Erich von Stroheim

[Scharphedin2]

Erich von Stroheim (1885-1957)




FIilmography

Blind Husbands (1919) Kino (R1) / Filmmuseum Edition (R2 DE) / mk2 (R2 FR)*

The Devil's Passkey (1920)

Foolish Wives (1922) Kino (R1) / mk2 (R2 FR)*

Merry-Go-Round (uncredited, 1923) Image Entertainment (R1)

Greed (1924) Culture Publishers (R2 JP)

The Merry Widow (1925)

The Honeymoon (1928)

The Wedding March (1928)

Queen Kelly (1929) Kino (R1) / mk2 (R2 FR)*

The Great Gabbo (uncredited, 1929) Kino (R1) - included as extra on Blind Husbands / Alpha (R1)

Hello Sister (1933)


* Included in Erich von Stroheim Box Set


General Discussion

Von Stroheim's Greed

Also, see the Kino boutique thread for scattered comments on that label's releases of Blind Husbands, Foolish Wives and Queen Kelly.

The Wedding March


Recommended Web Resources

Not a lot is available on the internet. There is a cursory overview of Stroheim's career at Wikipedia; Silent Era has a profile; Bright Lights Film Journal published an article in 2007 by Tom Sutpen; an unsigned article on the religion of Stroheim at Adherents; and another paper written by a student at Stanford. Jonathan Rosenbaum's article on the reconstruction of Greed is also available online, as referenced by Via_Chicago below.

[Scharphedin2]

In an effort to decide whether to retire my Laserdisc player last night, I viewed excerpts from a few films that are still not available on DVD. One of them was Greed. I viewed some of the opening with McTeague working in the coalmine, and parts of the climactic scenes in Death Valley. The visual splendor of these scenes are of course legendary, but I was still impressed at seeing them again. What an amazing film! It is unfathomable to me that this of all films is still nowhere to be found (except in Japan). I also viewed a few clips from the equally unavailable The Crowd, The Lusty Men and Bullfighter and the Lady, after which I decided to give the player another lease on life.

As a result of viewing those clips from Greed, I became curious to find an article that I thought I had read on the internet some years ago on the premiere of a "reconstruction" of the film. I could not find this article, so if anyone knows the location, please let me know. And if anyone has actually seen this reconstruction in a theatre, what was the impression?

And also, if anyone owns the Japanese DVD release of the film from Culture Publishers, comments would be welcome... Is it the reconstructed version, or the "original" cut?

[Knappen]

Maybe thisis the article you were looking for?

The 1999 reconstruction has been shown on TCM a couple of times. It is basically a filling out of the plot holes with the use of promotional stills from the film. It works well enough, but the constant use of zoom in the still images (an addition of 100 minutes) to create some movement is a bit annoying.

Some caps:

[Via_Chicago]

Scharphedin, were you thinking of the Rosenbaum article, featured in his book Essential Cinema, and which originally appeared in the Chicago Reader? It can be found here.

[zedz]

The 1999 reconstruction has been shown on TCM a couple of times. It is basically a filling out of the plot holes with the use of promotional stills from the film. It works well enough, but the constant use of zoom in the still images (an addition of 100 minutes) to create some movement is a bit annoying.

The reconstruction is a must-see, but somewhat frustrating for the reasons you suggest. I view it as a cast-iron argument for the greatness of the lost film rather than a great film itself (or even a particularly satisfactory substitute for it).

I always find the stills route problematic, as the stills photographer on a set is really doing a completely different job to the cinematographer. That London After Midnight reconstruction is almost unwatchable. The posed, emblematic shots give the impression of relentless mugging, and all that sub-Burns zooming and panning is intensely irritating. (Unless Browning and von Stroheim borrowed Fritz Lang's zoom lens and steadicam for these particular films!)

[Scharphedin2]

Thanks for all the valuable feedback. I would like to see the "reconstruction," although based on past experiences I am not that fond of the practice commented on above, of inserting production stills and text/voiceover to bridge gaps. As truncated as the surviving version of Greed is, I still think it plays. Hopefully, when and if the film is finally released, it will offer an option of viewing it with and without the "reconstructed" segments (maybe with the added possibility of viewing those segments as a separate visual essay).

Interesting to see the gold coloring of crucial objects in the film as illustrated in Knappen's stills. I believe this was also missing from the cut that I own on LD.

The Rosenbaum article may well be what I read, although I am fairly sure that I remember the piece being illustrated with stills. In any event, thanks for the link Via_Chicago, it is a good article that I am sure others will benefit from as well.

[hearthesilence]

I have to disagree. I hated the reconstruction, so much that I seriously doubt the 'original' uncut version would've been that good, start-to-finish.

The studio cut several moments that were striking for their brutality (and they're still striking even as moving stills), but they also cut two opposing subplots that did no one any favors. Eliminating them focused the picture into something tighter and more subtle - the awful, syrupy love story between the two elderly neighbors is wretched mush and certainly diluted the film's power.

I can't imagine how Von Stroheim could've sustained anyone's interest for eight hours when the reconstruction couldn't do it in four. As is, I'd have to recommend the theatrical release as the best version currently available, but given the results, that's hardly a tragedy.

[HerrSchreck]

After eight hours the reviewers lucky enough to see the original cut said they were ready for more, that it was the most amazing cinematic experience of their lives.. maybe not totally unanimous, but thats the gist fo the majority. I've had the WB VHS of the schmidlin reconstruction since it came out (the same tinted source as the broadcast in Knappens caps) and though it's no "movie" per se, it's a road map towards understanding what was originally committed to celluloid, allowing you to imagine and fathom the depth of the achievement and obsession-- and profound aesthetic on display.

Of course one must think of Stroeheims masterpieces the same way we think of Lang's behemoth masterworks-- the Germans has the intelligence and appreciation to spread Mabuse der Spieler, and Die Nibelungen across two releases, as multiple movies... not meant as one sitting. Considering the utter modernity, the rampant decadence, and lush visual sense, Streoheim to me is every bit the equal of his counterparts on the other side of the world in Germany.For god's sakes we're talking early 20's... the visual expression is just incredible.

Those sequences with the junkman are some of the most avant garde looking pieces of cinema I've never seen. I think Greed is quite an achievement, and it's tough to judge the squeaky peachy elderly neighbors because there is no junkman sequence.. slimy, rampantly filthy, gone mad in smelly darkness and obsession... to bounce it off of. It's like looking at the highlights in a painting without the figure that they are highlighting. Greed, the fact of the form that it comes down to us today, is a terrible, agonizing tragedy. As though a couple of morons at Shakespeare & co had no idea what they were dealing with and started tearing pages out of Ulysses because they thought nobody would "get" it. The imbeciles already had plenty of precedent in Europe-- Germany as well as the serials of France-- to break the thing into pieces and make even more money off of multiple films-- instead of one-- but alas... this was Hollywood.

Another which many people are not entirely cognizant of is Foolish Wives, a monstrous masterpiece, was supposed to be twice the length of what we have today... and my personal favorite from EVS.

He never made a bad film.

[Rick Schmidlin]

I really wish WB would put Greed out on DVD 8-)

[Jeff]

I really wish WB would put Greed out on DVD 8-)

Don't we all! We have a thread just for pining for Greed, Rick. It seems like if Warner really had this in this works (as they've been claiming for years), you'd be among the first to know. You've heard nothing?

[Rick Schmidlin]

You've heard nothing?[/quote]

Nope

[HerrSchreck]

Warner Brothers are pathetic. They announce a release date, let it go by, and say nothing about it. This after already breaking a previous release date-- not only for Greed, but this announcement was for the second Chaney set from TCM, the Vidors i e The Crowd & The Big Parade, plus Sjostrom's american masterpieces i e The Wind, The Scarlet Letter (He Who Gets Slapped would wind up in the Chaney II if memory of the proposed lineup of titles serves).

If you know any guys over there, tell them for me, with a thick NYC Bronx accent "youse knuckleheads stink like eau de bum".

[myrnaloyisdope]

Agreed on the frustration with the lack of silents from WB. I would love a remastered version of The Crowd on DVD. It's a damned shame that the majors keep sitting on these great films, and even though WB has the best track record for tapping into their back catalogue, they still have a huge backlog of great films just waiting for a DVD release.

Aargh, I wish more people gave a shit about this, then both sides could be happy: we could get the films we want, and the studios could make money. As it stands we are a niche market, and it seems a small niche market.

[Knappen]

Stroheim retrospective at the Musée d'Orsay next month.

[Tribe]

Anyone familiar with Hello, Sister? My only point of reference to is is a description Shipman's The Story of Cinema (now terribly reliable, and sometimes one questions whether he actually did see some of the movies he claims to have actually seen, but still it's pretty comprehensive for pre-1980s cinema).

Hello Sister is described as something as a companion piece to Borzage's Bad Girl. Apparently von Stroheim was fired from the production at some point and the credit went to Alfred Werker. It was claimed that the film was entirely re-hot (it's original name was Walking Down Broadway), but Shipman disputes this pointing based on a so-called rape scene and a visit to a gynecologist which leads Shipman to claim those as "typical Von Stroheim touch[es]."

Any comments and/or recommendations about this? Is it available anywhere on DVD?

EDIT: Actually I found a nice run down on it over at Not Coming to a Theater Near You.

[Knappen]

It was shown on French tv under a year ago. Not that much to save, I'm afraid.

[ptmd]

Hello Sister is a fascinating disaster; 90% of it is reshot footage (most of it quite bad, although one scene in a carnival that was supposedly shot by an uncredited Raoul Walsh is very interesting), but the 10% of Stroheim's material that pops up intermittently makes this well worth seeing. His original design could have been really tremendous, but the studio thought it was too uncommercial (and likely to upset local censors) and they, once again, destroyed the footage. No version of it is available on DVD anywhere, alas, but there are decent 35s available. Koszarski has a detailed description of the whole production history of the film in his book.

[HerrSchreck]

Great Gabbo, on the other hand, is a totally excellent, great big pile of Weird.

[Props55]

For those who have access Koszarski also wrote a fairly long article on the shooting of HELLO SISTER/WALKING DOWN BROADWAY for Film Comment in the early/mid '70s. Heck, it may be the basis for the chapter in his book but the article has a lot of great photos and outlines the changes between concept and final form in great detail.

Amen on GREAT GABBO, Schrecko! In fact it seems to be the beginning of the "insane ventriloquist" horror line that later produced the Redgrave episode in DEAD OF NIGHT, our fave DEVIL DOLL (with "Janus-faced" Bryant Halliday!) and that creepy TWILIGHT ZONE with Cliff Robertson. A friend of mine had a "Stroheim Night" around Halloween several years ago with GABBO, THE LADY AND THE MONSTER and Mann's THE GREAT FLAMMARION. Unfortunately missing was Lew Landers PRC THE MASK OF DIJON with mistress Denise Vernac. I've still never seen it.

[hearthesilence]

Funny to see my old comments on Greed here. That opinion isn't quite so strong anymore - I definitely appreciate what evidence remains of the junk man sequences, and while I'm still not a fan of the elderly couple sequences, I don't mind sitting through them anymore.

Regardless, Film Forum here in NYC is showing 35mm prints of Stroheim's major works. They've already shown some of his key films as an actor as well as Greed, but the rest are coming up.

I've yet to see Foolish Wives and The Merry Widow in good quality, so I'm definitely catching those. I've seen Blind Husbands which is very good, a very fine, promising debut - it lays the groundwork for the masterpieces to come in terms of themes and style. I may catch it at Film Forum as well, along with The Wedding March - I don't think those two films are his very best work, but they're still good films from a comparatively small body of directorial work. (Eleven, correct?)

[knives]

Depending on how you count 12.

[hearthesilence]

Depending on how you count 12.

HA! Probably the only master filmmaker who had it worse than Orson Welles. (Correction - Stroheim and Jean Vigo.)

[knives]

Though he did it to himself on a lot of those occasions.

[Cold Bishop]

HA! Probably the only master filmmaker who had it worse than Orson Welles. (Correction - Stroheim and Jean Vigo.)

Somewhere, Michael Cimino gently weeps over unsold copies of The Sicilian.

Though he did it to himself on a lot of those occasions.

Then again, don't they all?

[stroszeck]

Welles, Cimino, Stroheim....most of these guys were geniuses but were tremendously difficult people to deal with. And it had to do more than just excessive spending, they were genuinely unpleasant and tyrannical on set and behind the scenes. At the end of the day, regardless of how brilliant someone is, very few people want to deal with taking shit. And thats ultimately what destroyed them - their ego.