Fate, Desolation, Little Bird
Ten months ago The Playlist‘s Kevin Jagernauth reported about a possible 12.10 DVD release of Rick Schmidlin‘s four-hour reconstruction of Eric von Stroheim‘s Greed (1924). Irving Thalberg butchered the epic-length classic down to a 2 1/2 hour cut. So far Schmidlin’s four-hour version has appeared on iTunes but not on a small disc.
About half way through the original cut I realized I was just enduring it so I could smugly pronounce that I had seen “Greed” in its intended form, aren’t I clever?
I love silent films. It’s just that….. I couldn’t get that into it. There. I said it.
I’ll now sit here and prepare to catch the same movie-snob wrath I caught when I let it be known I didn’t care for “Naked”.
Now if could just find the 8 (?) hour version.
Maybe we should look at that place where they found the “Metropolis” footage.
I do love these individuals who get all “I didn’t like movie X…so bring it, movie snobs!” Because here’s a funny little secret: even if movie snobs choose to “bring it,” it makes no difference, it doesn’t matter, and so on. It’s all just internet noise, man. Nobody walks around seething or even vaguely giving a shit over whether some schmuck out there likes “Greed” or not. William K. Everson didn’t. Herman Weinberg didn’t. I don’t. Nobody cares.
So what’s worse, actionlover: “movie snob wrath…”? Or the stark, inescapable reality that nobody really cares, and nobody ever will?
Think about it.
Most “movie snobs” haven’t seen the thing either, actionguy. Kenny is right. What’s next? “I switched off my CD player at the 20 minute mark of Wagner’s “Ring” cycle. There I said it. And I hate lobster meat! Hahaha! Let me pause right now and have a private laugh at my treachery!
Bit of an assholish reply to a rather low-key comment, doncha think? I was just sayin’.
And yes, people do give a shit. Why don’t you type “‘The Dark Knight’ is a totally over-rated, over-blown chunk of pop-culture pap” and see what happens. Sure. Everyone will just shrug and say, “eh”.
And it’s not a question of people giving a shit about what I, personally thought. It’s more of a chance for them to show how “knowing” they are.
I practically had people seeking me out 15 years ago. “Hey! I heard about you. You’re that guy that didn’t like Leigh’s ‘Naked’. What the fuck? Let me tell you about all of the brilliant subtleties that you missed in that masterpiece. Hell, next you’ll say you didn’t even like ‘Witnail & I’!”
And eat me.
And you guys cared enough to reply.
I’m touched. On the balls.
15 years ago? Were you the film critic for Sassy?
Yes.
I have found the letters page from the issue of Sassy from the following month. And you’re right. You were treated pretty harshly.
Dear Editor.
I think you should fire your film reviewer. “Naked” was awesome and David Thewlis is a hottie. Maybe you should hire someone who likes good movies instead of this Lame-O.
Sincerely,
Linda Grossman-O’Neill
Scarsdale, NY
You have a set of brass ones, my friend.
Wow, what an unfortunate hijack this turned out to be.
And here I was, thinking that my (and here I interject my subjective opinion) relitvely interesting comment about *the film itself* might spark an equally interesting conversation.
Ah well, back to “The King’s Speech” /”The Social Network” discussion.
relatively
This thread started out with me expressing my opinion and predicting that I would catch shit for it. Then it was about a couple of people telling me that nobody gives enough of a shit to give me shit. I’d like a cookie. Time to visit The Oracle.
(back to the film) I was just in Death Valley and I talked to a guy who works in Stovepipe Wells (and who looks just like Barry Goldwater, btw). He pointed out where exactly some of it was filmed. Seemed surprised that I’d even heard of it.
Then I made him put on a pair of bakolite glasses and say “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”
It’s a great movie to look at, but it’s a bit of a slog to get through at it’s abbreviated cut, much less the longer version.
About half way through the original cut I realized I was just enduring it so I could smugly pronounce that I had seen “Greed” in its intended form, aren’t I clever?
I felt the same way about 2001, Lawrence of Arabia, Reds, and so on etc etc. Long, much much too long. And not enough action, either.
Maybe if you weren’t a preemptively defensive luggage cart, action-friendo.
The Dark Knight’ is a totally over-rated, over-blown chunk of pop-culture pap, but I liked it while watching it, all the while knowing it was perfecting the appearance of depth while being shallow, which is fine because it was about a Bat Man. It truly is the American Beauty of superhero movies, but not nearly as execrable. The “touring Shakespeare company with a genocidista” episode of the original Star Trek had more balls.
(that wasn’t MY opinion of Dark Knight, Pinko… though I did think it was over-rated, but then I’m not a comic book guy)
For a moment there I thought you were serious York. Touche! But seriously, what did you think of the 8 hour version of “Greed”?
Just bustin’ balls.
You guys just don’t get The Dark Knight
I’ve never seen Greed, but that ending intrigues me enough that I’m interested in seeking it out.
And I don’t really care to add anything more to the internet’s continued fascination with The Dark Knight, either.
It’s WITHnail & I, by the way. If you want to make a joke out of your ignorance, you should at least get the names right.
Rashad, maybe some of us “get it” but still don’t care for it. It’s a fucking Batman movie not Last Year at Marienbad.
I thought, dare (I write this?) that Gance’s use of the triptych in NAPOLEON was a trifle overwrought, and in fact the whole movie is slightly overrated! I could piss in my pants right now from this stated example of my own roguishness. How say you, HE commenters? Should I disappear into a witness protection program?
I’m with you Prager. It’s incredibly dull except for the early stuff as a kid. That was great. I loved the snowball fight, but I couldn’t even finish that movie.
elzilcho – nope.
“Napoleon” is one of those films that’s awesome if you watch spippets of it during a retrospective of pre-sound European theater while being talked about by the likes of Scorcese or Brannaugh…. but then you actually sit down and try to watch the bastard and………………..
I’m sure I misspelled Brannaugh and Scorcese so there ya go, Nate… more examples of my ignorance.
And I liked “Whitnayle & Eye”, so suck it.
(while IT is being talked about….)
I’m not too surprised by the lack of appreciation for Von Stroheim’s masterpiece on this thread. To truly understand historic films, they have to be put into a historical context, much like literature, and appreciated for their aesthetic nature. But people today really have little interest in film as an art form. In college film classes I teach, undergraduates are always making comments similar to this thread:
“Citizen Kane”: It’s just a sled!
“The Searchers”": “This is boring.”
“Singin’ in the Rain”: This isn’t nearly as cool as “the Wall.” I mean, it’s raining and he’s singing. So what?
“City Lights”: What? They found a cure for blindness? Holy F**k!
“2001″: The effects in “Star Wars” are much better.”
“The Godfather” : This isn’t violent enough; “Scarface” is a much better Pacino film.
The truth is you either love cinema as an art form or you don’t. These films exist and will always exist, much like great literature, music, and art. Stroheim was 20 years ahead of everyone else working in Hollywood at the time, including his mentor D. W. Griffith. He brought a sophistication to early silent film due to his belief that his intended audience were adults who could think. And, if nothing else, he also brought a sexual kinkiness to film (see the unfinished “Queen Kelly” that I don’t think has been rivaled till the films of the 60s/70s). Pitts getting into a bed full of hand tinted gold coins and wriggling around in sexual esctasy is just a relevant today as it was in the 20s, don’t you think?
In her autobiography, Irene Mayer Selznick wrote about watching the director’s cut:
“It was masterful in ways, and parts of it were riveting, but it was an exhausting experience; the film in conception was a considerable exercise in self-indulgence, and a testament to the incompetence of the previous regime. When it was cut further, it still seemed over-length, except to certain critics who decried the desecration of a masterpiece — and the myth has been carried on by increasing numbers of people who, of course, never saw the original and who heard about it from others who also hadn’t seen it. I was there — and, as it happens, on von Stroheim’s side in advance and prepared to do battle. When it was over, nobody said a word — including me.”
“The truth is you either love cinema as an art form or you don’t. These films exist and will always exist, much like great literature, music, and art.”
If you really loved cinema you wouldn’t degrade your students’ opinions. If they feel Scarface is better, let them explain why they think so. It’s ridiculous that people like you try to firmly establish objective tastes when it’s clearly impossible
Rashad,
Adult education is not a democracy. I’m not there to indulge them or build up their self-esteem. All I can do is expose them to classic/great cinema and show them why these films are highly regarded. They either get it or don’t.
I’m with Rashad on this one. It’s not a fucking club. (again, to return to my earlier rant) by not liking “Naked” I was somehow relegated, (by some film snobs I knew), to being instead a fan of “Doc Hollywood” and “City Slickers 2: The Legend of Curley’s Gold”. As if I didn’t pass the test to get into hipsterville. I like Mike Leigh. I just didn’t dig “Naked”, that’s all.
I’m a fan of much of Stroheim’s work, and “Greed” certainly isn’t awful…. I just fail to see why it is considered such an undisputed, all-time classic.
And, scene. As they say. Interesting little thought experiment, this turned out.
I think Rashad is a moron. I place into evidence his opinions here.
I sit contentedly undegraded.
70% kidding!
Students are hard. You can’t hardly explain to them before certain scenes why they are so brilliant- that could destroy the power of first-time visual discovery, but if they aren’t yet trained for it, or their attention spans are so warped by the modern world and their visual experience, how can they understand. Some student will, some won’t. However, “boring” is the easy refuge of possibly shallow thinking. I’ve just cut myself off at the knees because I can’t declare this thread boring.
Action: lose the insecurity- who gives a crap what people think?
GREED is a character study. It takes its time to allow said characters to degenerate at a realistic pace. People impatient for something to blow up are simply not going to get it. It’s their loss, but if they’re happy, I’m not about to tell them to change their way of thinking.
In her autobiography, Irene Mayer Selznick wrote about watching the director’s cut
an unimpeachable source and a true giant of cinematic taste
I’m a wholesome diet regime fan, I am positive the ZiXiuTang Slimming is the best, I prefer it really significantly. If you’d like to turn into more slender fine? So hurriedly action! The Fruta Planta Diet Pills retailer possess a lot of healthful diet program products for you to pick. Such as Letpin Slim Coffe.