criterionforum.org

There is one frame of each original intertitle available, which should have been used to recreate original German intertitles. See the photograph in the Flicker Alley booklet on the top left of page 4 [taking the front cover of the booklet to be page 1 (there are no page numbers in the booklet)].

Thanks Nick! Of course I can't look it up in the booklet, but what you say seems to indicate that both the original text and the original typography are in fact available and have been used for the resto? That's even better than I hoped.

I was lucky enough to see the BFI's A COTTAGE ON DARTMOOR, with Stephen Horne's wonderful score, and concur with HerrSchreck. This is a major British film, and deserves heaps more recognition. A true rediscovery, a wonderful film.

[quote87="Tommaso"]Thanks Nick! Of course I can't look it up in the booklet, but what you say seems to indicate that both the original text and the original typography are in fact available and have been used for the resto? That's even better than I hoped.[/quote87]
Neither FWMS nor Flicker Alley used the original German intertitle frames. We've been provided with Flicker Alley's master (Flicker Alley prepared it for FWMS). We'd rather have the original German intertitles, and this is what's holding up the MoC release I'm afraid.

[quote0f="peerpee"]I was lucky enough to see the BFI's A COTTAGE ON DARTMOOR, with Stephen Horne's wonderful score, and concur with HerrSchreck. This is a major British film, and deserves heaps more recognition. A true rediscovery, a wonderful film.[/quote0f]
Completely agree - in fact, all of Anthony Asquith's silent films are well worth seeing ([i0f]Shooting Stars[/i0f] and [i0f]Underground[/i0f] being the others). They're a particular surprise if you're only familiar with his much stuffier and stagier sound films - though I think those are somewhat underrated too.

Nick, as to the intertitles-- it is a bit vague on my end, as the Berriatua article focuses on the disposition of the neg viz tinting "The colors of PHANTOM" is the title (for those who don't own it) by recounting the various surgeries done to the original neg as it passed thru different hands. It's hard to determine what disposition the neg stands in now and whether or not all of those 1923-added (by Ufa, when they absorbed Decla Bioskop which produced the film the year prior) flash titles still stand, or knocked out by the Russians ... it seems to suggest they left it alone and created a dupe interneg into which they placed their own intertitles... but it's a bit unclear as they precede that info with "PHANTOM's negative underwent no further changes until the 60's when it was reviewed and duplicated by the Russians after showing up in an E Berlin archive. Russian intertitles, translated literally from the flash titles (the above mentioned ones added in 23) were added to the interneg". It then goes on to mention the new editing of the orig neg by adding new intertitles by the Russians for duping and circulation.

As for the original cut of the negative before it was touched by anyone but Murnau & Decla, Berriatua says "..regarding the intertitles, the few notes present seem to correspond to the first rough cut. These notes, always about intertitles inserted into a scene, consist of the first words of the intertitle text written in ink on a few scratched frames." SO when the film was repossessed a year later by UFA, they added single frame flash titles, but all the subsequent busting up of this original neg to serve different ends and owners (sound film editing/printing, East Germans, Russians, unified modern Germany again) led me to construe that the last intertitles in the film prior to it's reposession by the Germans, pre FWMS, were probably Russian, or Russian attempts to reconstruct the original titles... in either sense probably dubious and requiring a look at the script or censor records for verification.

So are you saying that the original, 1923 UFA insert flash titles are still in there Nick? I thought that would be a little odd, considering that the original handwritten title notes are still there, too.

SO will this be an NTSC region 0 release Nick, like the Naruse (if memory serves), since the orig transfer was in NTSC, or are you going to be preconverting (I think I understood that you were using the NTSC tape Jeff Massino's struck on behalf of the FWMS) to PAL?

Heads-up for those who haven't been following the [i9c]Phantom Carriage[/i9c] thread. There's a Swedish box set in the works from Svensk Filmindustri (SF), containing these films:
[list9c][i9c]Terje Vigen[/i9c] (a.k.a. [i9c]A Man There Was[/i9c])
[i9c]The Phantom Carriage[/i9c]
[i9c]The Story of Gösta Berling[/i9c]
[i9c]Erotikon[/i9c]
[i9c]Sir Arne's Treasure[/i9c]
[i9c]Häxan[/i9c][/list9c]All films are sourced from the Swedish Film Institute's restorations (I think we can take Swedish intertitles as a given) (...well, Norwegian for [i9c]Terje[/i9c]). Musical scores by Matti Bye. English subtitles on all films. Extras include short films, production stills, interviews, and fragments of lost films. The extras will have English subtitles, too.

I don't think it has an official release date yet, but it looks likely that it will appear before Christmas. Ho ho ho!

[quotefd="ola t"]I don't think it has an official release date yet, but it looks likely that it will appear before Christmas. Ho ho ho![/quotefd]
According to THIS site, the 28/11/2007 is the projected release date.

George

Excellent. Will these be available on their own? Although some extras for the other films would be great, the only film not available elsewhere is "Terje Vigen", and that definitely would be a great addition to all silent film collections.

And although I'm not all that big on the film itself, if there has been any additonal work done on GOSTA BERLING, that might be a welcome addition.

SInce I suspect its the same very old resto in evidence on last years Kino Stiller trilogy, I can't understand why SFI took the most famous film of the three and left it in its' oldest state. Versus the nice work that was done on EROTIKON (save the discs wildly inappropriate score, which may be the sinister work of Kino who have no taste in this stuff) as well as the ab-so-frickin-lutely sublime SIR ARNE'S TREASURE, GOSTA looks positively archaic. I'm sure a hi-def transfer and some photochemical tinting at the very least in combination could bring this epic up to speed. In terms of quality, the elements really stuck out like a sore thumb to me. Especially considering what a pivotal-- breakout, really-- film the project was forthose involved.

Meanwhile, Warner deserves general tossing of spitballs for their endless delays of the American Sjostroms, not to mention the rest of their "forthcoming" silent catalog which is already a year late, based on HTF chat schedules.

well well well. It looks like the von Gerlach GRIESHUUS has been restored for some time now. Decent review on IMDB:

[quotea3]User Comments (Comment on this title)
Rediscovered classic, 17 November 2005

Author: Igenlode Wordsmith ([email protected]) from England
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

It's not very often that one gets the chance to attend the international premiere of a film first made some eighty years previously! But while "The Sentimental Bloke" and "Beyond the Rocks", the other two silent classics of the 2005 London Film festival, had both received well-publicised screenings abroad, we were given to understand that we were the first ever audience to glimpse the restored "Chronicles of the Grey House", a long-since-forgotten German prestige production from the 1920s. In common with, I suspect, most of the rest of the packed auditorium, I knew nothing whatsoever about what we might expect from the picture: so was it worth the rediscovery?

To my great satisfaction I can report that the answer is 'Yes' -- this is no "Beyond the Rocks", mythologised by the mere fact of its loss, but a film worthy of taking its place in the canon of German silents; the director's early death was a loss to posterity. It is beautifully filmed, expressively acted and distinctive in its extensive use of location photography. The setting, in what seems to be a feudal-era German state, is alien to an English audience, and I can't answer for the authenticity of the costumes and customs shown; but they looked very convincing!

The plot is the stuff of melodrama, almost of archetype: the young lord who falls in love with a beautiful low-born maid, the two noble brothers at odds with one another, the contested will, the blasted heath and the house brought to ruin, as we see in the opening shots. But it's not as inevitably tragic as that introductory scene makes it seem -- indeed, this was a question I found others too discussing with puzzlement after the film. With a flashback structure, a modern audience, at least, assumes that at some point by the end of the film the action will have reached the moment in time at which we started: "Chronicles of the Grey House" doesn't do this, and the result is rather disconcerting, leaving the viewer hanging, as it were. We are never actually shown how the 'present-day' situation comes about, and we never learn the identity of the traveller upon the heath, although we can hazard a guess. I suspect the intended audience were expected to be rather more familiar with Theodor Storm's original story...

The film encompasses a moving romance, played with great appeal by the attractive young leads, Paul Hartmann and Lil Dagover, some rousing action scenes in which Hartmann shows to conviction, light touches of humour, tragedy in the style of high drama, and a great sensitivity to the moods of the countryside. The landscape ranges from dark and brooding to idyllic in the shifting days and seasons, reflecting the tone of every scene and its characters' perceptions much as background music would be used today. The characters are all three-dimensional, neither wholly good nor bad but merely human in their weaknesses -- with the possible exception of Junker Detlef's ambitious aristocratic wife! Lil Dagover, in the part of the maiden Barbara, particularly impressed me with the sensitivity of her performance as well as her beauty, and the child who plays Rolf showed astonishing talent for his age.

I did feel that the beginning and the end, unfortunately, were probably the weakest parts. The opening scene is quite simply creaky in its melodrama, somewhat reminiscent of the introduction to a tongue-in-cheek horror, while the actions of the characters at the end owe more to archetype and less to individuality -- we are given fewer glimpses into motivation and the plot starts to feel a bit rushed. It all gets a bit far-fetched and Wagnerian and we lose track of the human side... or at least I did.

My only criticism of the restoration itself, however -- the print quality is so good you don't even think about it -- would be the translation used for the subtitling. My German isn't very good, and the original intertitles are retained in their heavy pre-war Gothic typeface, making them a challenge to read, but even from what I could make out I would say that in places the English version is actively misleading. The decision to render 'Junker', a minor aristocratic title, as the adjective 'young', leads to a surreal exchange where a peasant addresses the landowner's son patronisingly as 'young man' whilst in the original dialogue he is emphasising Junker Hinrich's feudal responsibilities: 'young Master' might have corresponded more closely to the social equivalent. And I have a strong suspicion that a significant story element has been obscured by another choice in translation: my scanty knowledge of medieval law suggests that the reason why Hinrich's father is so adamantly opposed to his marriage and the justification used by Detlef to set aside the claims of his brother's family to the estate are that Bärbe and her father are not merely peasants but *serfs* -- legally unfree -- and that any child Hinrich fathers upon such a wife will be born into serfdom in turn and unable to inherit. If I'm right, then if only the translator had been familiar with this one word, a good deal of otherwise unexplained confusion could have been cleared up.

Be that as it may, the film is definitely worth seeing, not only for its good looks and technical accomplishment but simply as historical fiction with a distinctively Teutonic slant. It shows its age a little, but this is quality cinema. [/quotea3]
For those interested but perhaps not going to buy the upcoming Kino disc of Lubitsch's DIE PUPPE, the MoMa will be showing the 2006 doc Ernst Lubitsch in Berlinale From Schoenhauser Allee to Hollywood, at Thursday, November 8, 2007
6:15 p.m.

Briefly back to "Phantom", as I watched my recording of the arte transmission yesterday.

[quotee1="HerrSchreck"]So are you saying that the original, 1923 UFA insert flash titles are still in there Nick? [/quotee1]
It would definitely appear to be so, regarding what the header to the German version says. The way it is done in the German version is similar to the resto of "Spione": original intertitles AND re-done intertitles which are 'signed' with the FWMS logo. A nice way to do it, as it enables us to follow a little bit what was restored and how much of it. There are VERY few of the 'signed' and thus recreated titles: the initial title card reading "Phantom" (NOT the credit list following immediately after), all titles indicating the beginnings and ends of 'acts', and two or three other titles in between, including the letter of Lorenz' dismissal from his job. Everything else seems to be taken from the original flash titles.

And having finally been able to see this film: I really understand why all those who saw the Flicker Alley are blown away. This is a highly intense film, probably because it almost completely avoids the melodrama that Harbou's script would invite almost any other director to fall into. It doesn't make the weakness of the story disappear completely, but Murnau manages to show proceedings with a very cold, analytic, almost cynical eye. A really disturbing account of petit bourgeois ambitions and aspirations, and probably also a commentary on the 'dreams' of young artists (or would-be artists). The title need not just mean Veronika, but also the idea of getting famous or trying to break out of that inhibiting society. In this respect, the 'happy ending' almost marrs everything that went before. Good acting, too, mostly, and it's always a pleasure to see the wonderful Lil Dagover, of course.

And one could endlessly rave about the restoration of course: these COLOURS... even if they were made digitally, I have to say: probably the most beautiful tintings I ever saw on a silent.... So to all those who still wait for the MoC: don't miss it, this is a real, real treat.

The primary reason for the mental blowout was the transfer itself (I had already seen the film, first in parts-- it was once thought a partially lost film--, then in a tv broadcast rip.. I recently got a very nice dupe of a tv rip that looked very nice, but I'd already had the full FA resto), which again I REPEAT is the finest transfer of a silent film I have ever EVER seen. The quality of the telecine, combined with the effect of the quality of the source materials (orig neg in fantastic condition), which have been so lovingly restored and beautifully tinted, (and the superhigh bitrates of the Flicker Alley encoding, which is native to Flicker Alley/R1 so completely devoid of digital artifacts) just make it absolutely superb. I heard Nick say he wanted to eat the transfer of DAYS OF HEAVEN the cc was so exquisite... Flicker Alleys presentation of PHANTOM is so exemplary I'd like to (ahem, if uh ahem [i22]girth [/i22]uh issues uh didn't create a probelm ah you know what I mean haw haw haw) insert myself into the disc hole.

Seriously-- if the MoC (I expect Nick is going to stay w the NTSC standard as he did w Naruse to avoid the ghosting in Kinos or much of the non-Moc Eureka silent catalog of non-native transfers i e Griffiths) matches the FA then you boys on the other side of the pond are going to cream in your habedashery. Don't let a television broadcast paint you the full picture of what this film looks like Tom. Like the dif Tribe was talking about betwen the seeing TCM broadcast of Kino/FWMS's POTEMKIN vs getting the Kino disc and seeing that way. Like nite and day.

Another nice thing about PHANTOM restored is that the contrast is so rich, full, and basically intact with no deterioration vs the original release prints, that it stands up well to the rich tinting schematic. Here the tints are rich and deep in zones (say, like WACHSFIGURENKABINETT).. they can also be delicate in places like the peach/sepia tones used for the intorductory scenes, like the establishing shots of the house w Dagover & Abel, where she tells him to write it down in the book. But the rich deep blues and greens do not overwhelm a deteriorated contrast, like the above mentioned Leni where the newly applied fullstrength tints are a bit powerful for the faded prints used to stand up to.. so they come off a bit overwhelmed by the colors.

I find the film a bit melodramatic in parts, and I have the rare experience of not being vcrazy about an Al Abel performance. I usually admire the man's enormous restraint and subtlty (which apparently was his schtick.. you see it all over, say, METROPOLIS, for example, where he exudes great power and confidence with the tiniest of gestures which he trusted the camera to capture for him... this is advanced-for-the-time FILM ACTING, versus what is needed for the stage; knowing that Freunds camera will pick up and magnify to the umpteenth iconic power on a gigantic screen what would pass unnoted onstage), but in PHANTOM I find him a little too childlike, harmlessly naiive and innocent. Especially since we are supposed to buy him as a genuine poet.. I'd expect him to have a little bit more dimension to him than the hypersimplistic image created onscreen. Of course Murnau paints these dimensions for him by rendering his dream world and visualizing his deterioation and states of obsession. There is actually a dissolve (I believe its where Abel fantasizes the grand scenario on the steps of City Hall with his dream girl) that is combined with a defocus where Abel's eyes have their reflected points of light/glint expand into little plates.. whereby it looks like his eyes grow and simultaneously lose their pupils... big white saucers. It's a quite disconcerting effect and yet brilliant as a visual metaphor, whether intended or not its the magic or Murnau.

Regardless of its simplicity it is a visual masterpiece on those terms alone, simply ravishing. Bteween SCHLOSS VOGELOD (which I have in its entirety and is a not very impressive entry in the Old Dark House murder mystery all the rage on the stage, thenscreen, back then) and this film, you see the man ramping up into masterpieceville in huge steps. You have interesting and very good projects (BRENNENDE ACKER a very visually haunting film with beautiful work by Freund.. and Wagner I believe too), then you hit NOS, and that's all she wrote. Jewel after jewel, one after another, with a sense of visual poetry and pictorialism that set the paradigm still in huge effect today.

Griffith/Italians --> Murnau/Stroeheim --> von Sternberg / John Ford ---> what we have today, with interesting variations and experiments along the way.

[quote83="HerrSchreck"] Don't let a television broadcast paint you the full picture of what this film looks like Tom. Like the dif Tribe was talking about betwen the seeing TCM broadcast of Kino/FWMS's POTEMKIN vs getting the Kino disc and seeing that way. Like nite and day.[/quote83]
I sure believe this but have to say that even on the TV broadcast (and then even more compressed via the dvd recorder) the image was absolutely stunning, blowing away many, if not most of the silents I have on proper dvd. Well, even better if this is even more improved by Flicker Alley or MoC. I'm sure Nick will do his utmost to at least match the Flicker Alley imagewise.

[quote83="HerrSchreck"]but in PHANTOM I find him a little too childlike, harmlessly naiive and innocent. Especially since we are supposed to buy him as a genuine poet.. I'd expect him to have a little bit more dimension to him than the hypersimplistic image created onscreen. [/quote83]
Interesting, because I actually interpreted Murnau's intention differently. I thought that precisely because he is like you describe him, we are NOT supposed to think he's a genuine poet, and that this was an important point that Murnau/Harbou were trying to make. His idea that he is a poet is as much a 'phantom' like the girl he pursues, and whereas he himself of course believes in it, the audience are to understand immediately that he follows an illusion. And via the way this very 'narrow' society he lives in is drawn (pure hypocrisy all around, apart from the bookseller and his daughter, who believe in him) we get also to learn WHY he follows this illusion. It's a sort of childlike rebellion, motivated and hindered at the same time by his background. The eternal dream of wanting to 'break out' but on the other hand being fully embued with the oppressive ideals you grew up with. That is why I found the ending so unconvincing. He has to go through the trials and tribulations, but in the end he's rewarded with a nice house in the countryside and - even better - with Lil Dagover. Nothing like this would happen in the real world....

I'm hoping someone can tell me whether the Alpha release of Shadows with Lon Chaney is likely to look better than other bargain-bin releases of it. The cover looks like this

[img9b]http://www.dvdpacific.com/imageups/44093.jpg[/img9b]

which is what I should have gotten from the Half.com seller from whom I ordered it. Instead I got one with a blurry bluish cover that reads "The 1922 Silent Film Classic" along the top and then says "Another early gem from Lon Chaney!" The fine print on the back says it's from Miracle Pictures. Sorry I don't have an image of it.

Since they didn't sell me the item I ordered (UPCs are supposed to match the listing page exactly) I can send it back for a refund, but to do so it would have to remain sealed, so I can't pop it in to see how bad it looks before deciding. If this one is likely to be exactly the same as the Alpha release, I probably shouldn't bother to return it. I know there's little chance that anyone has compared these, but any comments would be appreciated on the Alpha DVD's transfer and whether it might be superior in some ways to what else is out there. In the Silent Era review of it, they said

[quote9b]This budget edition is watchable, with a good transfer of a very-good (what appears to be) 16mm reduction print that is compromised by a number of splices, dust, speckling, and some contrastiness, but is not a bad disc for the moderate cost.[/quote9b]
Any advice?

I have seen the alpha and own the image ent. david shepard blackhawk ed doubleheader w Browning's OUTSIDE THE LAW, which is much better than the alpha which is actually not TOO bad. But whereas the alpha is a decent transfer of an often contrast-blasted 16, the image feautures a very passable transfer of either a 35 or excellent show-at-home-style 16, the ones where you can barely tell the dif.

silentera posts a frame grab from each which well illustrates the dif.

OUTSIDE THE LAW obviously makes it a dealbreaker (if you dont have it already).

[quote4a="Tommasso"] Interesting, because I actually interpreted Murnau's intention differently. I thought that precisely because he is like you describe him, we are NOT supposed to think he's a genuine poet, and that this was an important point that Murnau/Harbou were trying to make. His idea that he is a poet is as much a 'phantom' like the girl he pursues, and whereas he himself of course believes in it, the audience are to understand immediately that he follows an illusion. And via the way this very 'narrow' society he lives in is drawn (pure hypocrisy all around, apart from the bookseller and his daughter, who believe in him) we get also to learn WHY he follows this illusion. It's a sort of childlike rebellion, motivated and hindered at the same time by his background. The eternal dream of wanting to 'break out' but on the other hand being fully embued with the oppressive ideals you grew up with. That is why I found the ending so unconvincing. He has to go through the trials and tribulations, but in the end he's rewarded with a nice house in the countryside and - even better - with Lil Dagover. Nothing like this would happen in the real world....[/quote4a]
Interesting take on the film. I confess that hadn't occurred to me, but I always took the issue of whether or not the guy is "good" as a poet entirely irrelevant (the fact that some already think he's brilliant makes him "successful" in a very basic-- albeit limited-- sense) to the narrative which is about responsibility, cruelty towards uncorrupted naivete, the urge towards escape, the seduction of the world of dreams (dealt with in so many films of Murnau's.. many of his men are not the brightest lights in the world, but are not "guilty" in the strictest sense, though they often lose their battle of wits with the evil in the world, and slip into dreams at every possible moment. I took Lubota to me another along this line.

[quote99="HerrSchreck"]Interesting take on the film. I confess that hadn't occurred to me, but I always took the issue of whether or not the guy is "good" as a poet entirely irrelevant (the fact that some already think he's brilliant makes him "successful" in a very basic-- albeit limited-- sense) to the narrative which is about responsibility, cruelty towards uncorrupted naivete, the urge towards escape, the seduction of the world of dreams[/quote99]
Yes, this is exactly what I felt, too. But in your original post you wrote that "we are supposed to buy him as a genuine poet", whereas I thought that the film makes it clear quite early, when the bookseller recites us one of the poems which we get to read via the intertitles, that the young man's poetry is really bad (at least it's obvious from the original poem, don't know how this comes out in the English version of it). And as we then are not supposed to take the film as a meditation on what happens to young and misunderstood geniuses, it's clear that Murnau here follows again those 'basic' themes' of his that you mention. THe young man stumbles into a world which is not his own, neither socially nor artistically. And in this light his weakness and stiffness is quite convincing to me. He's indeed a dreamer who cannot understand or even[i99] see[/i99] the 'evil' motives of others, and thus loses the battle. And as this seems to me a true observation of what happens to such people in real life, the end of the film seems too 'positive' for me. Of course you have something like this also at the end of "Der letzte Mann", and there even more so. But in the later film it's so overdone, so deux-ex-machina like, that we're not supposed to take the porter becoming a rich and celebrated man at face value but rather as a thing that can only happen in film or in fairy tales. But in "Phantom", I feel that we are to believe genuinely in the 'happy end'. And I simply can't believe in it.

I see what you mean. I never took the poetry recited as meant to be judged as bad (I never thought Lubota was supposed to be judged in [i1f]artistic [/i1f]terms at all, he's just an aspiring artist like so many others, lost in the byways of his mind like so many others; as to his Phantoms, I don't entirely take them as an accusation i e a representation of what's "wrong" with Lubota. They really only ratchet up and start playing with his brain [i1f]after [/i1f]getting whopped in the cabeza via the accident, clearly he had some kind of concussion which doinked him pretty bad; I see him more Victim than Underserving Loser)... especially since the bookseller, considering his occupation, has such an atomic reaction to his work, and the gent who his work is submitted to is presented in almost cartoonish images. Like his dickwad employer and the jerk who visits his home, he is presented in my eyes like the one unguilty man (save his home base in Dagovers shop) in the whole thread. I just took it as an irrelevant question whether or not Lubota was "good" or not. SOme in the film think he's brilliant, one doesn't-- sounds about typical of any poet, and his net worth in the aesthetic dept is really not dwelled upon. I'd actually be interested in what it is about the poem in the intertitles-- remember the time that it appeared, going on ninety years ago-- that makes you think that it is without doubt meant to communicate that Lubota is talent freee (this also renders a judgement call about Dagover & the shop owner, if true, for thinking it's "good"). I saw the tale about the repercussions about this bad break (his work's rejection, his heart's rejection, his getting rolled over by a cruel world literally-- i e the horse cart-- and figuratively), which is common ground for any aspiring artist, be he great or lousy, on this underdeveloped dreamer. The issue is his childlike vulnerability to his dream world which has amped up owing to his awful circumstances at home, and now the concussion, and made him an escapist, and incapable of dealing in the real world owing to lack of experience.

I think what also bothers me is Abel's age... I just think he looks a bit too old for his part, and the one dimensional portrait of a man rhapsodising ethereally about Muses et al just a touch one dimensional.

[quote40="HerrSchreck"]I'd actually be interested in what it is about the poem in the intertitles-- remember the time that it appeared, going on ninety years ago-- that makes you think that it is without doubt meant to communicate that Lubota is talent freee [/quote40]
Not necessarily talent free, but remember that the book seller says: "he's not just a talent, he's a genius". Here's what the poem looks like in the original:

Bist Du es, Muse,
Die in ihren Dienst mich nimmt,
Und wie die Sphinx
mit Krallen aus der Brust
mir reißt mein Lied?

Freely translated:

Is it you, Muse,
who takes me in her service
and like the sphinx
with claws from my breast
draws my song?

Weellll.... this is totally conventional (even for the time, about 1900) with its call to the muse, and the imagery of the sphinx, apart from being old hat as well, certainly doesn't fit into the muse part, too. In other words: rather derivative, overdone and not exactly in good taste (admittedly, very much in the vein of fin de siecle poetry which often wasn't very much better). Whatever you think of it, certainly not a work of originality and genius, I'd say.
That the bookseller thinks otherwise might indicate his good-naturedness, but despite his profession also a somewhat 'unrefined' taste (here again one could argue about the difference between life in the small town and the big city). And the Dagover character then would also be meant to be easily impressed, precisely because of her inexperience with the 'things of the world' (which isn't meant derogatively, neither by Murnau nor by me, it's just an observation).

[quote40="HerrSchreck"] The issue is his childlike vulnerability to his dream world which has amped up owing to his awful circumstances at home, and now the concussion, and made him an escapist, and incapable of dealing in the real world owing to lack of experience.[/quote40]
Definitely true, so one could argue that the same thing would have happened if he had intended to set up a restaurant, a clothes' shop or any other business. The 'bad' poetry only enhances these tendencies you describe, and in this respect it is indeed not a big issue, but it underlines the rift between reality and dream. That any other young poet/artist would get the same different reactions to his works (good or bad) is not so important, I'd say. But as I said before: I also don't think it's a film about artists in the world, but basically a film about dreamers (of any kind) not being able to cope with reality.

And I fully agree with what you say about Abel's age (though this didn't disturb me). But I believe that the one-dimensional portrayal is intentional, as, so to speak, he isn't grown up enough to have more than this one dimension to himself.

I truly dont think there's a single soul alive on the planet who is "one dimensional" in the fashion we understand it.

Of course this is the cinema, where normal rules dont apply, so that doesnt mean anything. I just think the portrayal is part of the Harbouian (soiunds so Arabic! or maybe Armenian?) melodramatic simplicity to which this film is often and justifiably (to my sensibility) called to task for.

Again, there is not (to my mind) enough exposition-- or examples of verse-- of a judgement on Lubota's aesthetic qualities for me to believe that we are to render a harsh judgement on his abilities as a poet. Poetry of the stripe that he's trying to write (sort of Percy Bysshe Shellyesque, with the windy proclamations viz the artists breezy worlds and motivations and associations with the gods of the ancient globe) reads equally ridiculous, especially when excerpted without context or having a Big Name (like a rapper on amateur nite at the Apollo!).

And recall that the film itself is in essence "Lubotas book"... we are seeing what he has written as he recalls the sins of his immediate past. The frame story sets up the telling of the film as he begins writing, and ends as he closes the book. So in that sense his book is as good as Murnau's film/Hauptmanns book. And since Murnau put all his effort into this flick, I think the idea is that there is quite a bit of Hauptmann in Lubota, and quite a bit of Lubotas muse in the films unfolding. I really think the series of judgements about the cruelties lurking in the world waiting to waylay the uncorrupted dreamers just absolutely vaporizes if we are supposed to believe out of hand that Lubota is a total hack. It's not at all different from NOSFERATU or CITY GIRL and especially TABU in this fashion. These "pure" men are only guilty of not Anticipating/Expecting Evil in the world.

It may be that he found his voice after "growing up" a bit upon his snapping out of his fog and seeing himself for what he was and paying his "pennance". And therefore the book PHANTOM is his first real work... I dunno. I just don't think there's enough meat to bite into in the heart of the narrative to believe the author/filmmaker want us to believe he's a lousy poet.

And of course the frame story, making the whole film "Lubotas work" so to speak.

This posting is primarily a request to learn if anyone has updated information on the stated or rumored plans to release a number of silent films on DVD. But I am also curious to know if other posters have been able to see these films, in any condition. Some movies just sound so tantalizing to see that it causes a fascination, a yearning,a sense of loss, almost like a bereavement felt for a family member who died before you were born. So if you have experienced any of the following, are they deserving of such sentiments?

Dupont's VARIETY (what happened to the German release?)
Kinugasa's A PAGE OF MADNESS (is a decent restoration possible?)
Borzage's SEVENTH HEAVEN (has BFI shelved this? Will MOC come to the rescue?)
Hawks' A GIRL IN EVERY PORT
Murnau's CITY GIRL/OUR DAILY BREAD (is it as great as SUNRISE?)

Also, what about the upcoming Ford films on DVD? Are they important works?

As a follow-up, has anyone heard of plans to issue Borzage's 1930's films on DVD?

[quote8f="TIVOLI"]Kinugasa's A PAGE OF MADNESS (is a decent restoration possible?)[/quote8f]
Without question. Kinugasa's own copy (from the bottom of his ancestral farm's rice bin -- where it was stored, forgotten, for decades) is exceptionally well preserved.

The release of the restoration of DuPont VARIETE is coming to dvd within the next year without doubt-- I know it for sure but I can't say by who.. I have a vhs of the original Lasky US release which chopped off the breakup between Boss and his wife where he meets Lya, but you can watch a rare copy of the full (unrestored, 16m) print of the film, w Italian subs, on youtube.

If you trade with folks you should be able to get everything else on your list pretty easy (I actually believe there is a disc of 7th floating around somewhere in official release... scharf?). They're all absolutely wonderful films.

[quote00="HerrSchreck"]I actually believe there is a disc of 7th floating around somewhere in official release.[/quote00]
Yes, a Spanish release. Samples here. Grapevine have City Girl and Girl in Every Port.

[quote4d="HerrSchreck"] I just think the portrayal is part of the Harbouian (soiunds so Arabic! or maybe Armenian?)[/quote4d]
To me it also sounds like some Hawaiian twang guitar..

[quote4d="HerrSchreck"]Poetry of the stripe that he's trying to write (sort of Percy Bysshe Shellyesque, with the windy proclamations viz the artists breezy worlds and motivations and associations with the gods of the ancient globe) reads equally ridiculous, especially when excerpted without context or having a Big Name (like a rapper on amateur nite at the Apollo!). [/quote4d]
Quite true, that's what I meant when I thought of a possible comparison to some of the minor fin de siecle writers. But Shelley is also a good reference.... but, damn, I quite like Shelley, although he sometimes isn't very sure of his metaphors either... in fact he might have come up with the muse and her sphinx-like claws as well. But even if it was Shelley I'd still stay it's not good

[quote4d="HerrSchreck"] And recall that the film itself is in essence "Lubotas book"... we are seeing what he has written as he recalls the sins of his immediate past. The frame story sets up the telling of the film as he begins writing, and ends as he closes the book. So in that sense his book is as good as Murnau's film/Hauptmanns book.
(...)
It may be that he found his voice after "growing up" a bit upon his snapping out of his fog and seeing himself for what he was and paying his "pennance". And therefore the book PHANTOM is his first real work... I dunno[/quote4d]
That is a very convincing point, I didn't think of this. That of course has happened to all sorts of writers all the time, something occuring in their life that makes them shed their influences and 'old skins' to come into their own. And perhaps Harbou indeed wanted us to realise this. I'm not sure whether Harbou would have thought in such 'sophisticated' ways, though. I have the feeling that she generally tried to make things as 'effective' and sensational as she could, and didn't care overmuch for 'credibility'. So if you or others call the film melodramatic, I surely agree, but it didn't disturb me for most of the film. Probably because so many silents share this melodramatic aspect so that I didn't find it particularly pronounced in "Phantom" apart from the end.

Which reminds me (completely off topic): have you finally watched "Lorna Doone"? That's as melodramatic as it could possibly get, but still: totally enchanting, not just (but also) because of Madge Bellamy...

No I actually haven't. Is it really worth getting?

I have a request. I'm looking for films that are firmly ensconced in the tradition of folk art, or thoroughly give a sense of the folkloric either in their manner of storytelling or content. I ask in this thread because silent film seems to have the most zest for this sort of thing, throwing all conventions aside (since they're still being worked out) and just telling a story, as if its your own ancestors telling it.

Examples evade me, but John Ford's films strike me as incredibly well-suited in this regard, and most recently "The Edge of the World" gives an intimation of this, though Powell carries the film in a passive way, it still gives a sense that its a tale from the islanders themselves and not some fly on the wall from the mainland. If I'm understood I'd appreciate any recommendations.