollywood soundstages in different languages using hybrid production
teams with a combination of American, German, French and Spanish-speaking casts.
For example:
Hal Roach’s new MGM comedies such as Brats (1930), with Laurel and Hardy,
were made simultaneously in French and Spanish by James Parrott, directing
through interpreters. Stan and Ollie learned to pronounce their lines phonetically.
Roach also produced under (Buster) Keaton’s sponsorship, several two-reel
remakes in Spanish, of Fatty Arbuckle’s old comedies….Keaton tried out his
Spanish in De Frente, Marchen (1930), a remake of Doughboys (1930) with
Conchita Montenegro and Estrellados (1930) from Free and Easy
(1930)...Foreign audiences evidently liked Buster Keaton’s talkies (available in
French, German, and Spanish) better than Americans did.
123

But Paramount did go a different way and after making around ten pictures in the
first two years including eight in Spanish and two in French decided to get the jump on
everyone else and opened their own multilingual foreign language studio in Paris. There
was a big operation at the Joinville studio making pictures in about 13 languages.
124
And
they did get a that jump as it was reported in the New York Times that Paramount’s
Joinville studio was undoubtedly the most ambitious effort yet made in capturing the
foreign market for talking pictures.
125

Other film productions featuring predominately Spanish speaking casts consisted
of two different types. One model followed the template of Independent Spanish
language producer Sono Art’s Blaze O’Glory/Sombras de Gloria with the Spanish

123
Donald Crafton, 428.

124
Geoffrey Shurlock, 47.

125
The New York Times, October 12, 1930, X6.

68
language version produced simultaneously with a version in English.
126
The original plan
was that during the day, the studios would shoot the English language films and by night,
using the same sets and scripts, the Spanish version would unfold. The Spanish language
version had separate casts composed of Latin American, Spanish and Mexican actors as
well as separate behind-the-scenes talent. It was quickly seen, however, that this was not
going to work. But in this early phase mostly from 1930-1932 the films were taken from
English language films.
The second type of Spanish language films was motion pictures filmed with
original scripts produced only in Spanish.
127
These films were produced primarily by
Fox and Paramount Studios in the mid-thirties and featured imported talent on both sides
of the camera. Although fewer in number than Spanish versions of American features,
these films demonstrated the importance of the South American and Latin American
markets to Hollywood’s “bottom line.” “During the period between May of 1930 and
April of 1931, North American companies produced films directly in Spanish in a
quantity superior to the rest of those produced in the next years combined until 1939.”
128

Although Hollywood was making these films specifically for a Spanish speaking
audience, a couple of unforeseen problems rose almost immediately. As an August 1930
article in International Photographer noted, the stories were conventional Hollywood
stories and lacked any real Latino content that would make people in the intended

126
Alfonso Pinto, 474.

127
Ibid., 474.

128
Juan B. Heinink and Robert G. Dickson, Cita en Hollywood: Antologia de las Peliculas Habladas en
Castellano. (Bilbao, Spain: Mensajero, 1990), 49. This book has the most complete listing of all the
Spanish language films that were produced in Hollywood during the 1930’s.

69
audience identify the situations with their own life experience.
129
Like most mainstream
Hollywood product, the stories ranged from domestic comedies to horror to island
dramas to historical dramas to musicals. The musicals turned out to be among the most
successful exports, for a broad range of Latin American audiences. Even if viewers had a
difficult time understanding the language, it was easy to keep up with the action. The
combination of “song and dance” found satisfactory appeal.
130

A second problem was Hollywood’s thinking that the Latin American countries,
Spain and Mexico were a uniform entity, unaffected by cultural, geographical or social
differences. In their haste to capture the Spanish speaking market, executives hired every
available Spanish-speaking actor to be in these films even looting the national cinema of
many Spanish-speaking countries. The idea was to produce films in a “one size fits all”
mode that would allow them to release the same film in all Spanish-speaking territories in
the world. What Hollywood forgot was that Spanish is not a uniform language since it is
subject to strong regional variations.
131
The Foreign Language committee was created as
an adjunct to Academey of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences to arrive at uniform
standards for foreign production.
132
The committee consisted of representatives from
each studio. In a letter sent to the studios on February 3, 1930, the committee wrote,
The foreign language situation presents one of the most pressing problems now
confronting the industry. It has been suggested that cooperation between the

129
Guillermo Prieto Yeme, “The American Made Talkies,” International Photographer (August 1980), 14.

130
Kristin, Thompson, Exploring Entertainment: American in the World Film Market, 1907-1934.
(London: BFI Publishing, 1985), 159.

131
Guillermo Prieto Yeme, 14.

132
Variety, February 12, 1930, 4.

70
studios on those aspects of the problem which are not of a competitive nature
would facilitate progress and be mutually beneficial.
133

In another letter dated February 7, 1930 the committee further emphasized why solving
this problem was so important.
This problem…is one of the most crucial facing the cinema industry today,
involving the preservation of the great percentage of revenue on American-made
pictures that have been derived from foreign markets.
134

La Opinion immediately took issue with these films, once again raising Mexico’s
historic complaint against Hollywood depictions of Latin Americans while describing the
filmmakers as “totally ignorant of our customs and language” and reducing characters
and settings to the level of caricature. The paper’s film critic called the language
“horribly mutilated” with “a strange accent.”
135

But not everyone agreed that there was a “big” Spanish language problem. As
Jose Bohr, one of the stars of the Spanish language films remarked:
All of this discussion of Spanish in motion pictures is what you call a tempest in a
teapot. There are millions of people in the Spanish Americas andsimple Spanish is
understood everywhere. For generations theatrical companies of Argentina have
gone to Spain or Mexico and Mexican artists have gone to Argentina and Spain.
Their performances at times have been a tremendous success and suddenly, with
the coming of talkie pictures there is all this discussion of the Spanish language.
It is too ridiculous.
136

133
Foreign Language Committee Files, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences.

134
Ibid.

135
La Opinion, December 10, 1929, 4.

136
Examiner (February 2, 1930), section 1, page 16. (Found in the Foreign Language Committee files at the
Margaret Herrick Library)

71
Further amplifying what Jose Bohr said, an article entitled “More Cooperation and Less
Criticism for Spanish Pictures” appeared in the Hollywood Filmograph. The writer
Adolfo De Berg has this to say about the alleged misuse of the Spanish language in the
films,
What is really important is that there is a woeful lack of cooperation in certain
circles. What is important is if the talkie delivery conveys the expression intended
by the script and makes itself immediately understood…People are depending on
these pictures for their livlihood—Why attack?
137

Also complicating the reception of these films abroad was a problem common to
most of the talkies. Regardless of whether a film was a remake of a popular American
version or one made especially for a specific linguistic group, many of the films were
simply too “talky”. People wanted good stories with lots of action and movement on the
screen. Combine that with the fact that the actor is speaking in a different dialect and a
more formal stagey version of the language and you wind up with a bored audience. One
reason that musicals, like silent films before them, transcended international borders was
the fact that audiences loved the singing and dancing even if they didn’t understand the
words.
The studios had entered into making the foreign language films reluctantly and
began to be faced with the dilemma of quality versus quantity. They had assumed that
making the Spanish talkies would be easy. An article in Variety asked, “Why not, with
more Spanish speakers within hailing distance of Los Angeles than in any other spot in
the country? But to speak a language and act it, the studios soon discovered were two

137
Adolfo De Berg, “More Cooperation and Less Criticism for Spanish Pictures,” Hollywood Filmograph
vol. 10, no. 22 (June 14, 1930), 7.

72
different things.”
138
Plus some of the talent didn’t quite live up to expectations and the
costs of making the movies and what the bottom line recorded also came into play.
139

According to Jeffrey Shurlock the average cost of a silent film at Paramount was
about $400,000. “Now the pictures I made in Spanish were a joke. We made them for
$80,000 of which $30,000 was studio overhead. So you made them in ten days for
$50,000 actual expenses. Of course, you had no star salaries or anything like that.”
140

And it appears that Shurlock remembered the costs of making the Spanish language films
well as the budget for the two-week shooting of the film El Cuerpo del Delito was
$81,000
141
and Amor Audaz came in at $85,000.
142

In looking at the budget for Amor Audaz what was interesting was the money
allotted for the wardrobe for the lead actress Rosita Moreno. Her wardrobe for the film
consisted of street clothes, a traveling outfit, an afternoon dress, an evening dress, an
evening gown and wrap, a negligee along with a pair of shoes and some hats. All of this
came to $132.50.
143
It becomes clearer how the studios were able to keep the budgets

138
Variety, July 2, 1930, 7.

139
Ibid.

140
Geoffrey Shurlock, 57.

141
El Cuerpo del Delito, Paramount Production Files, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion
Picture Arts and Sciences.

142
Amor Audez, Paramount Production Files, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts
and Sciences.

143
Ibid.

73
down on these films. According to Variety the Fox studios worked to keep it Spanish
pictures at around the $65,000 mark.
144

By the end of 1931, according to Variety, it appeared that the Spanish foreign
language films were dead. As it said, “the Spanish market once loomed as the bonanza of
the talker era and for a while promised to fulfill this dream, but it’s extremely dull
now.”
145
The foreign language out at the two largest producing studios Fox and
Paramount came to a standstill. The foreign department at Fox ceased production and
waited for the home office in New York to make a decision about which way the studio
would go foreign-wise hereafte and the Paramount was following suit.
146

But the opening of an M-G-M film Mujer X seemed to make executives think twice
about the foreign language talkies. With the studios having almost decided to completely
abandon foreign picture production “along comes a picture whose qualities should attract
once again the attention of executives. It is the only Spanish speaking picture made so
far which possesses sufficient Latin American and Spanish flavor to make it appealing to
audiences of these countries.”
147
Mujer X became the first of several of the Spanish
language films that began receiving praise after the negative and critical reviews of some
of the earlier efforts.
148

144
Variety, September 4, 1934, 13.

145
Variety, November 10, 1931, 19.

146
Variety, November 24, 1931, 11.

147
The Los Angeles Times, April 13, 1931, A7.

148
Colin Gunckel, 116-117; In his dissertation A Theater Worthy of Our Race (2009), Gunckel discusses
some of the reasons for the shift in the critical reception of Hollywood Spanish language films in 1931.

74
Furthermore, a review of the Spanish language film production appeared in Cine-
Mundial. The writer Carlos F. Borcosque wrote,
…despite a few deafening successes as well as a few tremendous failures, general
opinion is practically united and has been reflected at the box office, which is
ultimately which matters most to producers. And this opinion, along with those
results, sends a clear message: Spanish language production has quietly become a
success and the studios have made money.
149

A year later, a few of the studios decided to once again begin production of the
Spanish language films and the Fox studio was the only one to go at it full force but in a
new way. As the New York Times reported, “Fox is preparing to invade the Spanish and
South American market. G. Martinez Sierra, leading Spanish playwright, is under
contract to prepare several Spanish screenplays. Raul Roulien, a Spanish film star, has
been brought to Hollywood to be featured in a number of films to be produced in both
Spanish and English.”
150
Fox had decided to produce films for the Spanish and South
American markets from original screenplays rather than re-making some of their English
language films. As The Los Angeles Times reported in May of 1934, the output of
Spanish films is growing steadily especially at Fox Studios.
151

As a memo circulated within the studio made clear:
In additon to the star players we have under contract it is necessary for us to
accumulate a stock company of players…We also have definite information that both
Warner Bros and R.K.O. plan to make Spanish pictures and we cannot afford to let

149
Carlos F. Borcosque, “The Spanish-Speaking Production of 1931,” Cinelandia, 1931.

150
The New York Times, April 5, 1933, 22.

151
The Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1934, 9.

75
any Spanish personality be idle around Hollywood so that other studios can grab
them.
152

To further their cause, John Stone, the Foreign Production Manager at Fox Studios wrote
an article in the Spanish language fan magazine Cine-Mundial talking about the
importance of the Spanish language films to the studio and how they hoped to reach out
to the public for help.
The Hispanic market is one of the most importantwithin the domain of
cinematography, all the more since sound was added to the screen…These
[Spanish Language] films have already gone beyond the experimentation stage:
they are now an integral part of normal cinematographic activities.

Stone went on to say,

However, we believe that if the growth that we have seen is to continue, these
films need to identify with the audiences we serve even more intimately. As such
we welcome the opportunity to join Cine-Mundial in promoting the Plot Contest
… so that the Hispanic audience can voice their opinion on the production of
these films…
153

While Hollywood was focusing on the international scene, on the domestic front,
another phenomenon was occurring almost unnoticed. Americans were discovering films
originally made for foreign audiences. German producers were perhaps the first to
discover that films could travel both ways with the success in the United States of The
Blue Angel/Der Blaue Engel (1930) which made an international star of Marlene Dietrich
but Mexican and Latin American film distributors were finding receptive audiences in the
American Southwest who were perhaps less concerned than audiences in Mexico about
the authenticity of the language and characters. In fact as early as 1924, “Motion Picture

152
Fox Film Corporation Studio memo from Sol M. Wurtzel to Mr.’s W. Sheehan, Jack Gain and George
Bagnall (February 8, 1934), Conchita Montenegro Fox Legal Files, UCLA Performing Arts Special
Collections.

153
John Stone, Cine-Mundial (February 1934), 78.

76
Spanish” was the title given to classes in the Spanish language at the University of
Southern California.
154
But several years later as the Los Angeles Times reported,
The trend toward a closer affiliation with Spanish speaking countries, mainly
Mexico on account of its close proximity to Southern California has hit the
movies. Classes of Spanish in night schools have increased amazingly and actors
and play writes who speak and write the language are smiling since the film
market in Spanish countries is wide open.
155

Paramount Pictures made a similar discovery at its test screening of El Cuerpo del
Delito in Los Angeles but didn’t understand the significance of what had happened.
Though not intended for them since the film was created for the international market,
Latinos flocked to the film. The studio executives got so involved in the international
market they lost sight for a moment that there might be an audience for the Spanish
language films domestically
156
. It probably is not too surprising that this initially
happened since most of the foreign language departments at the studios were thinly
staffed. Plus, there were probably other executives who agreed with the thoughts of B.P
Schulberg that the foreign language films were “nonsense” and were more concerned
with their domestic product.
With Los Angeles becoming a city that had a steady influx of people from
Mexico, Spain, Central and South America, the urgent need of a local theater showing
nothing but foreign language talking pictures, especially in Spanish has been needed for
some time. There had been a couple of theaters downtown, such as the California
operated by Fred Miller that occasionally hosted Spanish language theatrical

154
The Los Angeles Times, June 22, 1924, A3.

155
The Los Angeles Times, March 9, 1930, B9.

156
The Los Angeles Times, May 31, 1931, B7.

77
performances as well as films when they could be supplied. But in 1930, Tom White, a
theater manager, realizing the ostensible interest by the new immigrants, announced his
intention to lease the California Theater and establish “the first all Spanish program in
America”. Besides entertaining the local audience, his planned exhibition practice would
also provide an important function for Hollywood saying it would serve as a ‘tryout’ for a
purely Spanish reaction to Hollywood product made in the Spanish language.”
157
When
this plan apparently fell through, California theater owner Fred Miller quickly picked up
on the idea. He now dubbed his theater the International California Theater and stated the
theater would feature “the presentation of all-talking films in every language but
English.”
158

On August 29, 1930 Paramount’s El Cuerpo del Delito premiered at the
California Theater, which was located at the corner of Eighth and Main in downtown Los
Angeles. The theater had flourished as a legitimate theater during the teens and early
twenties. It went dark in 1925 until Fred Miller who over the years had managed other
theaters in the area purchased it in early 1930. With a largely Mexican audience
attending the shows at the theater, Miller hit upon a formula that would sustain the theater
over the next decade. With these Spanish language films being shot in considerable
quantity close by Hollywood, it’s hardly surprising that the California Theater became
the first-run theater for these films in Los Angeles.
159

157
Colin Gunckel, A Theater Worthy of Our Race, 112.

158
Ibid., 113; The Los Angeles Times, August 30, 1930, A7.

159
Robert G. Dickson, “California Theatre in the 1930’s: Los Angeles, California.” Marquee: The Journal
of the Theatre Historical Society of America 26, no. 4 (1994): 6-8.

78
For these films being something of an afterthought for showing here in the United
States, there was a large gala celebration planned for both the opening of the California
Theater and the film. With the potential of these films being shown in Los Angeles, La
Opinion began writing articles about the films and their stars. A month before the
planned event, an advertisement began appearing in the “La Sociedad” section. The
celebration was open to the public and numerous articles began appearing in the La
Opinion urging the public to attend the opening to indicate their interest in the film. This
would convince producers that California was the perfect venue to show these films on a
weekly basis. The upcoming showcase at the International California Theater was not
just an occasion to come and see the film and go home. It was a spectacle on par with a
vaudeville show. According to the advertisement, there were to be other acts as well
including a comedian, a performer who did caricatures and some short skits.
160

Even more important, there was an opportunity for this public that many other
filmgoers never had. Paramount sent an entire roster of actors and actresses who would
be appearing in future films to meet and greet the public with the advertisement saying
“Come and be introduced to the principal artists who will be appear in this film and other
notable artists as well.”
161
This was probably the first chance for young Latina to not
only get a glimpse of the actresses who they would follow in films over the next few
years. Of the actresses who were supposed to be in attendance that evening were Rosita

160
La Opinion, August 29, 1930.

161
Ibid.

79
Moreno, Maria Alba, Maria Calvo and Lupita Tovar as well as up and coming male stars
including Adolphe Menjou, Ernesto Vilches and Ramon Paredes.

Figure 2: El Cuerpo del Delito Advertisement

80
In fact, El Cuerpo’s first domestic screening, though simply intended as a test
project with an actual Spanish-speaking audience generated solid reviews in Spanish
language film magazines.
The Paramount Company has achieved a great triumph by shooting its first
Spanish film, El Cuerpo del Delito. When some future historian of Spanish
speaking cinematography sets out to review the initial stages and gradual
development of this particular cinematic form, he will surely stop at Paramount’s
first production and deem it to be the most transcendent Spanish film of this early
period.
162

The next day an article appearing in Los Angeles Times said, “if the capacity audience
which greeted last night’s presentation of El Cuerpo del Delito is any indication, the
success of this new venture should be assured.
163
After this first film engagement, Miller
realized that Spanish language films a larger audience than those for films in other
languages and decided to convert the programming of the International California
Theater to Spanish language films and so became “the Los Angeles first-run theater for
these films.”
If the Spanish language film experiment had all gone as well as the reception of
El Cuerpo de Delito did for Paramount a very different trajectory might have been
written. But that wasn’t on anyone’s mind on September 12
th
, less than two weeks after
the grand opening spectacular at the International California Theater, Paramount held
another evening gala for the public.
The occasion of this fiesta was the premiere of the Spanish version of the film
Paramount on Parade entitled Galas de Paramount. In its original form, the film was a

162
Cine-Mundial (June 1930), 38.

163
The Los Angeles Times, August 30, 1930, A7.

81
musical variety show introducing American audiences to such stars as Clara Bow, Gary
Cooper, Maurice Chevalier, Jean Arthur and Budd Rogers. The Spanish version included
Rosita Moreno, Ernesto Vilches and Ramon Pareda. The contributions of the Latin
actors were dance numbers added at the beginning and the end of the film. For the
middle portion of the film that was English, these actors introduced the other actors and
their performances in Spanish. According to the American Film Institute Catalog Within
Our Gates: Ethnicity in American Features, 1911-1960, Rosita Moreno and the other two
actors were the film’s master of ceremonies. As the film begins, they look in the camera
and introduce themselves to the audience
164
which, at that moment, would be the
Mexican public of Los Angeles. Again, Paramount brought the actors from the film,
including Rosita Moreno to meet with the fans.
But who were these actresses who came to Hollywood to star in these films?
Some were brought to Hollywood by various studios but others were already ensconced
in Los Angeles and producers wanted to find them. In fact, in early 1930, The
Association of Motion Picture Producers put an ad in The Los Angeles Times stating they
“will begin the registration of experienced Spanish speaking actors at its headquarters at
5504 Hollywood Boulevard.” Special invitations to register have been sent to all Spanish-
speaking artists known to be in Los Angeles.
165
But before preceding to their stories and
how they came to be known to the public, the next chapter will look at how the two most

164
AFI Catalog, Within Our Gates: Ethnicity in American Features, 1911-1960, 365.

165
The Los Angeles Times, February 14, 1930, A5.

82
popular Latina actresses of the 1930’s, Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez were presented
on and off the screen of Hollywood.

83

CHAPTER 4

DOLORES DEL RIO AND LUPE VELEZ ON AND OFF THE SCREEN
THROUGH THE LENS OF HOLLYWOOD

By the 1920’s, because of the size and sophistication of its population, Los
Angeles became a major market for Mexican and Latin American popular culture. This
included everything from theater to music to film. The Latino community provided a
variety of Spanish language live entertainment and movie theaters.
166

From the beginning, there was a significant Latino audience that found great
enjoyment in American films. As Jan Olsson’s article “Hollywood’s First Spectators”
notes, migrant Mexican laborers formed a core audience downtown Los Angeles as early
as 1911. A number of nickelodeons, in fact, exhibited special programming just for
them.
One theater, for instance, the Electric, at 215 North Main, in 1911 offered Pathe
titles for that company’s Mexico City studio to encourage attendance from the
Spanish speaking neighborhood. The new Plaza Theater opened at 423 North
Main in 1911 actively seeking local patrons. By adjusting admission prices to a
realistic level—from a dime to a nickel the Teatro Metropolitan at 515 North
Main, reported a big increase in June 1911. Acording to the Motion Picture News
“they are the house that caters to the Mexican publicand gives Spanish and
Americanvaudeville acts besides the pictures.”
167

This trend continued into the 1920’s when, despite some reservations, new Mexican
immigrants joined other Americans in their enjoyment of other movies. In fact, ninety

166
See, among others, Colin Gunckel, A Theater Worthy of Our Race; Antonio Rios-Bustamante, “Latinos
and the Hollywood Film Industry, 1920’s-1950’s,” Americas 2001 1, no. 4 (January 1988), 6-12; George
Sanchez, Becoming Mexican-American.

167
Jan Olsson, 185.

84
percent of all families in Los Angeles spent money on movies, averaging $22 a year per
family.
168

The Los Angeles Spanish speaking media exercised a significant, if
unacknowledged, cultural influence in the city and nearby areas. The Latinos in
Hollywood—the stars, supporting actors and studio employees—were an interconnected
part of this larger Latino community, with its linkages to Mexico and the rest of the
Spanish speaking world.
169
By the end of the silent period, Los Angeles was the most
important distribution center in the United States for Mexican, Argentine and other
Spanish language film industries, since it had the second largest population of Latinos in
the world after Mexico City and thus, there was an unprecedented Spanish speaking
market for Hollywood films.
170

During the silent period, Latina actresses were presented to the movie going
audience in either one of two ways. As noted earlier, lighter skinned women with
European features were presented as “exotic white” and in some cases as simply white
depending on the role. Actresses such as Lupe Velez, with darker skin were introduced
to the public as “Mexican” with all of the ethnic stereotypes that that implies.
With the advent of sound, both of these modes of presentation became one. When
the actresses voices were heard on screen, their accents and dialects betrayed them both
as Mexican. Crossover stars such as Delores Del Rio saw their status reduced after 1930
to portraying comic characters in musicals and ethnic supporting characters in comedies

168
George Sanchez, 173.

169
Antonio Rios-Bustamante, 12.

170
Ibid., 11.

85
and light dramas. Lupe Velez, on the other hand, continued playing “Mexican” in the
roles that were given her and achieved a high degree of success in comedy playing the
“Mexican Spitfire.”
Yet, with Hollywood’s attempt to recapture the Spanish-speaking market which
had been declining and was almost completely lost with the coming of sound, the
experimentation with the Spanish language films meant a third mode of presentation was
about to open up – one that had an impact not only in Latin American markets but
surprisingly in the United States as well.
Favorite stars in the United States were also idols in Latin America. Locally
printed film magazines proliferated to satisfy Latin American fans. Chile had La
Semana Cinematografia; Brazil, Para Todos and Palcos E Telas; Cuba Smart,
Law Pantalla, and Diario del Cine, among others; Mexico, Zig Zag; and
Argentina, Cine Gaceta and Cinema Magazine.
171

Looking at it from Hollywood’s point of view, what worked in the United States in terms
of promoting films through the act of promoting the actress would work internationally,
as well with certain limitations. Melvin Stokes in his article “Female Audiences of the
1920’s and Early 1930’s” explains this mode of thought:
The assumption on the part of an industry dominated by men, that to be profitable
it had to appeal mainly to women, had a profound effect on the way that
American cinema developed during the 1920’s and 1930’s. A high proportion of
20’s films were female-centered melodramas and romances. They were often
written by women scriptwriters, frequently adapting material from popular fiction
also written by women mainly for women. They featured female stars, who
outnumbered their male equivalents and seemed to spring from an apparently
endless pool of talent (the 1920 census listed 14,000 actresses). In the next
decade, such films gave way to a whole new genre: the women’s film. During the

171
Gaizka S. de Usabel, 8.

86
first half of the 1930’s, according to Tino Balio, films of this type made up over a
quarter of all the movies on Film Daily’s “Ten best” list.
172

The major studios correctly assumed that Latin American audiences would be female-
dominated, as well.
The actresses in the Spanish language films were thus taking over roles created
for “white” women so employing the usual ethnic stereotypes that worked with Latina
actresses in English language films would not necessarily work. These films were
intended for Latin audiences who had seen many of these actresses playing serious roles
in Mexican films and would expect nothing less than similar performances in these
Spanish language versions. In many cases, they also had the English language version to
compare it to. This required the studios to walk a fine line in selling the Mexican or
Latin American origin of the actress as perfectly appropriate to the story even though she
was playing a role usually played in the American version by a blue-eyed blonde Anglo
actress.
The Hollywood studios were able to make this all work by using a mode of
introducing the Latina actresses to international Spanish-speaking audiences as old as the
movies themselves. The intention was to create star texts for these actresses that would
resemble what was done with mainstream American actresses but which would also build
on their reputations in their native countries. They would then portray these new starring
vehicles as an opportunity for spectators to see the actresses as they had never seen them
before. Using film historian Jeanine Basinger’s template, this chapter will first introduce

172
Melvin Stokes, “Female Audiences of the 1920’s and Early 1930’s” in Identifying Hollywood’s
Audiences: Cultural Identity and the Movies edited by Melvyn Stokes and Richard Maltby (London: BFI
Publishing, 1999), 44

87
the steps the studios used to create a “star”. Once the process is set up, the careers during
the 1930’s of the leading Latina actresses Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez will be
examined within this formula and shown how two very different star texts emerged.
Creating a “Star”
The idea of using a star as a vehicle for selling a film that she was appearing in
had been discovered quite by accident in 1909 when audiences became enamored with an
unknown actress appearing in short films produced by the Biograph Company.
173

Interestingly, the actress, Florence Lawrence, from “north of the border,” did not face the
stereotypes suffered by her “south of the border” counterparts and had no trouble getting
roles playing “American girls.” That is not to say, however, that she was not treated
anonymously on the screen in the beginning.
At first, the early production companies naively assumed that audiences were
coming to see movies to enjoy the phenomenon of pictures that moved as well as for their
subject and story content. This resulted in a policy of not identifying actors or actresses
in the screen credits. They were simply not as important as the story and the experience.
It was also not overlooked that production companies could crank out “two-reelers” by
the hundreds without actors ever becoming well enough known to demand higher
salaries. This situation inevitably caused problems for early film reviewers (a profession
that like film was in its infancy) who were forced to write reviews much like this one for

173
Kelly R. Brown, Florence Lawrence, The Biograph Girl: America’s First Movie Star (Jefferson, North
Carolina: McFarland & Co., Inc., Publishers, 1999).

88
Biograph’s The Taming of the Shrew (1908):
After seeing the play, my first duty is to speak in unreserved praise of the lady
who took the part of the shrew, and the gentleman who portrayed Petruchio.
There is not a false move anywhere.
174

It was difficult to critique a performance without being able to identify the actor and
actress.
From the actors’ viewpoint, an important benefit of remaining anonymous was
that many performers worked on the stage as well and felt that appearing in the new
medium of films (which was looked down upon by many in the theater) would hurt their
chances of obtaining “real” jobs on Broadway.
By 1909, however, Lawrence had begun to receive large amounts of fan mail
addressed to her only as “The Biograph Girl”.
Florence’s mail began pouring in from everywhere Biograph films were shown.
She recalled receiving cards and letters from all over theUnited States, Canada,
France, England, Germany, Australia and Russia,“letters from boys and girls who
were stage-struck for moving picture show acting, who wanted to know what
school of dramatic art she would advise; notes from dazzled youth and moneyed
bachelors and fickle married men and merry widowers, pledging everlasting love
and devotion; a surprising number of autograph hunters, even offers of marriage
from men who claim enough combined wealth to pay the national debt.
175

This sudden fame led Lawrence to leave Biograph for a company that would allow
actresses to be credited on-screen for their work. This new company was The
Independent Motion Picture Company owned by Carl Laemmle who would later found
Universal Studios and be one of the early producers of Spanish language films in
Hollywood. He was immediately blacklisted by Thomas Edison’s Motion Picture Trust

174
Moving Picture World, 28 (November 1908), 423.

175
Kelly R. Brown, Florence Lawrence, The Biograph Girl, 27.

89
because Laemmle was not a member and in fact had been in litigation with the Trust to
be able to make films on his own using Edison’s patents.
176

After signing Lawrence, relations between Laemmle and The Trust heated up,
erupting in acts of violence directed toward the independent filmmaker. This prompted
Laemmle to take a step that would change the image of actresses forever.
In 1910, Laemmle, partly out of anger over the Trust’s actions….decided to
advertise the fact that he had Miss Lawrence. She made the first personal
appearance of a film star in St. Louis MO, that March, and the resulting publicity
made her famous (and also increased the grosses on her and Laemmle’s films).
Other film companies followed suit, and the names of film actors and actresses
began to appear in all segments of the media.
177

The first movie star, then, started as an “other” in a very real sense and went on to
become the first “somebody” in Hollywood. The creation of “star power” thus became a
mini-industry in itself and led to a remarkable alliance between studios, press agents,
publicists, and motion picture fan magazines.
“Star power,” in fact, carried financial ramifications well beyond the confines of
the studio lot. It didn’t simply sell theater tickets. As we have discovered through the
decades, it can be shaped and harnessed to sell almost every conceivable product known
to man. So, in the, sometimes uneasy relationship between the studios, the media and
advertisers, star power was a force to be reckoned with. Melvin Stokes notes how the
early incarnation of the star system was set up in Hollywood:
The star system itself was primarily aimed at women (one theater manager would
later describe most movie houses as Valentino traps). Women made up the great
majority of movie fans and the discursive apparatus attached to the cinema in the

176
Ibid., 64-66.

177
Carl Laemmle, IMBD (www.imdb.com).

90
form of fan magazines and articles on the stars in newspapers, periodicals and
women’s magazines, was addressed mainly to them…As the American economy
moved from one based on production to one oriented toward mass consumption,
the film industry was also important to appreciate the importance of women as
consumers. Charles Eckert noted that “statistics widely disseminated in the late
1920’s and early 1930’s showed that women made 80 to 90 per cent of all
purchases for family use.” Through advertising associated with product “tie-ups”
and licensing deals, business and the studios in combination set out to sell a range
of commodities to women movie-goers. These included goods (clothes,
cosmetics) designed for women’s own use, as well as more general household
products (for example, appliances). The need to appeal to women as
consumers in turn influenced the character of films being made: modern films
offered wider opportunities for showcasing products and story-lines were
frequently created or amended in order to facilitate “tie-ups.” Whether it involved
the production of particular kinds of films, the development of the star system, or
the attempt to appeal to women as consumers, a weight of evidence suggested that
the movie industry of the 1920’s and early 1930’s was clearly oriented to serving
(and therefore making a profit from) a dominant female audience.
178

Women’s impact on the cinema of the 1920’s and 1930’s, in fact, raised the stakes for the
American film industry to maintain its foreign markets and, in the case of the Latin
markets, to create new stars that would appeal directly to them.
Despite, their parent’s adherence to traditional cultural values, young Latinas
coming of age in the 1920’s were bombarded with media – much originating in the
United States – tempting them with the possibilities of earning a living outside of the
home and then using their newfound disposable income for the same types of material
goods enjoyed by their peers in the United States.
179

178
Melvyn Stokes, 44.

179
See, among others, Douglas Monroy, “Our Children Get So Different Here: Film, Fashion, Popular
Culture and the Process of Cultural Syncretization in Mexican Los Angeles, 1900-1935,” Aztlan 19, no. 1
(Spring 1988-1990), 79-108; Vicki L. Ruiz, “’Star Struck’: Acculturation, Adolescence and the Mexican
American Woman, 1920-1950.” in Building With Our Hands: New Directions in Chicana Studies edited by
Adela de la Torre and Beatriz M. Pesquera (Berkeley: Univeristy of California Press, 1993).

91
This war on traditional Latin American cultural values was blamed on the
influence of film and particularly on the pervasive presence of American film throughout
the world. Nowhere was this clash of cultures more noticeable than in Los Angeles,
which had a strong base of all types of Latin American entertainment by the turn of the
century. By the 1920’s the existing traditions of entertainment became intermingled with
both films from Mexico and from Hollywood as additional diversions for young Latinas
in particular. On one hand, the rise of the local film industry provided much needed jobs
for the Latino community; on the other, it played a role in breaking down the traditional
Mexican values espoused by the previous generation.
Los Angeles, due to its proximity to the entertainment industry and its
intermingling of cultures, provided a microcosm of what was happening in the larger
population centers of Latin America. It was also a major center of the newly expanding
consumerism that was sweeping the United States and making inroads all over the world.
As Vicki Ruiz observes:
The Mexican community (in Los Angeles) was not immune to this orchestration
of desire, and there appeared a propensity toward consumerism among second
generation women. In his 1928 study of Mexican women in Los Angeles
industry, Paul Taylor contended that second to economic need, the prevalent
motive for employment among single women was a desire to buy the extras –a
radio, a phonograph, jazz records, fashionable clothes…The American cinema
also made an impression. Although times were lean, many southern California
women had dreams of fame and fortune,nurtured in part by the proximity to
Hollywood.
180

It was this young Latina audience who looked to Hollywood for newer role models and
for the new fashion and lifestyle tips that they couldn’t get in the traditional Mexican

180
Vicki L. Ruiz, From Out of the Shadows (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 112-113.

92
household during the 1920’s. They were “star-struck” with very few stars of their own
ethnicity to look up to. Historian Ruth Vesey in her book The World According to
Hollywood 1918-1939 talks about how foreign audiences watching American films were
able to adopt the imaginative content of the movies as part of their own cultural territory.
She says as “active interpreters, audiences made sense of Hollywood in their own cultural
terms.”
181
Their time would come in a more explicit way and for a brief period when
with the advent of sound, Hollywood and all of its attendant advertisers and affiliated
media would aim for Latin America and would discover or actually almost stumble upon
Latina actresses in various parts of the world and give them the Hollywood “star”
treatment.
Historian Jeanine Basinger, in her book, The Star Machine, describes the process
of creating a “star”as a collaboration between the head of the studio or production
company and the head of publicity. The following things usually took place:
o The actor’s name would be changed.

o A fake biography would be created, working as much from a basis
of truth as could logically be salable.

o Photographs of all types would be taken: fashion shots, close-ups,
glamour poses, cheesecake, “human interest” (posing with dogs and
children), and seasonal shots (cheesecake shots for Christmas, Halloween,
and other holidays), all of which would be widely circulated to
newspapers and magazines.

o “Plants” – small stories to appear in movie magazines and newspapers
that mentioned the new star name and kept it before the public as
often as possible – would be sent out and “dates” would be arranged
with a slightly bigger name of the opposite sex (which benefitted the
stardom of both). “Plants” were a form of imprinting: keep the name

181
Ruth Vasey, 69.

93
in front of movie fans and they will eventually follow it to the boxoffice.

o Introductions would be made to every publicist in town, every magazine
writer in town, and every newspaperman or photographer to show off the
new girl/guy in interviews.

o Lessons in everything would begin, the most important of which was
learning to act for the camera.
182

Basinger also points out that as far as the “name change” goes that with a few notable
exceptions like Rita Cansino becoming Rita Hayworth, “ethnic players were allowed
ethnic names – Katina Paxinou, Akim Tamiroff, Leo Carillo, Mischa Auer, Leonid
Kinskey, Lupe Velez – and minority actors who were comedians could have joke names
to identify their trade: “Stepin Fetchit” for an African American and “Parkyakarkus” for a
Greek.”
183

Dolores Del Rio
At the advent of sound, Dolores Del Rio’s career was at its height. Though it
would begin to decline as sound films took hold, she was the leader of the first “Latin
invasion” of Hollywood and, as such, provides an excellent model for applying the star-
making formula, cited by Basinger, to the new crop of Latina actresses who were being
groomed by various industry executive to play starring roles in the Spanish language
versions of Hollywood films. As mentioned in an earlier chapter, the other Latina star of
the period was Lupe Velez who is on the other side of the continuum from Dolores Del
Rio. I will also discuss how Velez’s career was handled and then there will be a larger

182
Jeanine Basinger, The Star Machine (New York: Alfred Knopf, 2007), 48-49. See, among others,
Richard Dyer, Stars (London: BFI Publishing, 1979); Barry King, “Articulating Stardom” Screen 26, no. 5
(1985): 27-50.

183
Ibid., 48-49.

94
canvas laid out to provide a better understanding of where these “new” Latina stars fit
within this continuum.
The career of Delores Del Rio during the 1920’s was, in fact, almost a textbook
example of Basinger’s formula since she had been positioned by producers, as early as
1925, to “pass for white” or, at least, a “mysterious European exotic” in her silent film
roles. Her career was targeted primarily for white audiences and she was “handled” in
much the same way as Clara Bow and other Anglo actresses of the period. She was
allowed to keep her real Mexican name although the studio biography initially created for
her took great pains to point out that she was aristocratic and more Spanish than Mexican
since that ethnicity evoked existing derogatory stereotypes that would not permit her to
become a star.
184
One advantage that Del Rio also possessed was the fact that her
discoverer and mentor, director Edward Carewe was smitten with her and determined to
make her a star. He was well positioned both professionally and socially within the
Hollywood community to provide her with the exposure needed to propel her career to
the uppermost levels.
Del Rio’s biographer, Linda B. Hall believes that:
Carewe, himself, at some level, spotted the opportunity to use Dolores – and her
dazzling beauty – to change attitudes toward women (and men tangentially) of a
racially and ethnically stigmatized group. He was not straightforward about this
attempt and consistently emphasized in her publicity that she was of Spanish
descent. At the same time, she regularly pointed out to reporters that she was not
European but rather Mexican. Along with the publicists he chose, Carewe
emphasized her personal wealthy and upper class status, as well as her total
respectability (which later, after she broke away from his control, he desperately

184
Joanne Hershfield, The Invention of Dolores Del Rio (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
2000), 9-10.

95
and publically attacked). Yet, if he intended to make Latina women (with the
possibility that they had some indigenous blood) acceptable and even
sympathetic romantic heroines by using Dolores Del Rio as the vehicle, I believe
he succeeded.
185

On one level, the fact that Carewe was under contract with a number of studios to
make films that he could easily cast her in made her access to acting roles easier than that
afforded other ethnic performers but it helped her access to the studios’ star making
apparatus, as well. However, since Del Rio was married at the time she came to
Hollywood, the idea of a “star date” with an established young actor was not an option
for building her career. Yet , Carewe was able to work around that by having himself
mentioned along with her in articles “planted” in the papers to introduce the new star and,
thus, in effect, through his patronage, he served the function of the “date with a slightly
bigger name of the opposite sex” cited by Bassinger as one aspect of star building. The
relationship with the socially prominent director also had the effect of “whitening” Del
Rio for the movie-going public whereas publicity that included her Mexican husband
which had worked well for Spanish-speaking audiences would not be as effective with
the mainstream audiences that her mentor was preparing her for.
Del Rio was, however, subtly linked in some recounts of society events with actor
Ramon Novarro whose off-screen sexuality was considered “mysterious.” Since she was
being positioned to be the female Valentino and Novarro was being groomed as his
potential successor, their emerging star power rubbed off on each other and enhanced

185
Linda B. Hall, “Images of Women and Power” Pacific Historical Review 77, no. 1 (2008), 13.

96
their individual box office appeal. As one such plant detailed:
Ramon Novarro was host at his own premiere, Devil May Care, the Metro-
Goldwyn-Mayer picture at Carthay Circle Theater and this is all the more
noteworthy because Mr. Novarro is sometimes regarded as the recluse
mysterious….The star was host to a distinguished group of guests and was seen in
the foyer and under the awning outside during the intermission affably signing
autographs for fans of the outdoor gallery, who numbered thousands.
Partucularly interesting was it to note his animated conversation with Dolores Del
Rio, for whom Novarro’s lovely sisters are often mistaken.
186

This brief mention not only kept Del Rio’s name before the public but it effectively made
her a “sister” or kindred spirit to him with a subtle hint of romance in terms of her star
cache.
Closely associated with the “plant” was the practice of having up and coming
stars attend civic and social events so that their names, when they appeared in the papers,
would be linked with worthy causes. For example, on July 18, 1927, Dolores Del Rio,
Ramon Novarro, and Lupe Velez were among the attendees at a reception in honor of the
consuls and vice-consuls of all the Latin American countries at a special screening of
Cecil B. DeMille’s King of Kings.
One year later a notable example of a “plant” in which both Del Rio and Velez
lived up to the screen images created for them was in a Los Angeles Times account of
“The Sanjuan Testimonial and Spanish Fiesta” held at the Los Angeles Philharmonic
auditorium. The event was held to defray the expenses of bringing Spanish Maestro
Sanjuan to be the guest conductor at The Hollywood Bowl.
Count De Segurola will be but one of the Spanish-speaking celebrities of the
screen that will make their personal appearance on the stage on said occasion.
Dolores Del Rio, Mexico’s foremost contribution to Screenland will make a brief

186
The Los Angeles Times, February 2, 1930, B22.

97
speech and Lupe Velez, the next best Mexican screen actress will sing and dance,
as only she is able to do.
187

Del Rio the “actor” of the two read a prepared speech in keeping with the Castillian
Identity crafted for her while Velez, the former vaudeville performer, who was at that
time playing in movie comedies was chosen to sing and dance. This news item kept both
actresses in their respective places, which is where their producers wanted them.
Linda B. Hall notes that the comparisons between Del Rio and the “up and
coming” Lupe Velez always cast Del Rio as the Spanish patrician while Velez was
usually depicted as the lower class Mexican peasant with the looser morals of the two.
She believes that Del Rio’s European exotic beauty image cultivated by Carewe obscured
the real person beneath. As she asks and answers the questions:
How does one deal with that? How does one deal with someone who is so
beautiful that other memories of those who knew her are overshadowed by that
extraordinary physical presence? As one delves into the story, one discovers that
this beautiful woman broke every possible gender norm. She divorced twice; she
left in her wake two possible male suicides, her first husband and the U.S. director
who discovered her in Mexico; she made semi-nude appearances on the screen;
she had a highly publicized affair with Orson Welles, a man at least ten years her
junior. And yet she never ceased to be considered a great lady.
188

It is interesting that it was Velez, who admittedly had less external management of her
image who wound up with the pubic reputation of being the “hot Tamale” that perhaps
Dolores Del Rio equally deserved.
Yet, the net effect of these public appearances and the resulting “planted
mentions” was to create an appetite within the local Spanish-speaking community to see

187
The Los Angeles Times, June 24, 1928, C13.

188
Linda B. Hall, 11.

98
these actresses on the screen. Thus, when the Spanish language films began to appear at
the end of the decade, they found Los Angeles’ Latino film goers just as keen to see these
actresses in leading roles as were filmgoers in the Latin American countries for which
they were intended.
Another aspect of creating a star was careful attention to the proper wardrobe.
According to another biographer Larry Carr, Del Rio was shy and conservatively dressed
when she arrived in Hollywood. The actress who would later appear in some fashion and
cosmetic ads also wore almost no make-up.
189
She was also a bit on the plump side and
appeared decidedly Hispanic in her first couple of films. This may have been due
primarily to a rush to establish her in films before her “whiteness,” proper ethnicity and
back-story had been effectively shaped for audiences and film critics. Mary Beltran, like
Hall, notes the placement of Del Rio in the press as an aristocratic “daughter of the
dons:”
Del Rio’s ethnicity never ceased to figure in journalists’ coverage, however…Del
Rio’s Mexican (or more often, Castilian) heritage and dark beauty are mentioned
in most of this early publicity to differentiate her in a generally positive, if
ambiguous way from other starlets. For example, Photoplay, dubbed Del Rio
“the daughter of the dons” and “a perfect Latin type” in an early article. A
rhetoric of leisure and economic privilege also was emphasized. Pains were taken
to underscore that Del Rio had never needed to engage in such unseemingly
behavior as training in order to establish a career as a Hollywood actress.
190

Yet, that was exactly what her handlers were doing. She had Gloria Swanson’s designer
Peggy Hamilton working on her wardrobe and wore the same trendy make up and lipstick
popular with other young actresses. Also, while she didn’t appear in “cheesecake” per

189
Larry Carr, More Fabulous Faces: The Evolution nd Metamorphosis of Dolores Del Rio, Myrna Loy
Carol Lombard, Bette Davis and Katharine Hepburn (New York: Doubleday, 1979), 20.

190
Mary Beltran, 61.

99
se, she was often portrayed in glamour shots wearing sophisticated fashions. As Clara
Rodriguez notes:
Dolores image evolved from the richly Mexican look she brought to Hollywood
in the mid-twenties to a more modern style, sophisticated and glamorous. By the
early thirties, she had discarded the soft-focus prettiness of the previous decade.
She…cut her long hair, enlarged the shape of her mouth, altered the style of her
eyebrows, and emphasized her exquisite bone structure. …. at this point, she wore
only high-style clothes - both on screen and off – that suggested no particular
national origin. Her wardrobe established her as one of Hollywood’s best dressed
women. From the start of her career in Hollywood, fan writers and the press
found her “as dazzling in appearance as she was gracious in manner.
191

Del Rio made her debut in talkies in 1928 in a number of singing roles,
presumably to determine how her voice with its now distinctive Mexican accent would
resonate with audiences. She scored a solid hit with her performance in Ramona (1928)
on the basis of her singing but she was, in fact, playing the role of a Mexican woman in
California. The film, while maintaining her star power, clearly defined her as Mexican.
When she followed it with Evangeline the following year in which she played a
Nordic heroine, she began to receive criticism for the thickness of her accent. An article
in Vanity Fair warned that Del Rio was undertaking “a hazardous task” in portraying a
non-hispanic character
192
while other publications closely scrutinized her singing to see
if her voice was being dubbed. Everybody, it seemed loved her singing but they clearly
had issues regarding her fitness to play a non-Mexican character.

191
Clara E. Rodriguez, 58-59.

192
Vanity Fair (September 1929), 77.

100
At the same time, in an article titled “Foreign Star Outlook Cited,” The Los
Angeles Times pronounced Del Rio’s future career to be limited because her accent was
now deemed to be too Mexican.
Such players as Lupe Velez, Racquel Torres, Dolores Del Rio, Jetta Goudal are
likely to encounter difficulties….for they will surely find their scope ever more
limited. For here again, as Paul Stein points out, even a character calling for an
accented speech is often better played by an American girl, who is first of all
fluent in language of the play, and so at greater ease in playing tricks with it.
….Imagine how it would have impaired the charm of Warner Baxter’s accent in
“Old Arizona” if that role had been played by a real Spaniard in his idea of
English dialect. It was obviously Baxter’s command of English which enabled
him to give the fascinating nuances to his Spanish dialect.
193

The article was prescient in regards to Del Rio who immediately went into A Sailor’s
Sweetheart about a Spanish girl living in France. With the advent of sound, she did lose
much of her aura of “whiteness” and would see her career during the 1930’s descend into
more distinctly ethnic roles. She would also find that most of her roles were becoming
more oriented to her singing in musical films and beginning to play secondary roles in
films.
Because she had been groomed for white audiences with Spanish-speaking
audiences being a secondary consideration for her producers including Carewe, sound
was the beginning of a decline for Del Rio, and her choice of roles became limited. For
one reason or another, appearing in Spanish language films was not an option for her
probably due to all of the years that Carewe and other spent grooming her for white
mainstream audiences. If she was to continue making films for this group, it meant a

193
The Los Angeles Times, August 25, 1929, B9.

101
steady diet of stereotyped “singing Mexican” roles in films dominated by Anglo
performers.
The final straw came in one of her more successful starring roles Flying Down to
Rio (1933) when, despite her singing and dancing ability, the film was taken over by two
emerging stars in Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers. The following year, her studio, RKO
terminated her contract and she moved to Warner Bros. where she had her final big
hurrah as a Hollywood leading lady.
Dolores Del Rio’s image during the silent era had focused on her physicality and
beauty.
194
That image had been so vigorously reinforced during the first part of her
Hollywood that it seemed like it was “botoxed” in that there was no room for her to
move. So when Del Rio was attempting to move into sound films, it was her voice that
announced the first slippage to her image. When she was signed by Warner Bros. to
appear in several pictures it was under the watch of producer Hal Wallis that more than
her voice was exposed.
Del Rio appeared in a string of films during her tenure at Warner Bros. including
Wonder Bar (1934), Madame Du Barry (1934) In Caliente (1935), I Live For Love
(1935) and The Widow From Monte Carlo (1935). The studio still thought they might
have a cash cow in Del Rio but through the marketing materials for the film, it becomes
apparent that there was ambivalence about how to market the actress.
Wonder Bar (1934) was Del Rio’s next film after Flying Down to Rio and takes
place in a Parisian nightclub, with the stars playing the ‘regulars’ to the club and the bar’s

194
Mary Beltran, 65.

102
central attraction is the Latin lounge dancing group led by Inez (Dolores Del Rio). Al
Wonder (Al Jolson) has a secret attraction to Inez, who has a burning passion for Harry
(Richard Cortez). However, Harry is two-timing her with Liane (Kay Francis) who is
married to the famous French banker Renaud (Henry Kolker). The story comes to a
climax when Inez finds out that Harry and Liane plan to run away together and head to
the United States. Inez, in a haze of jealousy, kills Harry.
195

One of the first obvious differences between this film and the Spanish language
films was the production budget. Del Rio was still considered an A-list star and Wonder
Bar was a big budget picture with a budget estimated at $450,000.
196
But she did not
receive the first female star billing which went to Kay Francis and, according to the title
credit sheet that was approved by Mr. Warner, Del Rio’s name would be in smaller letters
than Francis.
197

In looking at the press book Warner Bros. sent out to the movie theaters, in the
advertising Del Rio is always just a face in the crowd. It is only in the material in the
press book that Del Rio gets some of the spotlight for herself and a majority of that has to
do with the dancing she does in the film.
198
What is interesting about the page in the
press book devoted to Del Rio is that the page starts with the heading “Ah, Senor, You
Mus’ Leesten to My Story” and that over one of her photos is the heading “Exotic
Star”.
199

195
American Film Institute Catalog.
196
Wonder Bar Production File, Warner Bros. Archive, University of Southern California.
197
Ibid.
198
This is discussed in Priscilla Pena Ovalle, Shake Your Assets: Dance and the Performance of Latina
Sexuality in Hollywood Film, (Dissertation: University of Southern California, 2006).
199
Wonder Bar Press Book, Warner Bros. Archive, University of Southern California.

103

Figure 3: Dolores Del Rio featured in the Wonder Bar press book

104
Even though the industry had been promoting Del Rio to the public in a more white
washed way during the silent period, but now in the sound era, this is one of the first
instances in press materials that highlight the shift in how Del Rio was presented in
marketing materials. But the ambivalence was shown in the press book for the film I Live
For Love which promoted Del Rio as “fair as a star when only one is shining in the
sky.”
200

The one area that is true to the Del Rio text is when it comes to fashion and the
clothes she wore, for there is an article that focuses on the dresses Del Rio wore in the
film that were created by the top costume designers in Hollywood at that time, Orry-
Kelly.
201
That is quite a difference from the small wardrobe budget in the Spanish
language films.
Also, in accordance with her star status, Dolores Del Rio was still making a top
salary at this phase of her career. As her contract with Warner Bros. attests, she was paid
$25,000 for her services for the film and as a couple of memos from the producer of the
film Hal Wallis to the director Lloyd Bacon regarding the dailies of the film, it wasn’t
exactly her acting that made the audiences flock to her movies.
I am just getting caught up on your dailies.…now in the scene with Dolores Del
Rio where she pleads with Al not to let Harry getaway. All of this stuff is very
good but you are going to have to be careful with DelRio in these dramatic scenes
as she isn’t the best actress in the world and when she gets into those dramatic
sobbing scenes, she isn’t very convincing.
202

200
I Live For Love, Press Book, Warner Bros. Archive, University of Southern California.

201
Wonder Bar, Press Book.

202
Warner Bros. Inter-Office Communication from Hal Wallis to Lloyd Bacon, November 20, 1933.
Wonder Bar Production file, Warner Bros. Archive.

105

As Wallis says in another memo a few days later,
The dailies are excellent. The shots of Cortez and Del Rio, especially the long
shots, are beautiful.
203

A review of Wonder Bar says it all came together.
…Warners-First National have a superb piece of entertainment in Wonder Bar.
Results amply justify its imposing cast array and its lavish production.
204

It is in the movie In Caliente (1935) that producer Hal Wallis rips open the slight
tears in Del Rio’s image by marking the landscape in which Del Rio’s character resides.
In the film Del Rio plays dancer Rita Gomez who becomes romantically involved with
magazine editor Larry MacArthur (Pat O’Brien). In a memo to Lloyd Bacon, the director
of the film, Wallis wrote:
…I asked you when we got into Del Rio’s bungalow in the “Caliente” set to have
it look a little more Spanish…It went to almost another extreme. It looks
absolutely unlike “Caliente” and there is almost no Spanish touch of any kind
around there.
205

Ultimately in Del Rio’s case, it came down to the image as this memo from Edward
Chodorov, the producer of In Caliente illustrates:
I wanted to tell you how especially beautiful and effective you were in the
Caliente sequences.
206

203
Warner Bros. Inter-Office Communication from Hall Wallis to Lloyd Bacon, December 1, 1933.

204
Variety, February 8, 1934.

205
Warner Bros. Inter-Communication from Hal Wallis to Lloyd Bacon, January 7, 1935. In Caliente
Production file. Warner Bros. Archive.

206
Warner Bros. Inter-Communication from Mr. Chodorov to Dolores Del Rio, January 21, 1935. In
Caliente Production file.

106
But Del Rio’s beauty failed to bring the audiences to her films and soon she was finished
at Warner Bros. and then within a couple years her star had burned out in Hollywood as
well.
Lupe Velez
At the other extreme were the Latina actresses not necessarily selected for
stardom in the manner of Del Rio. Their obvious Mexican-ness relegated them to
playing roles of saloon girls and peasants rather than “daughters of dons”. One of these
who was able to make a success of being a stereotype was comic actress Lupe Velez.
Victoria Sturtevant in her study of Velez, describes two types of Mexican actresses. She
identifies Del Rio as “part of a vague upper-class” and as an ambassador from her
country “rather than an immigrant.”
207
However, those, like Velez, lacking the “quasi-
European pedigree” that passed for a kind of “whiteness” were simply Mexican with all
of the appropriate stereotypes applying. As Sturtevant observes:
Velez….was much more closely identified with Mexico, as the “Mexican
Spitfire,” the “Mexican Monsoon,” or the “Mexican Pepperpot.” Velez, then, was
part of a more nationally specific Mexican class of immigrants, more threatening
and debased, far closer to the United States’ most fetishized, culturally and legally
problematic border, threatening cultural intrusion and a drain on the resources and
dominance of the Anglo majority. Unlike Del Rio who was initially characterized
as languid and exotic, Velez was shown in her films and in her publicity trying
unsuccessfully to assimilate into American codes of conduct, for example,
lightening her hair, marrying an all-American athlete, buying a big convertible.
Yet, the more she made America her home, the more Velez was coded as a
polluting outsider aggressively storming the gates rather than preserving her clean
fetishized status as an exotic ambassador.
208

This image would both plague and benefit Velez throughout her career.

207
Victoria Sturdevant, 21.

208
Ibid., 21-22.

107

Lupe Velez, however, always strove her own rules so there was a fluidity and
flexibility to her text. Unlike Del Rio and other Mexican actresses, she followed
Basinger’s basic principle for stardom and changed her name herself. Born Maria
Guadalupe Villalobos in San Luis Potosi, Mexico, she changed her name to Lupe Velez
when she began to perform in musical comedies on the stage in Mexico City during the
1920’s. According to some sources, the name change was due in part to the fact that her
father didn’t feel that it was dignified for families of their station to appear on the musical
stage. Nonetheless, the family’s fortune did not measure up to her father’s ideal so Lupe
continued on the stage under the new name to contribute to the family income.
She subsequently took charge of creating her own biography, largely by living her
life as she saw fit and allowing the news stories to follow. Velez’ “Hollywood”
biography, which was undoubtedly a collaboration between the actress and the promoter
Louis Macloon who brought her from Mexico City to appear in his review, was first
printed in The Los Angeles Times on March 13, 1927:
The history of Lupe Velez, who is now fulfilling a limited engagement at Louis
Macloon’s “New Music Box Revue,” which enters its last week tonight, reads
like the dramatic chapter of a novel.

Senorita Velez was in a convent in San Antoles, Tex., when a revolution broke
out in Mexico and her mother sent for her. Her father, who was an artist, was one
of the revolutionists against the government which was in force at the time, and it
was necessary that he hide. The family was left without any means of support,
and it fell upon the senorita to earn the money necessary.

She applied for a position at the Teatro Principal in Mexico City, and after a brief
tryout, was offered the ingénue role. Lupe replied that she would be content with
nothing else but the feminine lead, and did not leave the office until she got it. She
is said to have taken the city by storm and was called “Mexico’s Sweetheart” by
critics and public alike.

108

Her desire to tour America and to see Hollywood, especially, proved too much,
however, and Miss Velez finally accepted an offer to come to Los Angeles.
Shortly after her arrival, she was signed by Louis O. Macloon toappear in his
revue. And now, it is said that she is well on her way to local stardom.
209

This was a somewhat hyperbolic story interweaving fact and fantasy obviously planted in
the Times to promote Macloons review.
The news story did have the effect of creating the beginning of the Velez
mystique. Despite her depiction as “Mexico’s Sweetheart,” the story shows her
stubbornness in attempting to get what she wanted, and, reading between the lines, one
can see the early development of the “Mexican Spitfire” persona.
Another article, appearing the day before, “Seniorita’s Chance for Fame
Hindered: Dancer in Quest for Guardian; Mexican Girl Appeals to Court” featured a
picture of a plaintive looking Velez with the accompanying article lamenting that studios
were reluctant to sign her to a contract because the money would have to go to her
mother instead of her.
210
Thus, she needed a court-appointed guardian to let her sign a
contract for herself. This article also hinted at the “spitfire’ who would not back down
from anyone.
This fact was also noted by Rosa Linda Fregoso in her discussion of Velez in her
book meXicana Encounters. She writes:
In her own time, Velez’s most rancorous critics often positioned her in that
shifting social identity of Mexican-ness that today one would characterize as
Chicana. At the time, critics in Mexico often measured Velez against another
Mexican star in Hollywood, of the period, the “sedate and ladylike”, who was

209
The Los Angeles Times, March 13, 1927, C22.

210
“Senorita’s Chance for Fame Hindered: Dancer in Quest for Guardian; Mexican Girl Appeals to Court”
The Los Angeles Times, March 12, 1927, A1.

109
carefully crafted by the industry as a high class ethnic woman “of impeccable
morals.” They vilified Lupe Velez as a commoner (populachera), “vulgar and
unmannerly (una chica incorrigiblemente vulgar) or, as one Mexican critic would
write, Velez had “traces we notice solely in lower class people, without culture,
nor ideals, nor patriotism.
211

The headlines would not get any less sensationalistic as her career progressed although,
they would include a number of items of her appearing at social and charitable events as
she made her way into the Spanish language films. She became, in fact, her own best
publicist for the complicated image of herself that she was attempting to create.
Lupe Velez was not costumed by her first producers in the sense that Del Rio and
Tovar were. As mentioned earlier, when she arrived in Hollywood, she performed in a
vaudeville review where she was noticed by Hal Roach and signed to appear as an
“extra” in Laurel and Hardy comedies. She basically bobbed her hair in the fashion of
other women of the 1920’s and adopted the short skirts and other styles worn by the
“flappers” of the period. She also wore a number of flowing dresses that hinted at her
Mexican heritage but were stylistically in line with the fashions of the late 1920’s and
early 1930’s. By the early 1930’s, as she was becoming a star, her off-screen appearance
became somewhat more subdued. As a reporter noted in 1929,
She dresses better. Gone are the little short pleated skirts and blouses cut almost
to her waist. In her wardrobe hang gowns that any Park Avenue lady would be
glad to own. In them, of course, Lupe does not look like a Park Avenue lady
merely because she is too striking a type.
212

211
Rosa Linda Fregoso, 112.

212
Clara E. Rodriguez, 70.

110
What the writer is trying to say apparently is that she still looks Mexican although now
she is a well-dressed, successful Mexican.
Velez took the major portion of the responsibility for her public persona and it
became interwoven with that of the characters she portrayed on the screen. One reason
that she seemed to have so much freedom to constantly reinvent herself is that she did not
stay long at one studio and was not constantly surrounded by publicists and image
consultants. As long as she was content with comic roles and continued to give the
audiences the Lupe that they wanted, she seemed always in demand.
When her big break came with a principal role in Douglas Fairbank’s film, The
Gaucho (1927), its producers attempted to balance her image and to give her a significant
role in promoting the film. As far as her public appearances at charity events and
sporting events, their management seemed to work. It was the subject matter of the film
and her role in it that actually continued to perpetuate the emerging Velez as the
“spitfire” image in the public mind. For example, one of the ads in The Los Angeles
Times portrayed an angry Fairbanks character as the Gaucho attempting to strangle an
equally angry Velez. Yet, Velez, as she did in her personal life, held her own on the
screen with one of Hollywood’s pre-eminent stars. As Woll describes:
Lupe’s performance made quite an impression. She slapped Fairbanks with such
vehemence in the film that one woman in the opening night audience commented
“Well, now, there’s a snappy little customer.” The Saturday Evening Post also
noted her aggressive attitude. “In that picture she had the manner of a lady who
will start a fight at any time the gentleman wishes – a system to which she still
adheres. Her religion tells her that life should consist of fighting and loving in
equal parts and anybody who is doing neither is dead and isn’t aware of it.
213

213
Allen L. Woll, 71-72.

111
The Gaucho seemed to meld Velez’ screen persona with her private persona in the public
mind. She even sang and danced on the stage at the premiere after the film was
screened.
214
The pairing with Fairbanks was instrumental in providing an entrée for Velez
into major films with well-known directors such as D. W. Griffith and Cecil B. DeMille.
She played a co-starring role in Griffith’s first talking picture, Lady of the Pavements and
in DeMille’s sound version remake of his first hit The Squaw Man.
In a January 27, 1929 review of her performance in D. W. Griffith’s Lady of the
Pavements, The Los Angeles Times described her character as “starting the film in a poor
ballet costume in an underworld dive but ending it in some of the most exquisite sartorial
costumes ever screened.”
215
This was a nice encapsulation of her ability to
metamorphasize from peasant girl to lady if the occasion demanded it.
Yet during the production of Lady of the Pavements, Velez also added to her
“spitfire” image by clashing with costume designer and co-star Jetta Goudal. According
to the Los Angeles Times:
Actresses must have temperament. D. W. Griffith made this comment yesterday
when quizzed about reports of a clash between the vivacious and fiery Lupe Velez
and Jetta Goudal who are the principals in a picture he is filming at the United
Artists Studio. It is being whispered about Hollywood that Miss Velez, Mexican
actress and Miss Goudal crossed temperaments about a week ago in an exchange
of fiery words because Lupe asserted that tried to “high hat” her. When Griffith
was asked about it yesterday, he had heard nothing of it; that they are now
apparently on the best of terms. “If Miss Goudal and Miss Velez have clashed, as
you say, it has in no wise interfered with the production of thepicture,” Griffith
commented. “They wouldn’t be actresses If they didn’t have temperament, but
neither has displayed any resentment toward the other in the least, in my
presence.”Several who say they are acquainted with the facts, however, insist that

214
The Los Angeles Times, May 27, 1928, C11.

215
The Los Angeles Times, January 27, 1929, C13.

112
Miss Goudal and Miss Velez were warned by studio executives against any
display of temperament and that they were instructed to remain in their respective
dressing rooms on the set when not before the camera.
216

The press release for the film, on its release in January 1929 described it as
“A double-barreled load of entertainment with Velez receiving top billing for singing
seven times and for being heard in dialogue passages.
217

Rosa Linda Fregoso asserts in her book meXicana Encounters that
What I find most curious (and unfortunate) about the legacy of Lupe Velez as
“The Mexican Spitfire” is the confusion that exists between the characters
that she portrayed and her public persona. Velez’s visibility within the star system
was predicated on an identity that she herself cultivated, as a woman who was
"uninhibited,” “unpretentious” and “frank,” “extravagant” and “unconventional” –
a woman who broke with all social conventions. Often this visibility was
interpreted differently within Hollywood circles, where she was known for being
“impetuous,” for her “irreverence” and “heavy-handed pranks,” for “a very rich
repertoire of bad words,” for a “difficult and aggressive personality.”
218

Yet, The Los Angeles Times noted that she was a fan favorite and the single most
important reason that Lady of the Pavements made money at the box office after she met
with the press to talk about the film.
…her sense of showmanship is keener than that of many in a stage appearance.
Consequently the picture is doing enormous business, thanks to the four
appearances Miss Velez is making everyday. Of itself, the film has not evoked
extreme praise, though its romantic, obvious qualities are thought to be good box
office, and the cast of popular players is an additional asset, particularly As Miss
Velez herself gives a spirited performance…
219

216
The Los Angeles Times, September 13, 1928, A13.

217
The Los Angeles Times, January 23, 1929, A7.

218
Rosa Linda Fregoso, 116.

219
The Los Angeles Times, April 21, 1929, C9.

113
So, the publicity caused by her public persona was actually giving her films a boost at the
box office.
During the 1930’s Lupe Velez, Lupita Tovar and the other Latina actresses who
had been brought to Hollywood began playing starring roles in the emerging field of
Spanish Language films.
Velez, however, kept getting major roles in English language films, as well, When
some of the films were subsequently selected for Spanish language versions, she would
simply reprise her English language role in Spanish. One key to Velez’ success in
“talkies” was the fact that her English was much better than her detractors believed.
Though she was haunted by headlines such as ‘Lupe is in Beeg Panic” and “Lupe no
Hothouse Flower,” which quoted her in broken English, this was part of her persona and
reporters tended to exaggerate her accent according to their own stereotypes – something
they never did with Del Rio or Tovar. The reality, however, is buried at the end of this
article concerning Velez worries about how her first all-talking film Tiger Rose will be
received by audiences.
Nothing in the world matters to Velez, the firebrand from the south, but her
career. For that, she is willing to make any sacrifice, and does work night and
day. Lessons for each spare moment – singing lessons, tap dancing, guitar,
diction, A secretary follows her around to see that she mispronounces not a single
syllable. Nights are spent mastering lines.
220

While this information could be pure PR, the fact remains that she actually assumed star
status by being in demand for leading roles in some serious films with well known
directors including in addition to DeMille and Griffith , William Wyler, Gregory La Cava

220
The Los Angeles Times, December 8, 1929, 23.

114
and Del Rio’s mentor Edwin Carewe. True, her characters ranged from Indian to
Mexican and “exotic side-show dancer,” but she was at the center of the action and
received star billing.
In 1929, she went way beyond one of Jeanine Basinger’s steps to stardom – that
of being seen dating a member of the opposite sex who is a slightly bigger star than you.
After meeting Gary Cooper on the set of The Wolf Song in which they were appearing
together, she embarked on a tempestuous and widely publicized affair with him. She also
consorted with actors Ronald Colman and Ricardo Cortez and then married Hollywood’s
“Tarzan” Johnny Weissmuller in 1933. Rosa Linda Fregoso notes:
As Velez’s career flourished, she was adored by fans in the United States and
Mexico, alike. Mexican critics, in sharp contrast, were threatened by her
subversive form of femininity and decried her negative influence on young
Mexican women. Her subversion of traditional notions of femininity – especially
her newfound sexual freedom – probably also scandalized the parents of a new
generation of Mexican American youth. After all, Lupe Velez openly advocated
sex beyond the confines of marriage. In a 1929 article also translated into
Spanish, the columnist Virginia Lane reports: “Lupe can love five men at the
same time, with incredible ease, and love them all for five different reasons” – a
statement sure to scandalize Catholic Mexican sensibilities.
221

It did not seem to hurt her popularity on the screen at all. In fact, it was perfectly
in keeping with the changing attitudes of American women during the 1920’s regarding
sex and women’s rights.
Unlike many of the actresses who appeared in Hollywood’s Spanish language
films, Velez appeared in the American versions, as well. In Carewe’s 1931
Ressurrection, she played Katusha Maslova, a Russian peasant girl who is seduced and
abandoned by a prince who, regretting his action years later follows her to imprisonment

221
Rosa Linda Fregoso, 113.

115
in Siberia to win her back. At night, the film was reshot for Spanish language release
with Velez reprising her role for the international audience.
The year before, she had played a Chinese girl, Ming Toy, who is sold in to
slavery in China but is saved and kidnapped and taken to San Francisco by a boy named
Billy who has fallen in love with her and wants to marry her. She also played the same
role in the Spanish language version produced at the same time.
Thus, while Velez could be expected to play leading roles and other races in the Spanish
language versions, she was the one actress who, while identifiably Mexican, was able to
flaunt it and achieve star status at the same time despite her ethnicity. By not only a
starring in the foreign versions of the films but also playing a leading role in their
American antecedents, as well, she was able to appeal to a variety of audiences. Even if
she could not escape the stereotypes, she made them work for herself.
Fan Magazines

The final stepping-stone on Basinger’s prescribed path to stardom
were the actresses interaction with motion picture fan magazines. This was, of course,
valuable to the studios in that it meant free plugs for their films, and it was equally
valuable to the magazines themselves because it increased readership. Increased
readership meant increased revenue from advertisers wanting their products to be seen in
the presence of “stars.” It was equally important to the actresses who could attract higher
salaries and better films by proving that they had legions of avid fans clamoring for their
next picture.

116
The influence of the fan magazine within the Mexican and Mexican-American
community during the 1920’s cannot be underrated. According to historian Vicki L.
Ruiz, “Movie and romance magazines enabled adolescents (and older women, as well) to
experience vicariously the middle class and affluent life-styles heralded in these
publications and thus could nurture a desire for consumer goods.”
222
Ruiz notes that
movies, both American and Mexican, were popular with young people of Mexican
descent in Southern California and that after viewing them, they returned home to act out
what they had seen on the screen and gravitated to fan magazines and publications that
encouraged these fantasies.
223
Many of the Spanish speaking stars, Lupe Velez and
Lupita Tovar included, credit the fan magazines for making them interested in pursuing
careers in motion pictures.
The fan magazine, which grew out of the popular general interest magazines at
the turn of the century and emerged fully in 1911 at the same time that Florence
Lawrence was becoming a star, was not immediately welcomed by the film industry.
Anthony Slide in his study of fan magazines, Inside the Hollywood Fan Magazine asks:
Did the film industry welcome or really want the fan magazine? At first, probably
not. They were much too dangerous in the potential promotion of actors and
actresses as “stars,” planting the notion in the minds of the players that they might
have some relevance to the success of a film and, thus, be worthy of a higher
salary. Fan magazines generated fan mail, and fan mail was conclusive proof of
the worth of an actor or actress. Selling the producers on the value of publicity
would take time. Posters outside of theaters could be justified easily. They
seldom mentioned a player, limiting themselves to the film title and the company

222
Vicki L. Ruiz, “Star Struck,” 112.

223
Ibid., 113.

117
responsible. Posters were,therefore, good publicity . Fan magazines were
potentially bad for the industry.
224

For this reason the early fan magazines were at the bottom of the list of studio options for
promoting their products. As mentioned earlier, the studios had a wonderful vehicle in
The Los Angeles Times and its Latino counterpart La Opinion. Stories could easily be
planted be studio publicists in these two publications under the guise of news and
potential viewers would take it on faith that actors and actresses were good, hard working
people with glamorous lives so they would rush to interact with their favorites in movie
theaters.
What the fan magazines promised was that the stars were people just like them.
They were interactive in nature and would invite readers (primarily women) to take part
in the stars lives by writing in to give them advice on what roles to accept and other
personal decisions. They would promise to give readers the inside scoop on the star
making process and allow them to claim privileged knowledge and to form their own
judgments about the stars screen image and private persona (which, of course, was pretty
much dictated by the content of the magazine’s photos and stories).
The first fan magazines were Motion Picture Story Magazine and Photoplay,
which first appeared in 1911. Initially, the formula was simple, consisting of stories and
photographs based on current films. These began to be increasingly supplemented by
interviews, photographs and stories about the stars and articles about the films’
production. Rounding out each issue was a short piece of fiction related to film.

224
Anthony Slide, Inside the Hollywood Fan Magazine (Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 2010),
13.

118
The articles were totally aimed at female readers and were for the most part
written by women. As studios warmed up to the role that fan magazines could play in
promoting their product, more and more articles were submitted by the studios’ in-house
publicists. Many of the articles were purported to be written by stars, while others were
supposedly interviews with stars who were soliciting readers’ input on career decision.
Authenticity would be gained by printing photographs of the star in question along with
handwritten responses to readers’ questions supposedly supplied by the star. In most
cases, this had an effect similar to publishing the same publicists’ “plants” in The Los
Angeles Times. Steve Hanson explains how the fan magazines came to be viewed by
both studios and fans alike as a vital bridge connecting the star, the film and the audience.

After the advent of sound, the fan magazines became less serious and more
concerned with sensationalism and sex. The magazines played a major role in
creating the lasting impression of Hollywood as the center of glamour during the
1930’s. To a country mired in the economic consequences of the Great
Depression, fan magazines presented an image of the American dream as
attainable to the average person…Fan magazines presented all movie actresses as
icons of perfect beauty. At one end of the scale they were pictures of fresh
prettiness (Fay Wray, Deanna Durbin) at the other, stylish and glamorous
sophisticates (Garbo, Dietrich, or Myrna Loy). Their handsome male
counterparts were either debonnaire (Cary Grant, Errol Flynn) or the epitome of
masculine strength (Gary Cooper, Clark Gable). Every thing about the stars was
larger than life – their homes, their lifestyles, their passions, even their sins. In
short, they had everything except the ability to visit with their fans. Hence such
magazines as Modern Screen, Movie Action Magazine, Movie Classic, Movie
Mirror, Silver Screen, and Motion Picture Classic came into being to reveal the
inside scoop on their lives to the fans.
225

During the silent period, few magazines made distinctions between Latina
actresses and Anglo actresses. There were, however, few male actors on the covers.

225
Steve Hanson, “Fan Magazines,” in St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture, vol. 2 edited by Sara
and Tom Pendergast (Detroit: St. James Press, 2000),65.

119
Female readers wanted to know about female stars. A few sex symbols like Rudolph
Valentino or Ramon Novarro made the covers, but for the most part the only way a man
could make the cover was to be romantically involved with a popular actress.
Although statistics and surveys concerning the amount of coverage received by
Latin stars during the early years of film are almost non-existent, a certain amount of
secondary materials cite the fact that they were not as invisible as many scholars might
think. In her study, Latinos in Hollywood, Heroes, Lovers, and Others, Clara E.
Rodriguez cites America’s fascination with all things “Spanish” during the 1920’s as well
as the influence of Valentino’s treatment by the fan magazines as opening the doors for
stories and articles on Latino stars. She goes on to say:
In Photoplay issues from 1921 to 1934, numerous photos and articles feature
“Latin stars” (the term used at the time), who were seen as major marquee idols.
They performed along side those who are today considered Hollywood legends,
and they sometimes had top billing. They advertised popular products like Coca-
Cola and Lucky Strike cigarettes. They were regularly celebrated as the ideal in
beauty and physique. Perhaps most surprising, their Latin-ness was often
foregrounded; moreover, consonant with the maxim that imitation is the highest
form of flattery, some non-Latino Stars sought to be more Latin. They changed
their names to sound more Spanish. The men sported moustaches and women
were photographed in Spanish dress. In 1928, for example, Joan Crawford was
described as “more Spanish than the Spaniards themselves” in a caption that
accompanied a large photo of her in a lace mantilla and a high Spanish shawl
(photo caption, Photoplay, June 1928, 19) These were the images projected at
the time; they would change dramatically in later years.
226

Some stars like Dolores Del Rio continued to be featured in fan magazines just on the
basis of their beauty and sophistication alone long after their roles no longer warranted
the coverage but others slowly saw the publications’ interest declining.

226
Clara E. Rodriguez, 4-5.

120
When Dolores Del Rio was nearing the height of her career in the mid-twenties,
Photoplay lauded her as rich and famous and from a privileged background. “She went
into movies just for fun. But the movies refuse to let her go, because she is one of the
great discoveries of the year.
227
However, in 1931 after her divorce and her first
husband’s possible suicide, Photoplay lamented, “Dolores, mother of pain – oh she was
born under an ill-fated star of suffering.”
228

By 1935, when Del Rio’s career was on the decline and she was playing in Latin
musicals such as I Live for Love, fan magazines such as Screenbook continued the
“sadder but wiser “theme.
The brief days of her life have been punctuated with illusion and disillusion in
love; with unemotional interludes and emotion laden periods. Behind those
absorbing eyes, there is a mind which card-indexes validly human weaknesses
and human strengths; which sees wholly and objectively the panorama of living;
and so her words and her philosophies, at which she arrived with ripe experience,
hold more than surface truth.
229

The rest of the article quotes her as saying that no woman should love but once. In
looking back at her first marriage, she must let the memory go and love again.
According to a 1935 Variety survey of twelve fan magazines representing 132
possible cover appearances; Dolores Del Rio was on three. Sharing this distinction with
her was Kay Francis, Alice Faye, Ann Sothern, Marion Davies, Betty Davis, and Loretta
Young so she was still in pretty good company.
230
She was the only Latina on the list.

227
Photoplay (1927), 66.

228
Photoplay (August 1931), 102.

229
Screen Book (November 1935), 19.

230
Anthony Slide, 65.

121
Her still great beauty and the fact that she was starting to have some of the
experiences shared by Lupe Velez and others made her personal story of more interest to
female readers than her films. As Mary Beltran notes,
With respect to Del Rio’s star image at the time, she evolved into an even more
cool clotheshorse……Del Rio became “a visual icon in stasis” in contrast to her
earlier positioning. Her image in fact takes on an icy untouchable distance and
elegance in her publicity photographs. Each studio had their own take on Del Rio
as mannequin, such as Warner Bros.’ chiaroscuro version as lensed by
photographer Elmer Fryer. Never smiling, Del Rio appears to have lost all
animation and agency in these images, perhaps understandable considering that
she was no longer was being offered self-actuating protagonist roles and generally
had far fewer career options. She, like all other Latino film stars who had
survived the transition to sound, had been pushed from center stage to the role of
window dressing.
231

By the end of the decade, Del Rio was no longer able to land leading roles and several
years later moved back to Mexico and her equivalency of the Spanish language films to
become the leading lady that she could no longer be in Hollywood.
On the other side of the spectrum, Lupe Velez professed a dislike of her treatment
in the fan magazines and yet she used them to achieve her stardom and to keep it going.
She deliberately exaggerated her accent and mispronounced words in English as if she
were one of the characters she played in her screen comedies. Unlike Del Rio and others
she was barely troubled by the transition to sound. Everyone knew she was Mexican and
highly emotional, even volatile at times. Her press suggested that and her screen roles
reflected it.
After coming to the public’s attention as a result of her lauded performance with
Douglas Fairbanks in The Gaucho (1927) she made a splash on the pages of Photoplay in

231
Mary Beltran, 75.

122
1928 and 1929. In February 1928, a somewhat suggestive bare shouldered photo of
Velez is featured with a caption comparing her to “a wild kitten,” but emphasizes that she
has “so much ease and spontaneity that it’s hard to believe that she is a novice before the
camera.
232
By April, she is posed with a fur coat draped over the upper part of her body
in such a way as to hint at nudity. The caption below reads “Mexico’s IT girl.”
233
By
October of 1928, Photoplay has her posed in a more serious, determined fashion with her
hair pulled back and wishes her “good luck” presumably on her career.
234
Then in
February of 1929, the magazine refers to her as “the hot baby of Hollywood.”
235

Going into November 1932 in the midst of her performing in Spanish language
films, Velez appeared to have calmed down in her private demeanor, a fact that confused
many of the fan magazine writers. She was coming off an ill-fated romance with Gary
Cooper and her film roles had stabilized. She had not yet begun the “Mexican Spitfire”
films. One magazine declared “There’s a different Lupe Velez – one whose tempestuous,
intense, fun-loving moods have given way to serious thinking, particularly where her own
heart is concerned. Her late romance with Gary Cooper has given her a new outlook on
life.”
236

232
Photoplay (February 1928), 21.

233
Photoplay (April 1928), 62.

234
Photoplay (October 1928), 21.

235
Photoplay (February 1929), 141.

236
Motion Picture Magazine, November 1932), 41.

123

According to Motion Picture Magazine writer Gladys Hall,
I’m through with trouble, Lupe said to me quietly. She didn’t shout it at me
tumultuously, as she would have done once, two, three years ago.She looked
tumultuous at first glance. She wore white slacks and a thin tailored silk blouse.
Her dark hair was as riotous as ever. On one arm glittered, magnificently and
unsuitably, a bracelet of diamonds and pigeon-blood rubies. It wasn’t unsuitable
to Lupe because she is the type who can adapt herself to the most flamboyant
outfit. …When you looked more closely you saw that the tumultuousness was
more a matter of the slacks, the wild hair, the diamond and ruby bracelet than a
matter of Lupe herself; it was a veil, rather thin, over a face from which sorrow
looked you in the eye. I thought somebody has been hurt.
237

The article effectively evokes sympathy from the women reading it because it makes
Velez seem as human as they are. Even though the article mentions Johnny Weismiller
with whom she would begin an affair and eventually marry, it made her seem “sadder but
wiser.” Yet her flamboyant clothing hints at the fact that the old Lupe may not really be
gone.
As was the case with Dolores Del Rio, most of the fan magazine articles during
the thirties treated Velez in terms of her personal life rather than in terms of her movies.
Unlike Del Rio, however, Velez had constructed her "real" and film personas on a
continuum so that if magazines described one they were effectively promoting the other.
As Clara E. Rodriguez states:
Like Dolores Del Rio, Lupe shifted to a more modern image toward the end of the
decade (1920’s). However, the course of her transformation was portrayed quite
differently in the media. The free-spirited Velez was seen to have attempted, but
not quite accomplished the shift; moreover, the alteration was seen to show that
she was merely getting smarter not tamer.
238

237
Ibid., 40.

238
Clara E. Rodriguez, 70.

124

Indeed, Velez was getting heavily into posing for promotions and advertisements during
the late 1920’s and early 1930’s in many of the fan magazines that were covering her
personal life in such detail. Like the current example of golfer Tiger Woods, she could
not be in a position of living a wild life and pausing to endorse Coca Cola or household
products.
Since Velez was appearing in both mainstream Hollywood films and Spanish
language films during this period, her endorsements and her movie plugs were not
hindered by media type. While Tovar was primarily restricted to Latin magazines, Velez
could do both.
In one 1932 Woodbury’s cold cream ad in Motion Picture Magazine, the headline
asks “With a skin naturally moist and luscious, Does Lupe Velez need
creams_________too?” Evidently, the answer is yes.
Shiny cheeks look young, Lupe Velez believes. But a skin has to be
immaculately clean and fine to dare and follow that fashion. Lupe Velez softens
her skin with cream, washes it with soap and water, powders lavishly, but then
rubs the powder off again to give her face those youthful highlights.
239

Woodbury and other advertisers are thus taking advantage of Velez’ ability to appeal to
both Anglos and Latinas.
To young Latinas viewing these ads and those of Del Rio, the net effect is that
they were being provided role models that they could identify with as they would with
their mother or older sister at home. The drawback is that advertisers were not always
looking out for their best interests. Velez, in particular, jumped from product to product

239
Motion Picture Magazine (November 1932), 67.

125
and many of them were trade-offs for the advertiser also mentioning the film that she was
appearing in. As Rodriguez relates:
The variety of images in promotional photos was matched by the variety of
products that she advertised. Lupe and her “friends in pictures” drink College Inn
Tomato Juice Cocktail (Photoplay, December, 1930, 134). She advises readers to
“enrich your beauty with really natural (Princess Pat ) rouge (Photoplay , May
1932, 107). Lux toilet soap “keeps her skin like velvet” (Photoplay, May 1928,
76); and it is the “Lady Pepperell colored sheets that make Lupe Velez bedroom
express her personality” (Photoplay 1929, 80). She takes “the pause that
refreshes” with Coca Cola (Photoplay May 1932, 22) and says that Lucky Strike
cigarettes “are certainly kind to my throat” (Photoplay , April 1932, inside front
page). Having played a Russian peasant in Resurreccion, she appears in a full
page ad for Photoplay’s Famous Cook Book (which contains 150 favorite recipes
of the stars) that includes Lupe’s best Russian recipes. The ad, entitled “Russian
Recipes via Mexico,” shows Lupe in Russian costume brewing tea in a samovar
(Photoplay, January 1931, 81)
240

240
Clara E. Rodriguez, 69.

126

Figure 4: Lupe Velez featured in Princess Pat Advertisement

127
The Russian ad, in particular, demonstrates Velez’ versatility both onscreen and off, as
long as she portrayed a peasant (in this case Russian)
While it is tempting to believe that this ad demonstrates the power and visibility
of the Spanish language films, Velez played the same role in both the English language
version and the Spanish language one. Thus, the film was popular enough with both
Anglos and Latinos that the advertisement for Photoplay’s cookbook would have
resonated with both groups of female readers.
A number of scholars, Colin Gunckel among them, have pointed out the
popularity of the Spanish language films in Los Angeles and other Mexican American
population centers in the Southwestern United States. Latinos were among the most
frequent filmgoers and young Latinas enjoyed the fan magazines as much as their Anglo
counterparts. While newspapers in Mexico and Los Angeles’ Spanish language news
organs decried the corrupting influence of American films, the enormous popularity of
Lupita Tovar on her trips to Mexico for the openings of her Spanish Language films and
the media’s fascination with all things Lupe Velez showed that people were watching
these films and that their leading ladies were reveling in a level of stardom and influence
not afforded to anyone but Dolores Del Rio in mainstream Hollywood product.
There is no doubt that these Latina actresses trod Jeanine Basinger’s path to
stardom. Del Rio did it by all of the conventional criteria while Velez worked through
the system independently to create her own positon within it. The next chapter will look
at how a few of the new arrivals to Hollywood, Lupita Tovar, Rosita Moreno and
Conchita Montenegro, gained stardom through their participation in Spanish language

128
films and how these actresses were positioned in comparison to to the more readily
recognized Del Rio and Velez.

129
CHAPTER 5
THE ARRIVAL OF THE LATINA ACTRESSES AND THEIR INTRODUCTION
TO HOLLYWOOD

Some local independent film producers seeing the possibility of foreign language
pictures decided to get a jump on the Hollywood studios and start scouting around
Europe for talent. Reports such as this started appearing in The Los Angeles Times:
Predicting a great boom in the making of foreign-language talking pictures here in
Hollywood for the various countries of the world, Al Christie, prominent local
film producer is back from a short tour of Europe.
241

Hollywood executives soon realized that the foreign language film production was going
to be a reality and they too soon headed abroad looking for talent that might possibly star
in their films. This chapter will focus on this group of Latina actresses, the roles the
studios assigned them to play and finally, on how the studios presented these women in
various types of publicity materials.
So who were these actresses? They came from Mexico, Spain, Argentina and
Brazil and from backgrounds in film, the theater and vaudeville. Many names were seen
on the screen. These included Maria Alba, Delia Magana, Lupita Tovar, Mona Maris,
Rosita Moreno, Conchita Montenegro, Berta Singerman, Catalina Barcena, and the list
went on.

241
“Producer Home From Overseas,” The Los Angeles Times, July 15, 1929, A9.

130

Figure 5: Maria Alba

131

Figure 6: Lupita Tovar

132

Figure 7: Mona Maria

133

Figure 8: Rosita Moreno

134

Figure 9: Conchita Montenegro

135

Figure 10: Catalina Barcena

136
Throughout this chapter I will foreground Lupita Tovar whose career did not have
a lot of longevity but who has been part of the Hollywood community since her arrival in
the United States and has talked extensively about her career. I will also include Rosita
Moreno and Conchita Montenegro who appeared somewhat regularly in the films
produced by Fox and Paramount, the studios producing the largest quantity of the
Spanish language films. Also, another primary reason for these specific choices is the
fact that of the few Spanish language films that are available for viewing, these actresses
have the starring roles. And equally important, the search for information regarding these
actresses in newspapers and fan magazines during their stay in Hollywood was more
readily available.
It soon became apparent that each studio wanted to sign talent to contracts to
have them only available to work for that studio. As Hollywood Filmograph wrote about
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer:
M-G-M is determined to make their foreign versions the outstanding ones of the
industry and aside from their importing foreign stars from the four corners of the
globe, they are using the best talents procurable in the Southland.
242

As these actresses were hired and began arriving in Hollywood, just as Basinger talked
about as a first step in creating a star, their names began appearing in newspapers like
The Los Angeles Times and La Opinion as well as industry papers with headlines similar
to the one announcing the arrival of Delia Magana from Mexico City.
“Talkies Bring New Foreign Invasionof Hollywood” Delia Magana the “Louisa
Fazenda of Mexico” heads the invasion. This youthful but famous Mexican
comedienne has been

242
Hollywood Filmograph 10, no. 23 (June 21, 1930), 23.

137
signed by First National. She is 19 years old and has been on the stage in Mexico
City first as a comic dancer and singer than a stage comedienne since she was
twelve years old.
243

Fox was one of the first studios to begin to bring Latina actresses to Hollywood and
Maria Casajuana was one of their first discoveries.
Maria Alba won a beauty contest in Spain that was sponsored by the Fox Film
Corporation. Her prize was a contract. She has talent to goalong with her beauty
and she is now rated as one of the promising young actresses in pictures. Her
innate charm has been greatly heightened by her work in Hollywood.
244

In keeping with the formula for creating a star, her last name was shortened and
she became Maria Alba. As she stated in a letter to the Fox Film Corporation:
“In consideration of the mutual benefits to accrue to both of us, I hereby grant you
permission to describe me by the name Maria Alba in connection with all motion
pictures in which I may appear while employed by you…”
245

Alba also made some films for Paramount as she was the star of Paramount’s first
Spanish language film the before mentioned El Cuerpo del Delito.
The Los Angeles Times reported the arrival of Mona Maris who had early
expectations of hitting it big placed on her:
Hollywood welcomed one of the first Argentine film actresses to bid for honors in
America with the arrival of Mona Maris, known throughout South America as the
“Pride of the Pampas.” She was brought to America by Joseph M. Schenck,
president of United Artists.
246

243
Hollywood Filmograph 10, no. 23 (June 21, 1930), 23.

244
Hollywood Filmograph 10, no. 38 (October 4, 1930), 19.

245
Letter from Maria Casajuana to Fox Film Corporation, May 23, 1928. Maria Alba Legal File, UCLA
Special Collections.

246
The Los Angeles Times, January 1929, A1.

138
In one of her earliest films Romance of the Rio Grande (1929) playing a supporting role,
Edward Schallert of The Los Angeles Times called Mona “rare and distinction” and had
all the makings of a star.
247
In another supporting role in the film Under a Texas Moon
(1930), a reviewer stated “the vivacious Mona Maris contributed a good performance.
248

Finally, in the Arizona Kid it was commented that “Mona Maris…plays the role of Lorita
with vivacity and naturalness.”
249
But by mid 1931 it became clear Maris would not be
one of the break out Latina stars.
Mona Maris who came to the Fox Company as an accomplished star never
seemed to rise above the roles of a Mexican spitfire.
250

Rosita Moreno was born in Mexico, about forty miles outside of Mexico City, of
Spanish parents, both professional dancers. Rosita won a dancing contest at the age of
three. A few years later she took the name “Viola Victoria” and became famous as a
child dancer through repeated tours of the Latin American countries.
Her parents took her into their vaudeville act, known as “La Pilarica Trio,” which
played on all the big-time American vaudeville circuits for several years. Moreno
eventually took over the act by herself. At eighteen, she played the Palace in New York,
mecca of all vaudevillian performers. It was there that some executives from Paramount

247
The Los Angeles Times, December 28, 1929, A9.

248
The New York Times, April 4, 1930, 20.

249
The New York Times, May 11, 1930, 121.

250
The Los Angeles Times, August 2, 1931, B11.

139
saw her and signed her to a contract to appear in their new venture in Spanish language
films.
251

When Moreno first arrived in Los Angeles from New York, she was featured in
The Los Angeles Times sitting on the hood of a sedan that she had traveled in with family,
the housekeeper as well as a pet Pomeranian and a canary bird.
252
In this first moment,
Rosita Moreno is positioned as an individual with her Spanish background who comes
from a family that can afford travel, a car, a housekeeper and has enough leisure time to
be able to spend time with pets. Moreno is one of the few who get this early treatment in
the newspaper.

251
Rosita Moreno, Biography File, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences.

252
“Famed Spanish Dancer Visiting Here” The Los Angeles Times, April 24, 1927, G11.

140

Figure 11: Rosita Moreno arriving in Los Angeles
Of all the Latina actresses that appeared in the Spanish language films, Conchita
Montenegro seems to be the one actress groomed to eventually make the transition to

141
English language films. According to her U.S. Department of Labor application for
Temporary Stay, Conchita was born Concepcion Andres Picado in San Sebastian,
Spain,
253
posed as a model for the famous painter Zuloaga and first went on the stage as a
child dancer becoming a sensation in European theaters. She then branched into dramatic
work. Her appearance in a Spanish silent picture won her an M-G-M contract. Like
several of the other actresses her arrival in Hollywood was heralded in Hollywood
Filmograph.
Seventeen, brunette and very pretty, Conchita Montenegro, Spanish dancer, stage
star and model for some of the most famous artists of Europe, has arrived at the
M-G-M studios to make a talking screen debut. Senorita Montenegro who has
been a stage celebrity since the age of thirteen was recently placed under contract
to appear in Spanish productions.
254

According to Robert M. W. Vogel, who was the head of the International Department at
M-G-M:

became aware that the language problem extended beyond the dialect spoken in
the Spanish language films when the studio learned that “Conchita—a very
attractive, young girl—in some Latin American countries that name meant whore.
So we had to be very careful with languages.
255

Lupita Tovar, who came to the United States from Mexico in 1929 at the advent
of sound and would play primarily in Universal’s Spanish language films, unlike Del Rio,
served only a short apprenticeship in some Fox silent films. She was seemingly
groomed from the beginning of her career to play leading roles in Universal’s Spanish
language films.

253
Conchita Montenegro Fox Legal File, UCLA Performing Arts Special Collections.

254
“Spanish Dancer Comes to Screen” Hollywood Filmograph 10, no. 23 (June 21, 1930), 14.

255
Robert M. W. Vogel, Oral History, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences (1990), 48.

142
She recalled her early experience at Fox in 2010:
The studio had a grooming class for newcomers, and a young woman, Miss
McKenna was assigned to me. She taught me how to walk, enter a room, sit,
cross my legs, and how to hold a cup of tea. I was told the public wanted to see a
glamorous actress. You always had to look nice, with clothes pressed and
makeup and hair done.

They sent a publicity-man from the studio who told us “Actors are in glass houses
– always on display. Your public expects you to look your best…..

...The studio wardrobe department would dress us in gorgeous evening gowns for
publicity pictures. If you were a big star and went to a premiere, the opera or a
symphony, the men dressed in white tie. For the ladies, a corsage and a lovely
studio dress for a royal entrance and a glamorous exit. Jewelry was loaned to the
stars too. You were told never to play with your hair, never be sloppy, always
wear white gloves, and always wear a hat. “You must look like a lady was the
message that was drilled into us.

Quite a few girls were already well groomed. I had no money, but I always
managed to look well dressed. I made my own clothes and, for special occasions,
I found a cheap dressmaker to copy clothes I had seen in magazines. My dress
may have cost fourteen dollars, but I walked as if I wore a thousand dollar dress. I
always wore gloves. We were encouraged to learn by watching the more
experienced actors. I taught myself how to put on makeup by watching Janet
Gaynor and Mary Astor at the studio. In Mexico, I hadn’t even owned a
lipstick.
256

Thus, though Fox thought enough of Tovar to give her a taste of the star treatment, she
was still a bit on the outside looking in, having to provide some of her own clothes for
personal appearances and watching more established stars to learn how to do her makeup.
Tovar’s first taste of publicity came in a 1929 The Los Angeles Times pictorial
featuring her posing semi-“cheesecakey”with two other Latina actresses under the bold
headline: CARAMBA!! The caption read “And so they come, from South of the Rio
Grande. Lupita Tovar and Delia Magana are the most recent to join the Hollywood

256
Panch Kohner, Lupita Tovar: The Sweetheart of Mexico (Xlibris, 2010), 27-30.

143
Mexican colony, and Maria Alba from Spain make a fiery trio. Spanish beauty is coming
into its own now on the screen.”
257
Interestingly, the paper makes no attempt to
distinguish between the ethnicities of the three actresses, classifying all of them
according to “south of the border stereotypes” as being a fiery trio.

Figure 12: Lupita Tovar, Maria Alba and Delia Magana
This introduction to Hollywood was followed by a more well meaning but equally
ignorant stereotyping depiction of the actresses ethnicities by lumping Tovar and Alba
with an Italian actress named Lola Salvi and a Brazillian actress Lia Tora under the
headline “Wave of Popularity Sweeping Mexican Stars to Top Goes Marching On.”
James Ryan, an executive of the Fox Studios who was responsible for putting
Lupita Tovar and Delia Magana, the two Robert Flaherty “discoveries,” under

257
The Los Angeles Times, January 20, 1929, K3.

144
contract believes that the two show all of the best attributes of a race fitted by
temperament for success in the acting field. “Both young women have
movement, color, the uncertainty, the vivacity, the mystery which is the peculiar
charm of women of Latin temperament. They accentuate the feminine, the
mystery of allure. So great is the Fox faith in dramatic qualities of the Latin race
that we have under contract besides these two Mexican girls, Maria Alba from
Spain, Lia Tora from Brazil and Lola Salvi from Italy.
258

Tovar was subsequently planted in another Los Angeles Times pictorial the following
March. The piece was titled “Gentlemen May Prefer Blondes, but…Among photos of
Fox’s brunette actresses, it had a provocatively posed Tovar with the caption “Lupita
Tovar is a little dusky-haired senorita from Mexico City, whom Fox has placed under
long-term contract. Like her?”
259

With the first wave of Latina actresses having arrived in Los Angeles, both The
Los Angeles Times and La Opinion had articles about the women and presented them in
somewhat different ways. Asking “What have these shiny-eyed Mexican girls got for the
fans?” in the above mentioned article that has the subheading of “Directors Tell How
Latin-American Beauties Have Carved Niche for Themselves”.
260
This article along with
the series of announcements regarding the new “foreign invasion” of Hollywood that puts
forward the idea that these actresses have carved a niche for themselves, foreshadows
how they will be thought of during their stay in Hollywood. While the actresses were
recruited to be part of the Hollywood industry, this group will be somewhat marginalized
in their dealings with the day-to-day activities of Hollywood. This first wave of publicity

258
“Wave of Popularity Sweeping Mexican Stars to Top Goes Marching On,” The Los Angeles Times,
January 27, 1929, C11.

259
The Los Angeles Times, March 24, 1929, J10.

260
The Los Angeles Times, January 27, 1929, C11.

145
from the mainstream American media sets the tone for how this group of women will be
viewed.
While The Los Angeles Times began their publicity by essentially ignoring the
individuality and ethnicity of these new Latina actresses, the Mexican newspaper La
Opinion took a different tact when announcing the arrival of the actresses in an article
entitled “Nuestro Caudro De Honor”.
261
Here the actresses are talked about as individual
performers with character. The paper presents these women as an interesting and diverse
group that audiences should look forward to seeing on the screen in the future rather than
lumping them all together in a faceless group. In the early stages of their time in
Hollywood, these actresses would not be receiving the individual packaging that Dolores
Del Rio received since she was affiliated with a “patron” who had power within the
industry.
In the case of Lupita Tovar it did not seem to matter as she thought her time in
Hollywood as going to be short lived. When Fox began moving over to sound films,
Tovar’s contract was not renewed and she was preparing to return to Mexico. She did,
however, catch the eye of an executive at Universal and she was immediately put under
contract.
But soon Tovar, like Del Rio before her, did acquire a “patron” who was smitten
with her and who was in a position to propel her career forward. In this case, it was Paul
Kohner who was in charge of the foreign productions office at Universal. He started the

261
“Nuestro Cuadro de Honor” La Opinion (1930).

146
young girl out by having her dub the voice of leading lady Mary Nolan into Spanish for
the film Shanghai Lady.
It was also Paul Kohner who reputedly came up with the idea that Universal
should start making Spanish language versions of their popular films and suggested that
Tovar should star in some of them.
Apparently, Mr. Kohner had told Mr. Laemmle that they were wasting half the
studio, because at six o’clock in the evening the lights were turned off until six the
next morning. Mr. Kohner said that they should hire an additional crew to come
in at night and, with Spanish-speaking actors using the same wardrobe, sets, and
equipment, they could shoot the same film in Spanish for very little money. Latin
audiences would be eager to see and hear films in their own language. Mr.
Laemmle accepted the idea, so Mr. Kohner quickly took advantage of the moment
and told him. “There’s a beautiful girl at Fox who’s not happy there, and she’s
thinking of going back to Mexico. Laemmle quickly said, “Kohner, don’t let her
get away.”
262

And so Universal’s Spanish language film program was born, at least according to Tovar.
Tovar, of course, appeared in a number of the Spanish language productions.
Tovar’s publicity at Universal consisted of introducing her in a feature “From
Foreign Shores” in The Los Angeles Times on Sept. 21, 1930 which was a compilation of
short profiles on foreign actors and actresses in Hollywood.
263
Other planted stories
concern her attendance at premieres of her films. She was very strongly connected with
the promotion of the Spanish language films and was mentioned prominently in
Universal’s publicity for their upcoming Spanish language releases. One 1930 Los
Angeles Times article “Twelve Talkies to be Made in Spanish,” listed the inaugural slate

262
Pancho Kohner, 42.

263
“From Foreign Shores” The Los Angeles Times, September 21, 1930, 12.

147
of films that Kohner had talked Laemmle into making:
The Spanish version of The Cat Creeps, La Voluntad Del Muerto, was so well
received at its recent preview that Carl Laemmle, president of Universal Pictures,
has announced twelve more Spanish-language pictures will be made during the
1930-31 season.

Work is now progressing on the Spanish version of East is West in which Lupe
Velez and Barry Norton are featured. George Melford, who made the Spanish
version of The Cat Creeps, is directing and such foreign artists as Manual Arbo,
Soriano Viosca, Marcella Nivon, Tetsau Komai, D. L. Rea and Andre Charon are
in the supporting cast.

A long-term contract has been give Baltasar Fernandez Cue, internationally
known Spanish journalist to adapt the cream of English talking pictures for
Spanish production. Lupita Tovar, promising young Mexican star, who played
with Antonio Moreno in the Spanish version of The Cat Creeps, is the first of a
number of Spanish-speaking players to be placed under long-term contract for
foreign-language films…
264

As these news items indicate, Universal’s promotion of Tovar was much more
professional and sedate than had been Fox’s treatment of her. This was due in no small
way to Kohner’s sponsorship of her and direction of her career but it also indicates that
she was being taken seriously as an actress who would be playing the leading roles in
Spanish language films that had been played by Anglo actresses in the English language
versions. They couldn’t afford to have her treated as a stereotype in her publicity while
asking audiences to take her performances seriously in films that could be easily
compared to their mainstream counterparts.
By the time that the Spanish language films ceased production in the late 1930’s,
Tovar had married Kohner and appeared in films only sporadically after that, making
films both in Mexico and in Hollywood.

264
The Los Angeles Times, September 4, 1930, B19.

148
So, the first group of Latina actresses that the studio executive scouted to star in
their upcoming Spanish language films had arrived in Hollywood. The local newspapers
had printed all the annoucements provided by the studios and now it was time to begin
producing the films. This emerging group of Spanish language films would soon be ready
to be seen by audiences.
The Spanish Language Films
The major effect of these films was that they broke, if only temporarily, the
stereotypical norms for the depiction of Latino actors and actresses on the screen. Yet in
using these films to free themselves from traditional Latin stereotypes, Latina actresses
were immediately confronted with a whole new set of expectations linked to their gender
and sexuality. The moment they crossed the threshold into portraying prototypical
heroines of the 1930’s films, they committed themselves to shaping their characters
within another confined spectrum shared by Greta Garbo, Marion Hopkins and Marlene
Dietrich where females were regarded as either virgin or vamp. In effect, while they
could temporarily shed their ethnicity, they could not elude their gender.
Within this newer and broader spectrum of characterizations, there are some
significant considerations which will be looked at in the English/Spanish versions of
several films. These sets of films are interesting because they shed light on how different
the films were in regards to subject matter. It is difficult to come up with anything
concrete as to why certain films were chosen to be remade in Spanish. The horror film
Dracula (Universal 1931) starring Lupita Tovar and an island drama Pursued/Nada Mas
Que Una Mujer (Fox 1934) starring Berta Singerman will be examined in detail while

149
Pleasure Cruise/No Dejes Abierta La Puerta (Fox 1933) starring Rosita Moreno and Bad
Girl/Marido y Mujer (Fox 1934) starring Conchita Montenegro will be discussed in terms
of what in each film Latina audiences might have been drawn to.
Dracula (1931)
Perhaps the most famous instance of a Spanish version of a popular English
language film is Dracula directed by Todd Browing with the Spanish version directed by
George Melford. In looking at these two films together certain significant differences
stand out. While the English and Spanish versions were said to follow the same scripts
exactly, it becomes clear that the directors of both sets of films made different choices as
there are substantial differences in the final cuts of each film. In fact, looking at a
published copy of the script shows that the creative team of the Spanish version followed
the script in a more exact manner paying closer attention to atmosphere and scenic
details.
265
In both films the appearances of the actresses and how the characters are
portrayed are vastly different.
The basic storyline conveyed in both films is roughly the same. Renfield, an
English businessman, goes to Transylvania where he is to arrange a lease of the Carfax
Abbey in England for Count Dracula. Unknown to Renfield, Dracula is a centuries-old
vampire, who lives off the blood of humans and cannot withstand the light of day.
Renfield is greeted at Dracula’s castle by Dracula himself, but after he passes out from
drinking drugged wine, Dracula descends on him to feed on his blood. Renfield,
weakened by the attack, and Dracula board a ship bound for England which also carries

265
Dracula script in Dracula Production file in Universal Studio Collection, Archives of the Performing
Arts, University of Southern California.

150
the coffin where Dracula sleeps during the day and several other coffins filled with his
native soil, which is required for his survival. When the ship docks, the entire crew is
found dead. Only Dracula and Renfield, who appears to have gone insane, survive.
Dracula proceeds to drain the blood of the female population of London. One
night at the opera, Dracula introduces himself to Dr. Seward and meets his daughter
Mina, her fiancé John Harker and friend Lucy. Lucy is enchanted by Dracula’s romantic
manner, and later, Dracula attacks and kills her. A German scientist Van Helsing arrives
in London to assist Dr. Seward, and correctly assesses the situation. Dracula plans the
same thing for Mina, however, she does not die immediately, but undergoes a change
over several nights until she succumbs to a final bonding with Dracula and becomes a
vampire.
Dracula takes Mina to Carfax Abbey, where he plans to make her final transition
to vampirism. Before this can take place, dawn approaches and Dracula must retire to his
coffin where Van Helsing finds him and drives a stake through his heart killing him for
eternity. At the same time that Dracula is killed, Mina is released from her spell. With
the horror ended, John and Mina reunite.
266

As mentioned, the Spanish version of Dracula follows the original shooting script
much more carefully than the English language film. Two independent moods for the
films are quickly established with the opening titles of each film. Instead of the static Art
Deco bat of the Browning version, the Spanish film superimposes its credits over a
flickering candle that is quickly extinguished, transporting the audience from an

266
American Film Institute Catalog, 537-538.

151
illuminated world into a realm of darkness. In the Browning version, the composition of
the film seems flat while the Spanish version is filmed in a way that gives more life and
tension to the story. For example, when Renfield is waiting to be picked up to go to
Transylvania, in the Spanish version, the mysterious driver who meets the traveler at the
Borgo Pass is covered by a black scarf so it is impossible to see the face whereas in the
American version it is possible to recognize that it is Dracula. The ride to the castle is
longer and bumpier in the Spanish version and Pablo Alvarez as Renfield looks
considerably more frightened than his American counterpart, Dwight Frye.
In another nuance, Spanish actor Carlos Villarias was the only actor allowed to
watch the English language dailies because the producers wanted him to be as Lugosi-
like as possible but wanted the other actors to do their own interpretations of their
characters.
267
Thus, the appearances and characterizations of the two sets of actresses in
the female roles is perhaps the most striking difference between the two films. In the
English version, Helen Chandler (Mina) and Frances Dade (Lucy) closely resemble each
other with blond hair and a similar demeanor. In the Spanish version, Lupita Tovar (Eva)
and Carmen Guerrero (Lucia) have dark hair and both have very light skin.
It is seemingly apparent that in choosing actresses to play in these Spanish
language films, Hollywood executives had a particular prototype in mind. It is thus not
surprising that all the women have dark hair and very light skin. In fact when seeing the
women in films or in photographs many seem almost interchangeable. Like the

267
George Turner, “The Two Faces of Dracula,” American Cinematographer 69, no. 5 (May 1988): 38.

152
standardized blonde actresses of the period, the Latinas also look similar to each other
and probably very close to the look of Dolores Del Rio.
It might not be that surprising since during the 1930’s Dolores Del Rio and Lupe
Velez had turned Latin beauty into an alluring beauty “type” rather than its ethnic
antithesis which for a time significantly challenged nativist beauty norms.
268
The fact
that they came from different countries within the Latin world—Mexico (Lupita Tovar),
Spain (Rosita Moreno, Conchita Montenegro) and Argentina (Mona Maris, Berta
Singerman)—lends credence to the fact that the studios were casting toward a certain
norm regardless of ethnicity or nationality. These women were basically stepping into
white roles, and they would be Anglicized as Delores Del Rio before them and Rita
Hayworth would be later on.
In looking at stills from her first movie and clips from Dracula it’s apparent in
this Pre-code era of the early 1930’s Universal chose to foreground Lupita Tovar’s body
and sexuality. Since both versions of Dracula are “Pre-Code,” it is interesting to note
that in the English version the sexual aspects of the story are surprisingly minimized
while the opposite is true in the Spanish version which adheres more closely to Molly
Haskell’s description of pre-code sensuality. In the Browning version, the women appear
prim and proper with their bodies completely covered and their hair pulled tightly to the
head. The women almost seem robotic in their movements as if Dracula has already
sucked the life out of their bodies. When the vampire attacks Mina in her bedroom, the
film fades out and in the aftermath she appears to be in a dazed somnambulant state.

268
Sarah Berry, Screen Style: Fashion and Femininity in 1930’s Hollywood (Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 2000, xxiii.

153
Exactly the opposite occurs in the Spanish version. In the same scene in the
Spanish version, Dracula covers Eva with his cape like a huge bat as he descends upon
her. The result is that Tovar’s Eva becomes sexually animated at the vampire’s spell
overtakes her. The sensuality and eroticism are further enhanced when Eva moves
around with her long flowing hair now unbound and in a low cut negligee.
While Paul Kohner wanted Tovar to be taken seriously as an actress and the initial
publicity surrounding her was more sedate, he eventually took a very different road with
Tovar than had been done with Dolores Del Rio. Of all the actresses who appeared in the
Spanish language films, the publicity surrounding her was the most sexually provocative.
This will be further illustrated when discussing the actresses appearances in fan
magazines. The original intent as far costumes go for Dracula was that Tovar would use
the same costumes that Helen Chandler wore. But right away Kohner had other ideas.
Since he was the producer on the film, he went to the costume designer and had new
costumes made for Tovar to wear in the film.
269

Interestingly, both versions played in Los Angeles during the week of May 8,
1931. The Spanish version played at the International California Theater and the English
version at the Fox Palace. One thing that audiences at the opening days of the films had
the opportunity to do was meet both Draculas as Bela Legosi and Carlos Villarias
appeared on stage as part of the opening day festivities.
270

269
Lupita Tovar, Oral History, University of California, Los Angeles, Oral History Center.

270
David Skal, Hollywood Gothic: The Tangled Web of Dracula From Novel to Stage to Screen (New
York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1990), 174.

154
Although the Hollywood Filmograph praised the film by saying “If the English
version of Dracula, directed by Tod Browning, is as good as the Spanish version, the Big
U haven’t a thing to worrry about,”
271
the Spanish language Dracula did mediocre
business. According to Tovar this was primarily because Universal did little to support
the film. Instead of having the director and producer available for publicity purposes,
they were sent off to Europe for other projects.
272
This was another demonstration of
what the studio executive thought of the Spanish language product. But when a print of
the film was found in Cuba in the late 1990’s, it was restored and now film historians are
taking a fresh look at the movie.
Pursued / Nada Mas Que Una Mujer (1934)
While occurring after the establishment of the production code, both versions of
Pursued /Nada Mas Que Una Mujer (1934) continue their emphasis on the whiteness of
the female actors but deviate somewhat from the typical 1930s film heroine. In a reversal
of the situation in Dracula, here the sensual roles are reversed. The female characters in
the English language are more overtly sexual in appearance then in the Spanish where the
sensuality is more subdued but still conveyed nonetheless.
Here again, the storylines are basically similar. David Landeen of San Francisco
arrives at a South Seas island to take over a deceased uncle’s plantation. Beauregard,
who owns a neighboring plantation and who has taken control of the Landeen property,
sends a group of island natives to attack Landeen and take his papers. After beating him

271
Ibid., 173.

272
Lupita Tovar, Oral History.

155
up, the natives leave Landeen for dead and an entertainer named Mona rescues him. The
young woman calls a doctor who tells her that Landeen has been temporarily blinded and
that he must convalesce in Mona’s room, despite her protestations.
Ashamed of her circumstances, Mona tells David, whose eyes are still bandaged,
that he is at the plantation home of her rich father. Subsequently, the two fall in love and
when David is finally able to pull the bandages from his eyes, he tells her how beautiful
she is and that he wants to marry her. She agrees, but a friend from the club convinces
Mona that David will leave her when he discovers she has not been truthful about her
circumstances. Meanwhile, the nefarious Beauregard is trying to get Mona for himself,
but she continually fends him off.
Using a recommendation from the doctor who cared for Landeen, Mona plans to
go to the United States for a new job and to start a new life that she can be proud of only
to be kidnapped by Beauregard and taken to another part of the island. David comes to
her rescue and tells Mona that he knows all about her and that he loves and needs her.
The two embrace as the story end.
273

It is obvious from the plot that this is a “B-picture”—a fact confirmed by the
following review from the Motion Picture Herald which said:
Located somewhere on a South Seas Island, this rather sordid story of a café
hostess in a seaport town who was the object of too emphatic and unscrupulous
attention of a crooked and evil appearing plantation operator, hardly has the value
of a standard major studio production.
274

273
AFI Catalog, Within Our Gates, 1715-16.

274
Motion Picture Herald (November 24, 1934).

156
But in looking at the two versions of Pursued, it also becomes clear that while
still a B-picture the creative team behind the Spanish language version, Nada Mas Que
una Mujer, attempted to lift this beyond a sordid story and that they did this in several
ways. First, unlike Pursued, which begins right outside Mona’s window as we see David
Landeen being beat up, Nada Mas Que Una Mujer begins during the day where we see
an overview of the island with people coming and going and the large market area where
people are buying and selling goods. Into this scene we see a woman departing one of
the boats carrying a suitcase. She stands out from the crowd in that everyone around her
is wearing white, and she is wearing a black dress with a hat. We follow the woman into
the club and learn she is Mona Estrada who has come to the island in desperate search of
a job. In the next scene, it is evening and the camera cuts back and forth between inside
the club where people are drinking and outside where vendors are selling their goods and
native dancers are entertaining a crowd. Nada Mas Que Una Mujer thus establishes an
ambiance that seems alive with the anticipation of something happening, while Pursued
seems dark, flat with a deadened atmosphere.
Here again, the major difference is how the two women were portrayed in each
film. In Pursued, Mona is played by Rosemary Ames, a blond actress who played in
mostly B-films during the 1930’s. She has a job as a singer in the nightclub. According
to the AFI Catalog, she performs the song “Wanted—Someone, When the Right One
Comes Along.”
275
Other than that the audience does not see her perform. The way the
nightclub is filmed in Pursued shows all the men getting quite drunk and shows close-ups

275
AFI Catalog, Within Our Gates, 699.

157
on some of the men in a distorted out-of-focus way to show the cheapness and deadening
of life on this island. The place looks like a dive filled with smarmy looking men looking
for cheap thrills.
The initial difference in Nada Mas Que Una Mujer was the actress chosen to play
Mona. As was written in a New York Times film review on November 26, 1934, “the
novelty of the film was the introduction to American screen audiences of Berta
Singerman, an Argentine diseuse…senorita Singerman’s acting is excellent…and she
may be described as “muy simpatico.” When the film was restored in 1999 and shown at
the Pacific Film Archive on November 7, 1999, the film notes had this to say about Berta
Singerman: “…Elegantly photographed by Rudolph Mate, Berta Singerman dominates
every shot of this story. The film is a glamorous multicultural stew…with fabulous over-
the-top romance, lush and moody music. Singerman is electrifying…classy, brazen,
dangerous and sexy…”
In Nada Mas Que Una Mujer, however, this Mona does not sing, she recites
poetry. Her recitation mesmerizes the predominantly male audience and, unlike Pursued,
this Mona performs three different poetry recitations and the viewer sees the full
performances with the camera focused solely on the actress. Another significant
difference is that while the same costume designer was used for both versions of the film,
the two women are dressed in completely opposite ways. The gowns that these two
women are attired in seem to match the atmosphere in each film. The Mona in Pursued
shows her tawdry sexuality through the dresses she wears at the club. They are low cut
gowns both in front and back so that her body is revealed to the men at the club as she

158
performs. As she begins to fall in love with David Landeen, however, her dresses begin
to cover up her body and turn from glitter and sparkles to a more demure white.
Yet, when Mona in Nada Mas Que Una Mujer performs, she always wears white
and her body is completely covered up. (It is interesting that for a woman who is
supposedly down on her luck, Mona has quite an extensive closet of clothes, expensive
makeup and perfumes.) Singerman conveys the sensuality of her character through her
face and the movement of her body. She does not dance but to convey the emotion of the
poetry to the audience she generates movement with her body and arms as she performs
solo on the balcony apart from the audience. When Mona does move within the men in
the audience at the club she never lets any man get close to her. She positions her arms
across her body which cuts off access to her body. The only time Mona lets her guard
down is when she is in her room with David. Perhaps, since his eyes are bandaged and
he cannot see her or her body, she feels more at ease. Also when she is with David she
becomes the stereotypical domesticated woman we see in Hollywood films as she feeds
and bathes him.
A final major difference is the lighting in the two films especially in the manner
in which the two Mona’s are lit. In the chapter entitled “The Light of the World” from
Richard Dyer’s book White, he talks about lighting in photographs and film, especially
Hollywood films. He discusses how light is used to construct an image of the ideal
woman within heterosexuality. Dyer goes on to say that idealized white women are
bathed in and permeated by light. In short, they don’t shine, they glow.
276
This could not

276
Richard Dyer, 122.

159
be more pronounced than in Nada Mas Que Una Mujer. (The two films had different
cinematographers). In Pursued, Mona is not the focal point for lighting the scenes. Most
of the time she blends into the darkness of the scene. The only time Mona actually
begins to be lit in the way Dyer discusses is when she is falling in love with David
Landeen.
The cinematographer on Nada Mas Que Una Mujer was Rudolph Mate who went
on to have quite a Hollywood career having worked on such films as Stella Dallas
(1937), My Favorite Wife (1940), Pride of the Yankees (1942), Sahara (1943) and Gilda
(1946). The look of Berta Singerman is like most of the actresses in the Spanish
language films, which is the dark hair and light skin. Mate uses the low key glamour
lighting to photograph Singerman. She becomes the focal point for the light in each and
every scene she is in, and the viewers eye is continually pulled toward looking at her.
The light is like a halo over her head, and she becomes the angel that stands out even
more in the darkness that pervades the nightclub atmosphere. Mate had perfected this
lighting technique during his Hollywood career so that in one of his last films Gilda
(1946), Rita Hayworth, too, had the glow of a “white” woman.
In looking at the press book advertisements for each film, the studio continued
with the tact the film had taken. In the advertisement for Pursued, Rosemary Ames is
positioned as a woman down troddened by the men in her life. By her picture are such
quotes as “Haunted by her own life!” and “Hounded by All Men!”.
277
On the other hand,
women seeing the advertisement for Nada Mas Que Una Mujer will see something

277
Pursued Press Book, General Press Book Collection, Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion
Picture Arts and Sciences.

160
different.
278
The advertisement in the press book is the one La Opinion chose to run to
announce the film. First, the eye is drawn right to Berta Singerman with her arms held up
truimphantly touching an inset of her and actor Juan Torena, the actor who played her
romantic interest. The second item of interest is that Berta Singerman is the star of this
film. Her name is by itself in the film credits in larger letters than any of the other actors.
This was specifically part of her contract for this film, “no one is to be in larger type than
the artist.”
279
The center of this film was Singerman who was paid $6,500 for the role.
280

None of the actresses appearing in the Spanish language film even approached the
amount Dolores Del Rio was being paid but seeing a Latina actress have the spotlight to
herself on screen and in the advertisement had seldom been done.
Pleasure Cruise/No Dejes La Puerta Abierta (1933)
Rosita Moreno appeared in over twenty of the Spanish language films, primarily
for the Fox and Paramount Studios. As her background was as a dancer, she primarily
appeared in musical productions where she played a variety of characters. Some
examples include Amor Audaz (1930) where she played a jewel thief, Gente Allegre
(1931) a singer and dancer, No Dejes La Puerta Abierta (1933) a high society wife, and
in El Rey De Los Gitanos (1933) a princess. Here I will discuss the film No Dejes La
Puerta Abierta (Fox) which opened in New York on 3 November 1933 and make some

278
Nada Mas Que Una Mujer Press Book, New York Public Library.

279
Fox Studios Inter-Office Memo, Geo. L Bagnall to Geo. Wasson, April 30, 1934, Berta Singerman
Legal File, 20
th
Century Fox Collection, UCLA Performing Arts Special Collections.

280
Ibid.

161
comparisons to the Dolores Del Rio vehicle Flying Down to Rio (RKO) which also
opened in New York on 29 December 1933.
In Flying Down to Rio, Dolores Del Rio stars along with Fred Astaire and Ginger
Rogers. She plays Belinha, a South American heiress who meets and falls in love with a
wealthy playboy and bandleader named Roger (Gene Raymond) at a nightclub in Miami.
By coincidence, Roger’s band is invited down to Rio de Janeiro by a friend of his who
happens to be Belinha’s fiancé (Raul Roulien) to inaugurate the opening of a new hotel
owned by Belinha’s wealthy father. When the hotel’s grand opening is threatened, the
band stages a spectacular performance in the air with Rogers and a chorus of show girls
mounted on the wings of stunt planes. At the conclusion of the film, Belinha rejects her
dark-haired South American fiancé for the blond, white hero.
281

In No Dejes Abierta La Puerta, Rosita Moreno plays Rosa, the high society wife
of Raul (again Raul Roulien), a painter and the rejected fiancé from Flying Down to Rio.
While celebrating their first anniversary, Raul is called away and his wife mistakenly
thinks he is having an affair. To teach him a lesson, Rosa decides to go on a cruise to flirt
and have some fun. Raul sneaks on the ship and gets a job as a steward to keep an eye on
his wife. The story plays like a French farce with mistaken identities and continuous
meetings between Rosa and Raul. One evening at a masquerade ball on the ship, Rosa
does a dance number in a very sexy outfit in front of the passengers. Speaking of this
scene, a review in The New York Times on 06 November 1933 said “Rosita Moreno is

281
AFI Catalog, Within Our Gates, 717-718.

162
charming as the wife and the director gives her a chance to show her ability as a dance
during the masquerade ball scene.”
In looking at the reviews for several of Moreno’s movies she is never seen as
anything less than charming. In making her debut in the film Amor Audez, The Los
Angeles Times wrote, “The cast is headed by the charming dancer Rosita Moreno. She
photographs beautifully”
282
Other reviews talk about Moreno in the same way. In the film
El Ultimo Varon Sobre La Tierra, “The charming Rosita Moreno…,”
283
and in El
Principe Gondolero, “The attractive Rosita Moreno is excellent…,”
284
and finally, the
reviewer wrote, “Rosita is fascinating enough…and displays her ability as a dancer…”
285

in the film Dos Mas Uno Dos.
Raul begins to think his wife might want to end their marriage as a man Rosa
meets on board wants to have an affair with her. But unlike Flying Down to Rio, Rosa
does not reject Raul and, in the end, the couple realizes how much they love each other,
which is portrayed well in a pamphlet for the film which was distributed to audiences. It
is like a mini press book with stills of different scenes from the movie.

282
The Los Angeles Times, September 6, 1930, A7.

283
The New York Times, June 12, 1933, 20.

284
The New York Times, September 11, 1933, 20.

285
The New York Times, October 27, 1934, 20.

163

Figure 13: Pamphlet Cover for No Dejes La Puerta Abierta

Figure 14: Inside of Pamphlet for No Dejes La Puerta Abierta

164
There is one obvious difference between the parts the Del Rio and Moreno
played. While both actresses tended to play sophisticated upper-class women, unlike Del
Rio, Moreno was never paired up with an American actor counterpart. Just the opposite,
the men that the Del Rio character would reject in a film would be the men that the
Moreno character would be in love with. This is not too surprising since Del Rio was still
in her “sophisticated European” phase and would not have “gone off into the sunset” with
a Latin character as that time. But in Latin America, Raul Roulien was a star and
audiences seeing this film would know that his character would end up with the leading
lady.
A similarity that would attract a young female moviegoer was the look of the two
actresses. In both films, the actresses have many costume changes and are always attired
in the latest fashions with their faces perfectly made up. Hollywood wasted no time in
reinforcing the message about the importance of consumption in the Spanish language
films. In No Dejes La Puerta Abierta, there is a scene at the beginning of the film where
Raul goes to a high end department store to get his wife an anniversary gift. There is a
musical number where Raul sings the song “Hace an ano que me case” (It’s Our
Anniversary Day) where he gets a private showing of the latest clothes, lingere, make-up,
perfume and jewelry that would make any woman happy. Any female viewer watching
could fantasize about that happening to her and, at the same time, get some ideas about
the latest beauty and fashion trends.
What this film also does is begin to open up the idea of greater mobility. This
couple lives in a large urban city in a beautifully furnished apartment, which also gives

165
the viewer the idea that they are financially well off and can afford to travel to exotic
locations for a vacation or a get-away. This is being shown in a time when there is
perhaps less mobility for young Latinas in both Mexico and in the United States as the
deportation and repatriation drives resulted in almost one-third of the Mexican
community of Los Angeles being sent back to Mexico without any idea when or if they
could return to the United States.
286
The idea of mobility while it might be a “imagined”
mobility gives way to future possibilities.
Del Rio and Moreno were on parallel tracks in Hollywood. In looking at the
photographs taken by the studios, both women looked similar a fact that played into
Moreno’s early days in Hollywood. Moreno was performing with her parents as part of
the “Dancing Morenos” when she was signed by United Artists to a contract to appear in
films. But it was quickly cancelled due to her close resemblance to Dolores Del Rio.
287

Although executives thought she photographed beautifully, she was ultimately released
due to the difficulty of finding roles for her to play.
288

Almost by coincidence, Moreno got a second chance in Hollywood with the
production of the Spanish language films. When Geoffrey Shurlock, the Head of Foreign
Production for Paramount was scouting around for talent he recalled, “There was a rather
interesting artistic guy. He was a semi-nut running around Paramount doing odd
jobs…He was one of those guy who would tackle anything…So I got a hold of him and

286
Francisco Balderrama, In Defense of La Raza: The Los Angeles Mexican Consulate and the Mexican
Community, 1929-1936 (Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press, 1982), 20. See also, George J.
Sanchez, 210.

287
The New York Times, June 2, 1929, X4.

288
The Los Angeles Times, June 15, 1930, B11.

166
asked if he wanted to be a director of an a project. He said of course and I had my
director.”
289
They recruited a young Spanish dancer named Rosita Moreno to be part of
the project and from there Moreno received her second opportunity in Hollywood.
290

Moreno was never in Del Rio’s league salary-wise; she made $1,500 for No Dejes
La Puerta Abierta
291
but she did receive star billing. One of the elements of her contract
was specified that she shall “receive first female billing…and that no name other than
that of the leading male player shall precede or appear in type larger than that used to
display your name.”
292

As we have seen, American fan magazines such as Photoplay where Del Rio
appeared, the focus tended not to be on Del Rio’s sexuality but on her sense of fashion
and beauty. In an October 1933 Photoplay article entitled “How Many Lives Has Del
Rio,” the actress spoke in great detail about clothes and her image.
293
Within the
magazines, she also appeared in advertisements for make-up. Other headlines about Del
Rio which appeared in the magazine included “Dolores Del Rio Extols Passive Love”
and “Meet the Duchess, otherwise known as the exotic Dolores Del Rio.”
On the other hand, Rosita Moreno was treated as a familiar friend of the readers.
Moreno became a favorite of the movie-going public in Los Angeles as she made several

289
Geoffrey Shurlock, Oral History, 44.

290
Ibid., 44.

291
Fox Studios Inter-Office Memo from John Stone to Jack Gain, April 15, 1933, Rosita Moreno Legal
File, 20
th
Century Fox Collection, UCLA Performing Arts Special Collections.

292
Fox Studios Inter-Office Memo from Geo. Wasson to Arch Reeve, April 16, 1933, Rosita Moreno Legal
File.

293
Alicia I. Rodriguez-Estrada, 480.

167
public appearances to greet fans at the International California Theater in support of her
films. As Moreno appeared in many of the Spanish language films, she received regular
coverage in La Opinion. For instance, The Los Angeles Times wrote, “Noted Spanish
dancer and co-star with Ramon Pereda in Paramount’s El Dios Del Mar will appear in
person at the International California Theater tonight in connection with the world
premiere of that film.”
294
A few days later The Los Angeles Times again reported, “With a
gala premiere equal to any offered by this unique film house, The International California
Theater premiered Paramount’s latest Spanish talkie El Dios Del Mar to a most
enthusiastic gathering.
Moreno was not set up as an exotic “other” or has her sexuality as a focus in any
of the articles written about her. In the various items about her in the newspaper, Moreno
is talked about in such ways as “the belle of the screen”, “the beautiful actress” and “the
enchanting star of the screen”.
Bad Girl/Marido y Mujer (1932)
Marido y Mujer starring Conchita Montenegro follows the year in the lives of two
young people, beginning when they first meet at an amusement park and ending soon
after the arrival of their first-born child. But in between the first time they and the happy
ending are a series of fears, broken promises and miscalculations that threaten the
relationship of this young couple.
Montenegro plays Clare Haley a young woman, who lives with her brother, and is
attempting to gain her independence from her family. She meets Eddie Collins played by

294
The Los Angeles Times, October 19, 1930, B23.

168
George Lewis, an ambitious young man who is saving his money to buy his own
business. One of the lazy details of this movie is that producers did not change the names
of the characters from the English language version. Clare Haley and Eddie Collins are
hardly the names you would expect these Latino/a actors to have. Eddie stresses to Clare
he does not want to fall in love, which, of course, they do. The couple marry and Clare
quickly becomes pregnant, which throws Eddie’s business plans out the window.
Through little communication and a lot of misunderstandings, the marriage is tested but
with the arrival of their baby, Clare and Eddie realize they want to be a family.
Of the many Latina actresses that came through Hollywood, Conchita
Montenegro was the one the Hollywood executives hoped to turn into a star. She began
at M-G-M but the Fox Studios latched on to her as quickly as they could. As The Los
Angeles Times reported, “Audiences applaud Conchita Montenegro for screen
performances. M-G-M let her slip through their fingers but Fox has signed her for both
foreign and English pictures.”
295
and “The new beauty Conchita Montenegro is the bright
hope of 1931 in the way of Latin beauty.”
296

While many of the Spanish language films Hollywood produced were fairy tales,
historical and modern day, which allowed a young woman to get caught up in the fantasy
of what was happening on screen, Marido y Mujer is one film that a young newly modern
Latina could actually identify with and Montenegro was the perfect actress for the role.
The English language version Bad Girl had one of the better pedigrees of the films

295
The Los Angeles Times (July 11, 1931), I1.

296
The Los Angeles Times (January 18, 1931), 27.

169
chosen by the Fox studio to be remade in Spanish. Frank Borzage, who directed Bad Girl,
had won an Oscar for this film.

Figure 15: Newspaper Advertisement for Marido y Mujer

170
This film had all the elements that Latinas in the audience would be drawn to.
There were the themes of independence from the family, the anticipation of setting up
your own home and participating with friends in leisure activities at places away from
the home such as places as amusement parks. This is right on track with what Kathy
Peiss describes in her book Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-
the-Century New York in that “youth is regarded as a distinctive stage of life, a time of
self-expression and experimentation”
297
and that is what is conveyed in this film.
In addition, there are the elements of popular culture that are described in fan
magazines as well as the Society sections in the newspaper, which include falling in love,
beauty, fashion and cosmetics. Culturally defined notions of beauty and fashion
surrounded Latinas at school and in the work place. These spaces provided the
opportunity not only to meet people outside the family circle, but to keep in touch with
the latest trends as well.
Mass culture integrated itself through these avenues, providing a fluid space
whereby Latinas could begin to mediate between discourses to negotiate their identities.
As more Latinas earned wages, some helped financially to support the family while
others used their economic independence to distance themselves from parental
supervision. Heightened by what they saw in motion pictures, magazines and
newspapers, young Latinas rebelled willingly against family and social norms to gain
control of their individual appearance and behavior. There were may struggles between

297
Kathy Peiss, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 56.

171
the young women and their parents about appropriate haircuts, clothing, dating and
money.
298

Studio Publicity in Fan Magazines and Newspapers
The popularity of Hollywood movies, La Opinion and the fan magazines were
arguably some of the most influential vehicles of information in the Mexican community.
La Opinion, first printed in September of 1926 by Ignacio Lozano was an extension of
San Antonio’s La Prensa, and boasted a circulation of 25,000 subscriptions by 1930.
299

According to Historian Francine Medeiros, La Opinion considered itself a “Mexican
paper in exile,” with a mission that was twofold: first, to reinforce Mexican cultural
values, and second, to aggressively criticize the dominant society, in order to keep in the
foreground the notion of a “Mexico de afuera.” She claims that “Lozano’s newspaper was
more interested in the affairs of the patria than those of the colonia” and that it sought to
inculcate southern California Mexicanos with the notion that even Mexicans born in the
United States had a social, political and cultural responsibility toward Mexico.
300

During the 1910’s, movies were directed at working class communities, with
many of the plots based on issues that interested that group of people. However, movies
soon targeted a broader audience, playing in newly made movie houses with more diverse

298
Vicki L. Ruiz, From Out of the Shadows: Mexican Women in Twentieth-Century America (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1998), 52. Vicki L. Ruiz. “Star Struck”, 112, 118.

299
Francine Medeiros, “La Opinion, A Mexican Exile Newspaper: A Content Analysis of its First Years,
1926-1929” Aztlan 11, no. 1 (Spring 1980), 68.

300
Ibid, 74.

172
subject matters
301
and Hollywood stars becoming leaders in the beauty and fashion
industries.
302
As the appeal of Hollywood grew, so did its influence. It is interesting that
at this time of the introduction of the Spanish language films and their new stars to
audiences, that there was a relative increase in the range of beauty types that Hollywood
was bringing to the movie screens.
303
Studio executives utilized this mass appeal to
promote its new starlets in situations other than in the movies.
There was a growing trend of using Hollywood stars to endorse consumer
products.
304
Using Fanny Schiller for one of its ads, Max Factor ties the success and
class status of the actress with her use of cosmetics by stating that “society women” used
Max Factor products to “enhance the natural beauty of a lady, making her appear more
beautiful and glamorous.”
305
By “following the stars,” Max Factor hoped to convey an
urgency to use their cosmetics.

301
Judith Mayne, “Immigrants and Spectators” Wide Angle 5, no. 2 (1982), 34.

302
Sarah Berry, Screen Style, 10-11.

303
Ibid., 95.

304
Ibid, 23.

305
La Opinion, June 5, 1927.

173

Figure 16: Max Factor Make-Up Advertisement

174
As a result of such marketing strategies, the cosmetic industry swelled with new
products. Eyeliners, mascara and rouge catered to the increased demand set in motion by
Hollywood’s standards of beauty.
Very few advertisements first appeared in La Opinion, but within a few months,
purveyors bought space to sell their products and services. Local merchants, dentists,
hairdressers catered to the Mexican community by buying advertising space. Department
stores such as May Company and Sears bought full-page advertisements displaying the
latest fashions. Cosmetic companies such as Max Factor, using the advertisement
mentioned above, targeted the Mexican community’s buying power while other
marketing ploys capitalized on the culturally defined notions of beauty during the 1920’s.
One of the sections that La Opinion created to attract female readers was the “La
Sociedad” or society section. Because the society pages attracted female readers who
were supposedly interested in “lighter” news, all manner of things were found here
including notices of cultural events, announcements of engagements and marriage, a
column called “Femininas” which focused on such things as fashion and beauty tips,
cooking and keeping house and frequently included photographs of the latest fashions
and hairstyles. Also included on this page was a daily column about Hollywood films
and in the 1930’s the Spanish language films and their stars and gossip. This information
was efficiently put together in one page—a one stop area to get all the information a
woman needed to be fabulous and in style.

175

Figure 17: “La Sociedad” section in La Opinion
The “La Sociedad” section was expanded by the La Opinion editors when they
added a “Segunda Seccion”—or second section—in the Sunday edition which included
longer articles on celebrities as well as expanded sections of fashion and beauty
information plus photographs for illustrative purposes. The fashion and beauty advice
along with the celebrity testimonials further fused the connections between gender
identity and consumer culture.
306
While Latinas were certainly exposed to a multiplicity

306
Vicki L. Ruiz, 57.

176
of factors of urban life—the influence exerted through the pages of La Opinion as well as
the fan magazines cannot be overlooked.
In her article “Costume and Narrative: How Dress Tells the Woman’s Story,”
Jane Gaines relates how film costume designers such as Edith Head created “storytelling
wardrobes” which let the costume “tell the woman’s story” or usually the story of the
main female character of the film.
307
This concept can be turned around and talked about
in terms of how sections of newspapers like the “La Sociedad” section of La Opinion and
fan magazines gave fashion and beauty ideas and tips so a young Latina could create and
fashion her own story.
As was mentioned, it wasn’t just the newspapers that caught the eyes of the Latina
women. While Rosita Moreno, Conchita Montenegro and Lupita Tovar received a
smathering of attention in American fan magazines the films received no mention since
the Spanish language films were not directed toward an English-speaking audience. In
addition to the coverage they received in La Opinion in Los Angeles, the actresses
appeared in Spanish language fan magazines such as Cine-Mundial and Cinelandia. Both
were published in the United States. Cine-Mundial was published in New York by the
company that published the popular fan magazine Motion Picture World. A more
significant issue since studio issue since studio publicity heightened an actresses appeal
to her fans is “How would these actresses be situated in publicity materials on the
continuum between Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez?

307
Jane Gaines, “Costume and Narrative: How Dress Tells the Woman’s Story” in Fabrication: Costume
and the Female Body edited by Jane Gaines and Charlotte Herzog (New York: Routledge, 1990), 180.

177
First, I will take a look at Lupita Tovar. Unlike Del Rio, however, she enjoyed
most of her major success in Universal Pictures Spanish language films. Since the films
that she appeared in were all Spanish versions of Hollywood films a deliberate attempt
was made to make sure that most of her press coverage was in Spanish language fan
magazines. While she was in production of her first film, La Voluntad del Muerto which
was the Spanish language version of The Cat Creeps (1930), Universal’s publicity
department made sure that she was featured in the April 1929 issue of Cinelandia, one of
the most prominent Spanish language fan magazines.
Following the completion of the La Voluntad del Muerto, the studio sent her to
Mexico for the opening of the film in the Latin markets. As a result, she made the covers
of Jueves de Excelsior, La Ovacion, Ilustrado and El Cine. Tovar recalled many years
later that the publicity had done its work. “I made personal appearances in the different
theaters where La Voluntad del Muerto was playing and I was mobbed every time.”
308

This trip and the impression that Tovar made on film audiences during her visit to
Mexico served not only to enhance the success of the Spanish language films that she
worked on, it also allowed her to get enough exposure so that she could move easily back
and forth between playing supporting roles in “B” pictures in Hollywood during the 30’s
and 40’s to playing starring roles in Mexican films.
When she returned to Hollywood following the trip she recalled:
The publicity department was very pleased with the results of my trip. Mr
Alarcon (her publicist in Mexico) had sent them all of the newspaper clippings
and photographs. They said they had never seen such publicity. They couldn’t

308
Pancho Kohner, 60.

178
get over the success of the picture. Paul was ecstatic; he had discovered me, after
all.

Mr. Laemmle was shown all the publicity from Mexico. When he saw it he said,
“My God. This must have cost a fortune, all this publicity for the girl.” Then he
was told that not one penny had been spent; that the press was running after me
and that they had given me the title, “The Sweetheart of Mexico.” The next day I
was called to the studio to see Mr. Laemmle. He told me that he was proud of me
and said, “You will start immediately on Dracula.”
309

Dracula turned out to be the film that put Tovar on the international map and on
to the cover of Cine-Mundial in February of 1931. After Tovar went to Universal, she
was presented in rather provacative ways in the fan magazines. Starting with her lips
puckered for a kiss on the cover of Cine-Mundial, her body became the focal of the
advertisement. This can be clearly seen in the soap advertisement as well as in the pose
she strikes annoucing her current movie project. Even for a publicity shot showing her
perusing a Cine-Mundial magazine, Tovar is surrounded by three men in suits and once
again she is wearing a “barely there” outfit. Only when she is chosen for the “Lo Que
Visten Las Estrellas” fashion spread in Cine-Mundial is presented in a much more
sophisticated way, all covered up and her hair pulled back. Besides being featured in the
Spanish language fan magazines, she also was featured in La Opinion as “the premiere
young Mexican woman of the screen.” Here as well, it is all about the body with Tovar
framed in such a way that the eye goes immediately to her chest before anywhere else.

309
Ibid., 63.

179

Figure 18: Lupita Tovar on cover of Cine-Mundial fan magazine

180

Figure 19: Lupita Tovar featured in soap advertisement

181

Figure 20: Lupita Tovar featured in a fan magazine

182

Figure 21: Lupita Tovar seen reading the Cine-Mundial fan magazine

183

Figure 22: Lupita Tovar featured in a fashion layout

184

Figure 23: Lupita Tovar featured in the newspaper La Opinion

185

The year after the success of Dracula, Tovar returned to Mexico to star in that
country’s first sound film, Santa. Her character, a young peasant girl who is cheated by
an arrogant soldier and must take refuge in a whore house and earn her way as a
prostitute is said by some critics to be the model for a string of heroines played by
Dolores Del Rio in her Mexican films late in her career.
Before actually seeing a copy of the fan magazine Cine-Mundial, I assumed it
would be a smaller and less focused effort by the publisher. I couldn’t have been more
wrong. To my surprise, Cine-Mundial was a beautifully put together magazine that in
some ways was more lush than some of the American fan magazine. Like La Opinion, it
brought together all the areas of interest a young woman would have into one place. It
covered the movies, fashion, beauty, make-up and the art of domesticity. Each month
young women could look forward to the beauty column “La Mujer Ante El Espejo” (The
Woman in Front of the Mirror) that gave tips on cosmetics and hair along with “Ciencia
Domestica” informing women about how to have an efficiently run home (and I guess be
beautiful while you do it), along with the newest in fashion courtesy of your favorite star.

186

Figure 24: The “La Mujer Ante El Espejo” column in the Cine-Mundial fan magazine

187

Figure 25: The “Ciencia Domestica” column in the Cine-Mundial fan magazine

188
During the 1930’s as fashions moved from only the upper classes being able to
afford high fashion to clothes being mass produced
310
the fan magazines not only
showed the fashion they also provided information from such company’s as the Butterick
Pattern Company on how it would be possible to make some of these outfits at home.
311

All of this was part of the process for changes in what femininity meant
312
at this time as
well as providing ideas for young women as they moved into being modern women.
313

310
Sarah Berry, xii.

311
Charlotte Cornelia Herzog and Jane Marie Gaines, “’Puffed Sleeves Before Tea-Time’:Joan Crawford,
Adrian and Women Audiences” in Stardom: Industry of Desire edited by Christine Gledhill (New York:
Routledge, 1991), 75.

312
Sarah Berry, xiii.

313
Joanne Hershfield, 100.

189

Figure 26: Cine-Mundial Fashion Layout (1)

190

Figure 27: Cine-Mundial Fashion Layout (2)

191

Figure 28: Cine-Mundial Fashion Layout (3)

192

Figure 29: Cine-Mundial Fashion Layout (4)
This is the space where the Latina actresses appearing in the Spanish language films
found themselves front and center. They still had to share space with the stars of
American film but they were not relegated to the margins and most definitely not in the
shadows. The studios for one were not hestitant when it came to photographing these
women for publicity purposes.
Like Lupita Tovar, Rosita Moreno and Conchita Montenegro were photographed
extensively for studio publicity. Before focusing on them another actress fits into this
area as well. As has been mentioned, when the first batch of Spanish language films
were produced, they were remakes of domestic English language films, which had
received much criticism. For their second attempt, the studio decided to use original

193
stories for their foreign markets and to do this they needed to once again find actors to
take on these new roles.
314
No one was more aware than the Fox Film Studio.
One of those actresses added to the roster was the respected Spanish theater
actress Catalina Barcena who eventually starred in several Spanish language films for
Fox. According to the fan magazine Cine-Mundial, the Fox executives “would pay her
whatever she wanted” to appear on screen.
315
While that is somewhat of an exaggeration,
Barcena had one of the most lucative contracts for an actress making these films. Her
original contract called for her to $15,000 for two pictures with above the title star
billing. Barcena also received what no other actress did and that was additional
compensation of 5% of gross revenue in excess of $150,000.
316

The Fox executives had heard the complaints about how the story content of the
Spanish language films did not relate to the audience they were intended for. The
thought was that by hiring Spanish writers this would result in films the audience could
relate to. The studio hired Gregorio Martinez Sierra who came as a package with
Catalina Barcena. In viewing their first collaboration Mama (1931), it is difficult to see
how this story was made for any specific audience.
The story begins at a French seaside resort with Barcena starring as the wealthy
socialite Mercedes who is vacationing with her family. Since her husband doesn’t pay

314
“Original Stories for Foreign Markets Look Like General American Production Policy,” Variety,
December 10, 1930, 6.

315
“Hollywood: The World’s Most Fortified Column Published From the Sidelines of the Los Angeles
Film Industry” Cine-Mundial (November 1931), 847.

316
Fox Film Corporation Studio Memo from Geo. Wasson to Mr. J. J. Gain (August 11, 1934). Catalina
Barcena Fox Legal File, UCLA Peeforming Arts Special Collections.

194
much attention to her, Mercedes spends her time gambling and ends up losing big at
roulette and borrows 23,000 pesetas from a man she doesn’t seem to realize has targeted
her. With the family back home in Madrid with Mercedes and her husband actually
communicating about their relationship. The film ends with the money being repaid and
the family happy once again.
317

While Martinez Sierra did not write the story, he was the script supervisor on
another film starring Barcena entitled Senora Casada Necesita Marido (1935). Here
Barcena plays Irma another sophisticated disgruntled wife who’s marriage has gone stale.
Irma decides to make her husband jealous in order to get his attention and get their
marriage back on track, but he has to chase her across Europe in order to do it.
318

Barcena received glowing reviews for her acting as Cine-Mundial called Mama
“the best of the handful of films shot in Spanish to date”
319
and Variety commended her
as “being excellent.”
320
While noting that there was “absolutely nothing original in this
story,” in the film Senora Casada Necesita Marido, the reviewer of the New York Times
said of Barcena, “Displaying the versatility for which she is noted, the able and charming
actress’s chatter and whimsicalities are so entertaining that the spectators are amused just
the same.”
321
But what these films did offer to a Latina audience was again the idea of

317
AFI Catalog.

318
Ibid.

319
“Hollywood,” Cine-Mundial (November 1931), 847.

320
“The Screen” Variety, July 8, 1933, 14.

321
The New York Times, February 11, 1935.

195
upward mobility in an urban setting, the possibility of world travel and a stunning fashion
show the likes of which can be imagined with the publicity stills the studio released.

Figure 30: Catalina Barcena Publicity Still (1)

196

Figure 31: Catalina Barcena Publicity Still (2)

197

Figure 32: Catalina Barcena Publicity Still (3)

198
As the Los Angeles Times commented in an article about Barcena and the film
Mama:
Barcena brings to the screen a unique and vivid personality. Her naturalness, even
in this, her motion picture initiation, coupled with an outstanding skill to wear
clothes should establish her as a potential star.
322

While appearances by the actresses including Barcena at premieres were reported,
Barcena was probably the only actress fans could meet at the Central Library in
Downtown Los Angeles as in the fall of 1931 she gave a talk in Spanish entitled “Una
Hora de Literatura” a few weeks before her Hollywood debut in Mama.
323

Like Tovar, Rosita Moreno and Conchita Montenegro made the cover of the
Spanish language fan magazines. Looking over the publicity stills from the studio as well
as what the studios requested be placed in the fan magazines, Moreno continued as the
“wholesome” girl that could be identified with. She fit right in the middle of the
contiuum between Delores Del Rio and Lupe Velez. Looking at the publicity stills taken
by the studio photographer, Moreno is seen as participating in all the activities a young
Latina would. She is at home with a pet, coming home from traveling, interested in
fashion. It is intriguing to see how some of the studio stills were transferred to the pages
of the Cine-Mundial fan magazine.

322
“Spanish Film Popular Fare at California” The Los Angeles Times, December 9, 1931, A8.

323
“What’s Doing Today” The Los Angeles Times, October 15, 1931, 20.

199

Figure 33: Rosita Moreno on cover of Cine-Mundial fan magazine

200

Figure 34: Rosita Moreno Publicity (1)

201

Figure 35: Rosita Moreno Publicity Still (2)

202

Figure 36: Rosita Moreno Publicity Still (3)

203

Figure 37: Rosita Moreno Publicity Still (4)

204

Figure 38: Rosita Moreno featured in a fan magazine

205

Figure 39: Rosita Moreno featured in a fashion layout
As her name became more well known, Moreno’s activities outside of film were
reported in both The Los Angeles Times and La Opinion which seemed to begin with a
purported engagement Orville Mohler, a football star at the University of Southern

206
California which was quickly refuted
324
, to having Antonio Moreno paying a lot of
attention to her at the Coconut Grove
325
and finally to having her “real” engagement to
Paramount studio executive Melville A. Schauer annouced
326
. All of these planted new
items kept up her name recognition with the public and on the radar of her intended
audience.
From the outset of the Spanish language film experiment, studio executives has
seen “star” potential in Conchita Montenegro and she was pushed in the direction of
Dolores Del Rio as an elegant beauty but with the splash of sexuality that wasn’t quite as
foregrounded in Del Rio’s publicity. When Montenegro arrived at the Fox studios she
was selected on one their three “Young Fox Beauties” and notice was sent out through
The Los Angeles Times that the studio had plans for her to act in both Spanish and
English films.
327
and then following that announcement another bit appear the next day
giving the reader a teaser to further interest is seeing Montenegro on the screen.
The lovely, demure Conchita Montenegro is a veritable storm center of rivalry,
both professionally and socially over at the Fox Studios. If you have seen Miss
Montenegro you won’t be a bit surprised. Directors are clamoring for her services,
leading men are demanding that she play opposite them—for Conchita has that
most inestimable gift,the power of bringing out the best acting in a player without
losing a whit of her own fascination…”
328

324
“Rosita Moreno Denies Troth to “Orv” Mohler,” The Los Angeles Times, December 20, 1930, A1.

325
“Hobnobbing in Hollywood,” The Los Angeles Times, December 16, 1933, A7.

326
“Spanish Actress Troth to Film Executive Told,” The Los Angeles Times, January 7, 1935, A1.

327
“Film Debutantes Make Bow,” The Los Angeles Times, August 24, 1931.

328
The Los Angeles Times, August 25, 1931, I1.

207

A few years into her stay in Hollywood, The fan magazine Cine-Mundial wrote,

The restless and thrilling Conchita Montenegro has been and continues to be, the
most talked about Hispanic star in Hollywood…she really does mystify us…
329

These publicity blurbs seem to grab in a nutshell how Montenegro was presented
to the public. There is the elegance in the fashion spread, the sensuality in the way she is
posed for studio publicity stills, the smoldering sexuality when she is posed with Leslie
Howard one of her co-stars and finally, the way that the studio ties her present to the past
by having her pose with a painting of herself.

329
Miguel de Zarraga, “Who’s Looking Out for Conchita…? Cine-Mundial (May 1934), 255.

208

Figure 40: Conchita Montenegro Publicity Still (1)

209

Figure 41: Conchita Montenegro Publicity Still (2)

210

Figure 42: Conchita Montenegro posing with co-star Leslie Howard

211

Figure 43: Conchita Montegro featured in a fan magazine

212

Figure 44: Conchita Montenegro featured in a fashion layout
Montenegro reached the a new stage in the type of publicity surrounding her
when she joined the ranks of those actresses on the public radar when her romance with
leading man Raul Roulien began being followed in “That Certain Party” column in The
Los Angeles Times. Their dates and romantic plans were mentioned in spots throughout
1934 and 1935.
330

While Dolores Del Rio never made any of the Spanish language films her path did
cross with several of these actresses. There were announcements regarding the activities

330
The Los Angeles Times (June 10, 1934, A1; August 19, 1934, A1; June 25, 1935).

213
of the Spanish language actresses that included Dolores Del Rio as well. In November
1931 both Del Rio and Montenegro were part of a group of Hollywood actors who met
newspaper editors at the Coconut Grove.
331
and the two actresses were both on the bill
for a “Standing Room Only” show in October 1933.
332
Rosita Moreno, Montenegro and
Del Rio had seats reserved for them for a performance of Ravel’s “Bolero” at the Shrine
in July of 1934.
333

But it was on Lupita Tovar that Del Rio had the most influence. When Tovar
arrived in Hollywood, Del Rio took her under her wing. As Tovar remembers:
She [Del Rio] was already well known when I came here. Dolores was very nice
to me. She would often invite me over for tea. I was like a kid next to her. There
was absolutely no competition. She was just so nice. She was my daughter’s
godmother and we became very close.
334

With this quote from Tovar, it seems that the continuum actually becomes a circle
with all of the Latina actresses having their own place during the 1930’s in Hollywood.
There are a range of presentation from the girl next door to the sophisticated woman of
elegance to the woman of smoldering sexuality but what is clear is that these actresses
were not hidden. They were not only on the screen but out and about Hollywood and
their presences on and off the screen were well-documented. There was a plethora of
images, advice and activities that would give Latinas food for thought beyond one the
one hand, the blue-eyed blond actresses or on the other that Dolores Del Rio was the only

331
The Los Angeles Times, November 11, 1931, A9.

332
The Los Angeles Times, October 21, 1933.

333
The Los Angeles Times, July 8, 1934.

334
Lupita Tovar, Oral History, UCLA Oral History Center, 105.

214
Latina actress on the radar as they were becoming more comfortable in their roles as
modern women.

215

AFTERMATH

By the mid-1930’s, the Hollywood studios had substantially cut their foreign
departments. There were a few Spanish language films that trickled through and made it
to the screen but for all intents and purposes the experiment was over. The dubbing
process had made great strides and the cinemas in such countries as Argentina, Spain and
Mexico.
335

The Mexican film industry had been relatively quiet during the early part of the
decade was ready to burst out with the release of the Mexican film Alla en el Rancho
Grande. This film often regarded as the film that saved the Mexican film industry from
ruin.
336
put the Hollywood film industry on notice that they would have more
competition for the Mexican audience closer to home.
Now that the Spanish language film experiment was finished, what did that mean
for the actresses who had starred in these films? Many of these performers had already
come and gone as the production of these films wound down. But there were several
actresses still in Hollywood that hoped to parlay their stardom into roles in Hollywood
product in Los Angeles. Although it was touted that they could speak “perfect” English, it
was soon obvious the accented speech was going to be a deterrent. While they weren’t
starring in films anymore, they didn’t immediately disappear from the Hollywood radar.

335
Colin Gunckel, A Theater Worthy of Our People, 126.

336
Ibid., 126.

216
Conchita Montenegro whom both the first M-G-M and then Fox studios had had
the highest hopes of turning into a bona fide star worked in such English language films
as The Cisco Kid (1931) and Laughing at Life (1933). But stardom remained elusive. She
eventually left Los Angeles and worked in the film industries in Brazil, Italy and Spain.
The stardom that wasn’t found in Hollywood was found in Italy. Ironically, it was the
Hollywood produced Spanish language films dubbed in Italian that cemented her
popularity in Italy.
337

Lupita Tovar had small parts in several films such as East of Borneo (1931). But
by 1938 her role in the film Blockade was listed as “Palm Reader”. Tovar made her big
mark in the early Mexican film Santa (1931) that made her a celebrity in the land of her
birth. The discovery of the Spanish language Dracula in Cuba a few years ago re-ignited
interest in her career but she had contributed quite a legacy within the Hollywood film
industry. Her marriage to the producer Paul Kohner produced two children Pancho and
Susan Kohner. Pancho was the producer for many Charles Bronson films and Susan
played Sarah Jane in the Imitation of Life (1959). Susan’s two sons Paul and Chris
Weitz who between them have directed such movies About a Boy, the American Pie
series, the Golden Compass and New Moon. Lupita is still going strong at over one
hundred years old.
Rosita Moreno was one of the few actresses who appeared in the Spanish
language films over the entire arc of the experiment. Part of the reason could be was that
she was married to Melville Shauer who was an executive at Paramount Studios. In the

337
Robert G. Dickson, La Cita en Hollywood, 69.

217
late 1930’s the couple attempted to launch Victoria Films, Inc., their own production
company to produce Spanish language films. They struggled to produce their film Tengo
fe en ti and when it was released by RKO in 1939, it went largely unnoticed as did the
few other roles Moreno was cast in.
338

The one actress who was able to parlay a career in Hollywood beyond the Spanish
language films into supporting roles was the Argentinean actress Mona Maris. She
continued to perform in films for several studios including Fox, Warner Bros.,
Paramount, M-G-M and RKO. She established a solid filmography with such films as
Underground (1941), My Gal Sal (1942), and Monsieur Beaucaire (1946). But what all
these Latina actresses had in common was that after the Spanish language film
experiment ended none of these actresses ever starred in another Hollywood produced
film. Their careers were indeed pushed into the shadows.
It is interesting to contemplate that the only two actresses who didn’t leave
Hollywood, Lupita Tovar and Rosita Moreno, stayed not because of their starring roles in
the Spanish language films but through marriage to Hollywood studio executives. It ends
up being through domesticity and what that entailed that they were able to establish
themselves here permanantly. Stepping outside those understood lines could cause
problems as Lupita Tovar relates a story of why early arrival Maria Alba’s star dimmed
rather quickly.
Tovar had been cast as the female lead opposite Douglas Fairbanks in the film
Mr. Robinson Crusoe. Only after she had signed the contract did she find out that

338
Ibid., 60-61.

218
Fairbanks planned to have her as the only female among the crew during the filmming on
a South Pacific Island. She asked for a chaperone to accompany her and was turned
down. So Tovar bowed out of the movie and Maria Alba was given the part. Apparently
Mary Pickford knowing her husband quite well sent Tovar a note:
Dear Miss Tovar, You don’t know how right you are to turn down
This film. You have my admiration and respect. ---Mary Pickford
Although Tovar was disappointed not to be able to do this film, it was the right decision,
since upon the return to Hollywood, Maria Alba’s husband divorced her and with the
picture not being successful for the studio, Alba’s Hollywood career was effectivley
over.
339

Jump forward seventy plus years to present day Hollywood and film industry
executives are still trying to figure out the answer as to how to reach the Latino audience.
With Latino population growing by leaps and bounds in the United States, this is an
audience that Hollywood wants to grab onto. In 2010, The New York Times reported that
Lionsgate studio was going into partnership with the Mexico City based media
conglomerate Televisa to produce Latino-focused films. Lionsgate’s African-American
focused film business anchored by films produced by Tyler Perry became a goldmine for
the company. “Movies with predominantly black casts that tell stories rooted in black
culture—surprise!—bring out a sizable black audience.”
340
As Emilio Azcarraga Jean,

339
This story is related in Pancho Kohner’s book Lupita Tovar: The Sweetheart of Mexico, 91.

340
The New York Times, September 14, 2010, B1.

219
chief executive of Grupo Televisa said, “People like to see themselves represented on the
screen.”
341

In February 2012, Comcast announced they would be working with
producer/director Robert Rodriguez to launch a cable channel that will focus on
programming for Latino audiences. Rodriguez pointed out that Latinos “are an under
served market”.
342
But it is still more “niche” market rather than a mainstream approach.
In the twenty-first century, mainstream stardom remains elusive for most Latino
performers. Like in previous decades we continue to be focused on one or two
performers.

341
Ibid.

342
The Los Angeles Times, February 12, 2012.

220
CONCLUSION
This dissertation looked at the landscape of the Hollywood film industry during
the transition from silent to sound film and focused on what became known as the
multiple language films and in particular the subset of Spanish language films. The
Hollywood film industry was uneasy and fearful of losing their foreign audiences but
most especially was afraid of losing the money that came from these overseas markets.
The executives running the studios that made up the Hollywood film industry were
perceived as methodical and efficient who knew exactly what they were doing.
But in discovering and being able to find and use archival materials such as
business and production files at The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, The
American Film Institute, University of Southern California and UCLA suggests another
narrative. There was no straightforward answer to how to proceed into the sound era.
There were many different options and the Hollywood executives stumbled through and
had different successes and failures before getting on what they felt was the right path.
The choice to produce the Spanish language films brought many actresses from
Mexico, Spain and Latin America to California to be part of the film industry colony. As
this dissertation has demonstrated there was far more happening regarding Latina
actresses in the 1930’s than just Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez. The film industry had
set up these two actresses almost as the antithesis of each other. But between the
“whiteness” and upper class distinction of Del Rio and the perceived lower class Mexican
Lupe Velez were a plethora of other Latina actresses that could have served as role
models for Latinas demonstrating what could be attained both literally and figuratively.

221
The 1930’s were an interesting time for Latinas on both sides of the border. Both
Vicki Ruiz and Joanne Hershfield have asserted in their writings that Latinas in the
1930’s were negotiating moving into a new era of being more modern women both here
in the United States and in Mexico. The media and popular culture through such things
as movies, fashion and make-up were influencing part of this transitional process. So
while we have been led to believe that only Dolores Del Rio and to a lesser extent Lupe
Velez were the only Latinas who had any status in the industry during this time, the
actresses who appeared in the Spanish language films made a splash as well.
While these actresses received very little coverage in such fan magazines as
Photoplay, the opposite was true in such Spanish language film magazines Cine-Mundial
and Cinelandia as well as Spanish language newspapers such as the Los Angeles based
La Opinion. But they also received solid coverage in papers such the The Los Angeles
Times and The New York Times so they would have been on the radar of Latinas as they
negotiated moving into being “modern” women on both sides of the borders. With the
deportation and repatriation activities occurring which made mobility between Mexico
and the United States difficult to navigate in the literal sense, this move to “modern”
woman status was happening on both sides of the border with the “imagined” mobility
that was being seen on the screen and talked about in fan magazines and newspapers.
This could have been further heightened by the opportunity to see these actresses
in person on both sides of the border as several of the actresses appeared numerous times
at premieres as well as other venues around the cities. The stories of these Latina
actresses deserve to be told and by doing so, we further increase what is known regarding

222
the history of Hollywood and, in turn, expands film history scholarship. By adding these
new narrative strands to the Hollywood story, the hope is to offer some new starting
points for further exploration.
Since the salad days of that time were short and we only see the shadows of that
stardom today, I suggest that there was a much larger canvas for Latina actresses going
on in the 1930’s and that the Spanish language films and the actresses who appeared in
them did have some influence on a Latina audience. While these Spanish language films
may not have been masterpieces, they were unique in that it was one of the only places to
see Latina actresses in starring roles and if nothing else, to repeat again, it was one of the
few opportunities to “see someone like themselves represented on the screen” during this
transitional and transformative time.

223
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acuna, Rodolfo. Occupied America: A History of Chicanos, Fourth Edition. New York:
Longman, 2000.

Agrasanchez, Jr., Rogelio. Mexican Movies in the United States: A History of the Films,
Theaters and Audiences, 1920-1960. Jefferson, NC: McFarland& Co., Inc., 2006.

“All Spanish Cast Released,” Hollywood Filmograph vol. 10, no. 19 (May 24, 1930), 7.

American Film Institute Catalog of Motion Pictures Produced in the United States, 1931-
1940 Executive edited by Patricia King Hanson. Los Angeles: University of California
Press, 1993.

American Film Institute Catalog, Within Our Gates: Ethnicity in American Feature
Films, 1911-1960 edited by Alan Geveinson. Los Angeles: University of California,
1997.

Ankerich, Michael G. The Sound of Silence: Conversations with 16 Film and Stage
Personalities Who Bridged the Gap Between Silents and Talkies. Jefferson, NC:
McFarland & Co., 1998.

Aparicio, Frances R. and Susana Chavez-Silverman. Tropicalizations: Transcultural
Representations of Latinidad. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1997.

Balderrama, Francisco E. In Defense of La Raza: The Los Angeles Consulate and the
Mexican Community, 1929-1936. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1982.

Balio, Tino. Grand Design: Hollywood as a Modern Business Enterprise, 1930-1939,
History of the Cinema, vol. 5. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1993.

Banet-Weiser, Sarah. The Most Beautiful Girl in the World: Beauty Pageants and
National Identity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999.

Barbas, Samantha. Movie Crazy: Fans, Stars and the Cult of Celebrity. New York:
Palgrave, 2001.

Basinger, Jeanine. The Star Machine. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007.

Basinger, Jeanine. A Woman’s View: How Hollywood Spoke to Women, 1930-1960. New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1993.

224
Basten, Fred E. Max Factor’s Hollywood: Glamour, Movies, Make-up. Los Angeles:
General Publishing Group, 1995.

Bernardi, Daniel, Editor. The Persistence of Whiteness: Race and Contemporary
Hollywood Cinema. London: Routledge, 2008.

Beltran, Mary. “Delores Del Rio, the First “Latin Invasion” and Hollywood’s Transition
to Sound.” Aztlan 30:1 (Spring 2005): 55-75.

Beltran, Mary. Latina/o Stars in U.S. Eyes: The Making and Meanings of Film and TV
Stardom. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

Beltran, Mary and Camilla Fojas. Mixed Race Hollywood. New York: New York
University Press, 2008.

Berg, Charles Ramirez. Latino Images in Film: Stereotypes, Subversion & Resistance.
Austin: University of Texas Press, 2002.

Berry, Sarah. Screen Style: Fashion and Femininity in 1930’s Hollywood. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 2000.

Boland, Elena. “Foreign Stars May Shine in English.” The Los Angeles Times (August
10, 1930), B15.

Branston, Gill. Cinema and Cultural Modernity. Buckingham: Open University Press,
2000.

Brown, Kelly R. Florence Lawrence: The Biograph Girl: America’s First Movie Star.
Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc. 1999.

Bruno, Giuliana. Streetwalking on a Ruined Map: Cultural Theory and the City Films of
Elvia Notari. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.

Carr, Larry. More Fabulous Faces: The Evolution and Metamorphosis of Dolores Del
Rio, Myrna Loy, Carole Lombard, Bette Davis and Katherine Hepburn. New York:
Doubleday, 1979.

Crafton, Donald. The Talkies: The American Cinema’s Transition to Sound, 1926-1931,
History of the American Cinema, vol. 4. New York: Charles Scribners & Sons, 1997.

Craig, Maxine Leeds. Ain’t I a Beauty Queen? Black Women, Beauty and the Politics of
Race. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

225
Davila, Arlene. Latinos, Inc.: The Marketing and Making of a People. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2001.

De Berg, Adolfo. “More Cooperation and Less Criticism for Spanish Pictures”
Hollywood Filmograph 10, no. 22 (June 14, 1930): 7.

DeCordova, Richard. Picture Personalities: The Emergence of the Star System in
America. Urbana: University of Illnois Press, 1990.

De Usabel, Gaizka S. The High Noon of American Films in Latin America. Michigan:
UMI Research Press, 1982.

Delpar, Helen. The Enormous Vogue of Things Mexican: Cultural Relations Between the
United States and Mexico, 1920-1935. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press,
1992.

Desser, David and Garth S. Jowett, Editors. Hollywood Goes Shopping. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 2000.

Dickson, Robert G. “California Theatre in the 1930’s: Los Angeles, California.”
Marquee: The Journal of the Theatre Historical of Society of America 26, no. 4 (1994):
6-8.

Dickstein, Morris. Dancing in the Dark: A Cultural History of the Great Depression.
New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2009.

Douglas, Susan J. Where the Girls Are: Growing Up Female with the Mass Media. New
York: Times Books, 1995.

Durovicova, Natasa. “Translating America: The Hollywood Multilinguals 1929-1933.” In
Sound Theory and Sound Practice. Edited by Rick Altman. New York and London:
Routledge, 1992.

Dyer, Richard. The Matter of Images: Essays on Representations. New York: Routledge,
1993.

Dyer, Richard. Stars. London: British Film Institute, 1979, 1998.

Dyer, Richard. White. London: Routledge, 1997.

Enstad, Nan. Ladies of Labor, Girls of Adventure: Working Women, Popular Culture,
and Labor Politics at the Turn of the Century. New York: Columbia University Press,
1999.

226
“Exhibitors Greatly Encouraged by Success of Spanish Versions.” Hollywood
Filmograph (04 October 1930): 7.

Eyman, Scott. The Speed of Sound: Hollywood and the Talkie Revolution, 1926-1930.
New York: Simon and Schuster, 1997.

Flinn, Tom. “William Dieterle: The Plutarch of Hollywood.” The Velvet Light Trap no.
15 (Fall 1975), 23-28.

Fregoso, Rosa Linda. meXicana Encounters: The Making of Social Identities on the
Borderlands. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.

Friedman, Lester D., Editor. Unspeakable Images: Ethnicity and the American Culture.
Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1991.

Fuller, Kathryn H. At the Picture Show: Small-Town Audiences and the Creation of
Movie Fan Culture. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1996.

Fuller-Seeley, Kathryn H. (editor) Hollywood in the Neighborhood: Historical Case
Studies of Local Moviegoing. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008.

Gaines, Jane. “Costume and Narrative: How Dress Tells the Woman’s Story” in
Fabrications: Costume and the Female Body edited by Jane Gaines and Charlotte
Herzog. New York: Routledge, 1990, 180-211.

Geduld, Harry M. The Birth of the Talkies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975.

Gledhill, Christine, Editor. Stardom: Industry of Desire. London: Routledge, 1991.

Gunckel, Colin. A Theater Worthy of Our Race: The Exhibition and Reception of Spanish
Language Film in Los Angeles, 1911-1942. University of California Los Angeles
(Dissertation), 2009.

Gunckel, Colin. “The War of the Accents: Spanish Language Hollywood Films in
Mexican Los Angeles” Film History 20, no. 3 (2008): 325-343.

Gutierrez, David G. Walls and Mirrors: Mexican Americans, Mexican Immigrants and
the Politics of Ethnicity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995.

Hadley-Garcia, George. Hispanic Hollywood: The Latins in Motion Pictures. New York:
Carol Publishing Group, 1990.

Hall, Linda B., “Images of Women and Power,” Pacific Historical Review 77, no. 1
(2008), 1-18.

227

Hansen, Miriam. “Pleasure, Ambivalence, Identification: Valentino and Female
Spectatorship” in Stardom: Industry of Desire edited by Christine Gledhill. London:
Routledge, 1991.

Hanson, Steve. “Fan Magazines,” in St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture, vol. 2
edited by Sara and Tom Pendergast, Detroit: St. James Press, 2000.

Haskell, Molly. From Reverence to Rape: The Treatment of Women in Movies. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1987.

Hastie, Amelie. Cupboards of Curiosity: Women, Recollection, and Film History.
Durham: Duke University Press, 2007.

Heinink, Juan B. and Robert G. Dickson. Cita en Hollywood: Antologia de las Peliculas
Habladas en Castellano. Bilbao, Spain: Mensajero, 1990.

Hershfield, Joanne. “Dolores Del Rio, Uncomfortably Real: The Economics of Race in
Hollywood’s Latin American Musicals” in Classic Hollywood, Classic Whiteness edited
by Daniel Bernardi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2001.

Hershfield, Joanne. “The Hollywood Movie Star and the Mexican Chica Moderna” in
Fashioning Film Stars: Dress, Culture, Identity edited by Rachel Moseley, London:
British Film Publishing, 2005

Hershfield, Joanne. Imagining la Chica Moderna: Women, Nation and Visual Culture in
Mexico, 1917-1936. Durham: Duke University Press, 2008.

Hershfield, Joanne. The Invention of Dolores Del Rio. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 2000.

Higson, Andrew and Richard Maltby. “Film Europe” and “Film America”: Cinema,
Commerce and Cultural Exchange 1920-1939. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1999.

Hollywood and History: Costume Design in Film. Organized by Edward Maeder. Los
Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1987.

“Hollywood Dependables Won’t Go Near Local Unsung Foreign Departments” Variety
October 6, 1931, 15.

Hunter, Margaret L. Race, Gender and the Politics of Skin Tone. New York: Routledge,
2005.

228
Hurtado, Aida. Voicing Chicana Feminisms: Young Women Speak Out on Sexuality and
Identity. New York: New York University Press, 2003.

Jarvinen, Lisa. Hollywood’s Shadow: The American Film Industry and its Spanish
Speaking Markets During the Transition to Sound, 1929-1936. Syracuse University, 2006
(Dissertation)

Jewell, Richard B. The Golden Age of Cinema: Hollywood 1929-1945. Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishing, 2007.

Keller, Gary D. Hispanics and United States Film: An Overview and Handbook. Tempe,
AZ: Bilingual Press, 1994.

King, Berry. “Articulating Stardom.” Screen 26, no. 5 (1985): 27-50.

King, Berry. “The Star and the Commodity: Notes Towards a Performance Theory of
Stardom.” Screen 1, no. 2 (1987): 145-161.

Knox, H.G. “English Gives Way to Babel of Tongues As Foreign Language Film
Demand Grows.” Erpigram no. 13 (July 1, 1930), 1, 8.
.
Kohner, Pancho. Lupita Tovar: The Sweetheart of Mexico. 2010.

Kropp, Phoebe S. “Citizens of the Past? Olvera Street and the Construction of Race and
Memory in 1930s Los Angeles.” Radical History Review. 81(Fall 2001): 35-60.

Lipsitz, George. Time Passages: Collective Memory and American Popular Culture.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990. New Jersey: Rutgers University
Press, 2004.

Lopez, Ana M. “Are All Latins from Manhatten?”: Hollywood, Ethnography and
Cultural Colonialism,” In Unspeakable Images: Ethnicity and the American Cinema,
edited by Lester D. Friedman, 404-424. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1991.

Lopez, Ana M. “From Hollywood and Back: Dolores Del Rio, a Trans(National) Star.”
Studies in Latin American Popular Culture 17 (1998): 5-32.

Maeder, Edward, Editor. Hollywood and History: Costume Design in Film. London:
Thames and Hudson and Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1987.

Mayne, Judith. “Immigrants and Spectators.” Wide Angle 5, no. 2 (1982): 33-40.

McLean, Adrienne L. Being Rita Hayworth: Labor, Identity and Hollywood Stardom.

229
Medeiros, Francine. “La Opinion, A Mexican Exile Newspaper: A Content Analysis of
its First Years, 1926-1929.” Aztlan 11, no. 1 (Spring 1980): 65-87.

Mizejewski, Linda. Ziegfeld Girl: Image and Icon in Culture and Cinema. Durham: Duke
University Press, 1999.

Monroy, Douglas. “Making Mexico in Los Angeles” in Metropolis in the Making: Los
Angeles in the 1920’s edited by Tom Sitton and William Deverell. Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 2001.

Monroy, Douglas. “’Our Children Get So Different Here’: Film, Fashion, Popular
Culture, and the Process of Cultural Syncretization in Mexican Los Angeles, 1900-1935.”
Aztlan 19, no. 1 (Spring 1988-1990): 79-108.

Monroy, Douglas. Rebirth: Mexican Los Angeles from the Great Migration to the Great
Depression. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999.

Mora, Carl J. Mexican Cinema: Reflections of a Society, 1896-1988. Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 1989.

“Multi-lingual Production in U.S. Has Too Many Drawbacks,” Variety (July 2, 1930), p.
7
.
Negra, Diane. Off-White Hollywood: American Culture and Ethnic Female Stardom.
London: Routledge, 2001.

Olsson, Jan. “Hollywood’s First Spectators: Notes on Ethnic Nickelodeon Audiences in
Los Angeles.” Aztlan 26, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 181-195.

O’Neil, Brian. “Yankee Invasion of Mexico, or Mexican Invasion of Hollywood?:
Hollywood’s Renewed Spanish-Language Production of 1938-1939.” Studies in Latin
American Popular Culture 17, (1998): 79-104.

Orellana, Margarita de. “The Circular Look: The Incursion of North American Fictional
Cinema 1911-1917 into the Mexican Revolution” in Mediating Two World: Cinematic
Encounters in the Americas edited by John King, Ana Lopez and Manuel Alvardo.
London: BFI Publishing, 1993.

Orgeron, Marsha. “Making It in Hollywood: Clara Bow, Fandom, Consumer Culture”
Cinema Journal, 42, Number 4 (Summer 2003): 76-97.

“Original Stories For Foreign Markets Look Like General American Production Policy”
Variety December 10, 1930, p.??

230
Ovalle, Priscilla Pena: Dance and the Hollywood Latina: Race, Sex and Stardom. New
Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 2011.

Ovalle, Priscilla Pena, Shake Your Assets: Dance and the Performance of Latina
Sexuality in Hollywood Film, (Dissertation: University of Southern California), 2006.

“Par Heads Deciding in Europe Where Foreign Tongue Films Will Be Made—Over
There or Coast?” Variety April 30, 1930, 7.

Parish, James Robert. The Hollywood Beauties. New Rochelle, New York: Arlington
House Publishers, 1978.

“Par’s Joinville Policy Tends to Concentrate on Four Languages” Variety January 14,
1931.

Peiss, Kathy. Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century
New York. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986.

Peiss, Kathy. Hope in a Jar: The Making of America’s Beauty Culture. New York: Henry
Holt and Company, 1998.

Peiss, Kathy. “Making Faces” The Cosmetics Industry and the Cultural Construction of
Gender, 1890-1930.” Genders Number 7 (Spring 1990): 143-169.

Peiss, Kathy. “Making Up, Making Over: Cosmetics, Consumer Culture, and Women’s
Identity” in The Sex of Things: Gender and Consumption in Historical Perspective.
Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996.

Phillips, Alastair and Ginette Vincendeau, Editors. Journeys of Desire: European Actors
in Hollywood, A Critical Companion. London: British Film Institute, 2006.

Pinto, Alfonso. “Hollywood’s Spanish Language Films.” Films in Review 24, no. 8
(October 1973): 474-483.

Riley, Philip J., editor. Dracula: The Original Shooting Script. Hollywood: MagicImage
Film Books, 1990.

Rios-Bustamante, Antonio. “Dolores Del Rio: Hollywood’s First Latina Superstar.”
Americas 2001 1, no. 4 (January 1988): 20-23.

Rios-Bustamante, Antonio. “Latino Participation in the Hollywood Film Industry,” in
Chicanos and Film: Essays on Chicano Representation and Resistance edited by Chon
Noriega. New York: Garland Publishing, 1992.

231
Rios-Bustamante, Antonio. “Latinos and the Hollywood Film Industry, 1920’s – 1950’s.”
Americas 2001 1, no. 4 (January 1988): 6-12.

Rios-Bustamante, Antonio. “Lupe Velez: Tragic Prototype of the Latin Spitfire
Stereotype.” Americas 2001 1, no. 4 (January 1988): 4-25.

Rodriguez, Clara E. Heroes, Lovers, and Others: The Story of Latinos in Hollywood.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Rodriguez-Estrada, Alicia. “Dolores Del Rio and Lupe Velez: Images on and off the
Screen, 1925-1944” in Writing the Range: Race, Class and Culture in the Women’s
West., eds. Susan Armitage and Elizabeth Jameson. Norman: University of Oklahoma
Press, 1997.

Ruiz, Vicki L. From Out of the Shadows: Mexican Women in Twentieth-Century
America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Ruiz, Vicki L. “’Star Struck’: Acculturation, Adolescence and the Mexican American
Woman, 1920-1950.” In Building with Our Hands: New Directions in Chicana Studies.
Edited by Adela de la Torre and Beatriz M. Pesquera. Berkeley and Los Angeles:
University of California Press, 1993.

Sanchez, George J. Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture and Identity in
Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Schrum, Kelly. Some Wore Bobby Sox: The Emergence of Teenage Girls’ Culture, 1920-
1945. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

Serna, Laura Isabel. “’We’re Going Yankee’: American Films, Mexican Nationalism,
Transnational Cinema, Harvard University, 2006. (Dissertation)

Shipman, David. The Great Movie Stars: The Golden Years. Boston: Little, Brown &
Co., 1995.

Shohat, Ella and Robert Stam. Unthinking Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism and the
Media. London: Routledge, 1994.

Skal, David J. Hollywood Gothic: The Tangled Web of Dracula from Novel to Stage to
Screen. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1990.

Slide, Anthony. Inside the Hollywood Fan Magazine. Jackson: University of Mississippi,
2010.

232
“Spanish Producers Optimistic Over Future,” Hollywood Filmograph vol. 10, no. 20
(May 31, 1930), 7.

Spigel, Lynn. Make Room for TV: Television and the Family Ideal in Postwar America.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992.

Stamp, Shelley. Movie-Struck Girls: Women and Motion Picture Culture After the
Nickelodeon. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.

Stacey, Jackie. Star Gazing: Hollywood Cinema and Female Spectatorship. London:
Routledge, 1994.

Stewart, Jacqueline Najuma. Migrating to the Movies. Berkeley: University of California,
2005.

Stokes, Melvyn and Richard Maltby, Editors. Identifying Hollywood’s Audiences:
Cultural Identity and the Movies. London: British Film Institute, 1999.

Studlar, Gaylyn. “The Perils of Pleasure? Fan Magazine Discourse as Women’s
Commodified Culture in the 1920s.”

Sturdevant, Victoria. “Spitfire: Lupe Velez and the Ambivalent Pleasures of Ethnic
Masquerade.” The Velvet Light Trap 55 (Spring 2005): 19-32.

“Theatre Receipts” Motion Picture Herald 103 (1931).

Thompson, David. A Biographical Dictionary of Film, Third Edition. New York: A. A.
Knopf, 1994.

Thompson, Kristin. Exploring Entertainment: America in the World Film Market, 1907-
1934. London: BFI Publishing, 1985.

Turner, George. “The Two Faces of Dracula,” American Cinematographer 69, no. 5
(May 1988):34-42.

Valdivia, Angharad N., editor. Latina/o Communication Studies Today. New York: Peter
Lang Publishing, 2008.

Vasey, Ruth. The World According to Hollywood, 1918-1939. Madison: The University
of Wisconsin Press, 1997.

Vincendeau, Ginette. “Hollywood Babel: Ginette Vincendeau Considers the Coming of
Sound and the Multiple Language Versions.” Screen 29, no. 2 (1988): 24-39.

233
Waldman, Harry. Paramount in Paris: 300 Films Produced at the Joinville Studios,
1930-1933, with Credits and Biographies. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc.,
1998.

Walker, Alexander. The Shattered Silents. New York: William Morrow and Company,
Inc., 1979.

Waller, Gregory A., Editor, Moviegoing in America. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2002.

“Warners Decide on Foreign Versions; Last to Give In” Variety February 12, 1930, 4.

Woll, Allen L., The Latin Image in American Film. Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American
Center Publications, 1977.

Yeme, Guillermo Prieto. “The American Made Talkies.” International Photographer
(August 1930): 14.

Documentary Film

The Bronze Screen: 100 Years of the Latino Image in American Cinema (DVD), 2002.

Films

Bad Girl (1931)
Dracula (Both Spanish and English versions) (DVD)
El Dia Que Me Quieres (1935)
Flying Down to Rio (1933)
Pleasure Cruise (1933)
Wonder Bar (1934)

Archival Collections

Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences

Special Collections
Foreign Language Committee
Paramount Production Files
Robert M. W. Vogel, Oral History (1990)

American Film Institute

Geoffrey Shurlock, Oral History (1970)

234

The Library of Congress

New York Public Library

UCLA Film and Television Archive
Mama (1931)
Marido y Mujer (1934)
Nada Mas Que Una Mujer (1934)
No Dejes Abierta La Puerta (1933)
Pursued (1934)
Senora Casada Necesita Marido (1935)
UCLA Performing Arts Special Collections
20
th
Century Fox Studio Legal Files
Maria Alba
Catalina Barcena
Conchita Montenegro
Rosita Moreno
Berta Singerman

University of Southern California, Archives of the Performing Arts
Universal Studios Collection
Production files for Dracula

Warner Bros. Archives, University of Southern California
I Live For Love, Press Book
In Caliente, Production File
Wonder Bar, Production File, Press Book

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Shake your assets: dance and the performance of Latina sexuality in Hollywood film

PDF

Channeling Shirley MacLaine: stardom, travel, politics, and beyond

PDF

Hollywood vault: the business of film libraries, 1915-1960

PDF

I can't afford the luxury of just being an actress: the politicized work of African American actresses on television

PDF

What looked like cruelty: animal welfare in Hollywood, 1916-1950

PDF

¡Que naco! Border cinema and Mexican migrant audiences

PDF

A cinema under the palms: the unruly lives of colonial educational films in British Malaya

PDF

Image breakers, image makers: producing race, America, and television

PDF

Co-producing the Asia Pacific: travels in technology, space, time and gender

PDF

The virtual big sister: television and technology in girls' media

PDF

Comic venus: women and comedy in American silent film

PDF

Color inside the lines: race and representation in the formula dance film

PDF

The vicissitudes of postnational affects: visuality, temporality, and corporeality in global east Asian films

PDF

More lives to live?: archiving and repurposing the daytime soap opera

PDF

Video camera technology in the digital age: Industry standards and the culture of videography

PDF

Medusan optics: film, feminism, and the forbidden image

PDF

Dangerous beauty: representation and reception of women in the films of Evgenii Bauer, 1913-1917

PDF

Bad boys, reform school girls, and teenage werewolves: the juvenile delinquency film in postwar America

PDF

Screenwriting double function of anonymity for female authors in Hollywood and critical issues of authorship in cinema: two screenplay case studies: Grace of my heart and Edward Scissorhands

PDF

Engineering Hollywood: technology, technicians, and the science of building the studio system, 1915-1930

Asset Metadata

Creator Garcia-Myers, Sandra (author)

Core Title Shadows of stardom: Latina actresses in the 1930's Hollywood produced Spanish language films

School School of Cinematic Arts

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Cinema-Television (Critical Studies)

Publication Date 05/11/2012

Defense Date 03/19/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Actresses,film history,Latina representation,OAI-PMH Harvest,visual culture

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor McPherson, Tara (committee chair), James, David E. (committee member), Sánchez, George J. (committee member)

Creator Email garciamy@usc.edu,garciamyers@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-40945

Unique identifier UC11289332

Identifier usctheses-c3-40945 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-GarciaMyer-848.pdf

Dmrecord 40945

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Garcia-Myers, Sandra

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA