Erich von Stroheim is one of the greatest filmmakers of the silent film era, was in the twenties of the last century when some of his greatest masterpieces would be produced, and in the case of the film now discussed is a work in which Austria-Hungarian is more versatile than ever. Von Stroheim acts as writer, director and lead actor in this film, which sets up a case that more than one occasion would happen to the director, severe mutilation of his work by producers, and is also one of the roughest and complicated filmmakings for the creator, by various factors. It presents the story of a swindler individual, a subject up to Monaco where masquerades as a Russian nobleman to try to seduce the wife of an eminent American diplomat, while maintaining links with two women, apparently his cousins, and also generates fraud and counterfeiting. Continues Von Stroheim following the main guidelines that lead many of his works, portrays with great precision and detail the Monegasque social scene, while shows, while graphics as hypocritical and dummy can become certain individuals, and how manipulable, frivolous Americans can be, particularly women. A feature whose original footage was brutally mutilated and reduced, however still continues maintaining much appeal.
It is first seen to Princess Olga Petchnikoff (Maude George) and Vera (Mae Busch) with Count Sergius Karamzin (von Stroheim), Russian army officer, all in the comfort of their rooms. Are visited by Cesare Ventucci (Cesare Gravina), an individual with whom they are producing counterfeit bills, they plan to circulate them. Count learns that a major US political official will arrive in Monte Carlo, and plans with cousins to get linked to that man, posing as Russian nobles. Arrive at Monaco's special envoy Andrew J. Hughes (Rudolph Christians), and his wife Helen (Miss DuPont), a woman who draws the attention of Sergius. Count manages to get intimate with her, situations where she feels attracted, while Andrew notes with annoyance that growing closeness. In turn, the Count deceives his maid, Maruschka (Dale Fuller) with false promises of marriage, economic ruin, and snatches the whole savings of her entire live. Sergius tries to pass off as true both their counterfeits and how to grow maid's money betting, without much luck. Count gets Helen carried to his room, interviews alone with her, but Maruschka, mad with jealousy, catches fire throughout the house. Finally tragic outcome will find Count, his cousins will also be stopped, and Helen stays with Andrew.
The first images we appreciate of the film are already showing us its central protagonists, the well Princesses Olga and Vera, as well as the Count, enjoying good times and having certain luxuries, because the filmmaker shows us images of the maid by putting pillows under the feet under the table. Along with this, we also see food and caviar, luxury sumptuous banquet, with a single idea or detailed shot the filmmaker is delineating his characters. Is the film a new instance of the taste of von Stroheim to blockbusters, big budget and that he justifies with a variety of technical resources in its realization to appreciate as many shots, panoramic shots of the city of Monaco, big general shots, shots of crowds, interesting frames, we appreciate its well-known thoroughness in work to portray these aspects, a characteristic that would stay forever in his artistic personality, the master shows the domain and expert knowledge of film language, the wide technician range he has to shoot his films, really a cinema maestro. And of course, his close-ups, something a task in which he was always efficient, close-ups that capture efficiently actoral records, their expressions and gestures, as in fact on the feature we can see great performances, starting with the director and screenwriter (what an individual von Stroheim, screenwriter, director and principal performer in this film, a real all-terrain filmmaker), following Miss DuPont. The use of light, shadows, the color contrasts is already quite good by the filmmaker, without it being yet his greatest work in that regard. It is able, however, to produce a superb chiaroscuro von Stroheim moments after the fire sequence, where is Maruschka. Within the obviousness that is the color range in a film in black and white, it is interesting to note the color difference used by the Austro-Hungarian, creating atmospheres that permeates every sequence, a resource already used in silent films, black and white cinema, with all cold or warm tones, sepia tones, obviously all to illustrate different times, night, indoors, outdoors, etc; among other major European titans, for example we have also seen this resource in prodigious Victor Sjostrom.
The image of the main character, Count, is also shown soon, firing at a target testing his marksmanship effectiveness, smoking proudly, and with the monocle which will not come off at all the feature; it is distinguished as a gentleman, or at least that appears to be, constructed to project that image to others. But his real personality is also readily diagrammed, when the daughter of Ventucci, a female of strange behavior, with apparent mental disorders, after being studied by the camera, is addressed by the count, who nevertheless shows intentions apparently dishonest with the woman. We see that he is an abject subject of reprehensible actions, from the beginning we see his personality in those instants. It is a manipulative individual and knowledgeable about how to get what he wants, seducing the wife of a diplomat, indicating a child to announce his false lineage with the most loudly as possible voice. On the feature mainly we appreciate that, falsehood, false of these characters, charades or artificial stuff, the film portrays his game, his falsehoods are portrayed such as the farce of banknotes that will circulate. It is therefore a bunch of swindlers, who make a false image, through which achieve their Machiavellian goals, seduce Helen in the case of Sergius. The Count is certainly one of the meanest characters built by the Austro-Hungarian, we see eloquent sequences, such as watching him giving some privacy to Helen to be undressed, but he, first turning around to pretend false respect and solemnity, then through a mirror looks her undressing, appreciates her relative nakedness with depraved smile. As if that was not enough, in those eloquent moments a goat appears, animal that literally puts its tail in the face of false noble, insistently puts its not so noble parts on his face. A certainly not very elegant figure presented by the filmmaker, but it serves to ridicule the figure of the swindler, potently to reinforce his ridiculous figure and personality, and incidentally outlines a certain comic scene thanks to the impertinent animal. The false noble first with subterfuges approaches Helen at night, the next morning he smooches with one of his cousins, and then still has time and mood to lie and deceive the maid. It is therefore a low, abject, vile being, and its image is reinforced by that perennial sardonic attitude, that sly smile that complements using military cap sideways, crooked, twisted, as the same character who wears it.
Another eloquent image of that character is as he relates to Maruschka, resulting almost unbelievable that the maid had actually believed that the Count would marry her, beseeching and suffering for the conduct of the false noble. But the figure comes when the Count pretends to mourn with her, the face between his hands, covered, until pouring a liquid pretending to be his own tears, but when she does not see, he laughs, outlines again that wry smile, he mocks women, and ultimately, in implausible way, gets money from his own maid, he tricks to keep the money; he is a wretch, and incidentally the title of the film is justified, the lewdness, frivolities that can be seen throughout social circles, particularly the upper stratum now. Even we see the Count wiping his mouth after kissing Maruschka -the female kisses a bird in extreme close-up, figure that we will see similar in
Greed (1924)-, it is a harsh and effective portrait presented. The final piece of his personality will be graphed when the fire show us his true face, the face of cowardice. With that sequence is finished tearing apart the figure of Count, falsehood, lies, cowardice, all engaged in a cold Machiavellianism, but finally ridiculed. The subject treated by von Stroheim, the situations portrayed acquire greater vitality when we think about the context in which the picture is placed, the context is always vital to better understand and assess an artistic work. In the twenties of the last century, in the film industry Hollywood ceased to be the great artistic luminary, its main exponents, Griffith at the head, began a slow artistic decline, and the great European masters migrated to Yankee land, to shine with their own light in that environment. This is the case, among many others, of von Stroheim, a newcomer to the United States, seen as an exotic foreign, and the fact that Americans certainly ignored the manners of European royalty, is something that probably shocked and really amused the filmmaker, adapting it to some extent in his feature, as he ponders the frivolities and trivialities of human beings, lower levels of their personalities and instincts; probably he poured some of his own mind, insufflating that vitality all artistic creation has when it feeds on reality, real experiences.
We are also facing one of the pictures whose shooting was among the roughest for Erich, perhaps the greatest in that regard. Nine hours of footage in total were those produced by von Stroheim, material that was reduced to little more than two hours, another detail very similar to what would happen two years later in
Greed, with all the frictions and difficulties that this entails, staying many sub plots in the air, many characters losing relevance, losing cohesion and fluidity the work in its entirety. There are alternate endings, like Helen having a baby, Count dying and being devoured by an octopus (! ...), countless asperities in final montage, not to mention the obvious and evident narrative ruptures, resulting of course of severe mutilation and reducted material, much of the original script was severely modified, many details changed, others simply eliminated, in another example of the cruel intervention of producers on a feature. Last but not least, Rudolph Christians, actor who plays the diplomat, had to be replaced, as he perished during filming, and replacement used, mostly appearing backwards, he appears with white hair, contrasting with the black hair of Christians, quite striking, knowing the meticulous detail Erich's personality. Certainly a very rich film from virtually all points of view from which to analyze it, a feature which directly influenced a great filmmaker like Jean Renoir, and curiously the French would use his referent idol von Stroheim in
The Great Illusion (1937), clearly showing how well acting was suited for Austria-Hungarian director (actually, his production as an actor is tremendously greater than his production as a filmmaker, but the genius is not measured in quantity). Also interestingly, Renoir was characterized as well as a director and leading actor of his films at the same time; very similar both titans. Von Stroheim's feature is part unfortunately of lost pictures, those movies will never be appreciated as its creator genuinely wanted, not done as he wanted to create them, but as attempts to approach it; different versions over the years emerge but will not be more than that, efforts to rebuild impossible. Reductions from nine hours of shooting to two, a cruel mutilation that would make look not great thing those which suffered Orson Welles himself. Yet it is one of the referent pictures by a major filmmaker in silent cinema, the golden age of film art, a more-than-worthy -to-see work for connoisseurs of the best cinema.
Erich von Stroheim is one of the greatest filmmakers of the silent film era, was in the twenties of the last century when some of his greatest masterpieces would be produced, and in the case of the film now discussed is a work in which Austria-Hungarian is more versatile than ever. Von Stroheim acts as writer, director and lead actor in this film, which sets up a case that more than one occasion would happen to the director, severe mutilation of his work by producers, and is also one of the roughest and complicated filmmakings for the creator, by various factors. It presents the story of a swindler individual, a subject up to Monaco where masquerades as a Russian nobleman to try to seduce the wife of an eminent American diplomat, while maintaining links with two women, apparently his cousins, and also generates fraud and counterfeiting. Continues Von Stroheim following the main guidelines that lead many of his works, portrays with great precision and detail the Monegasque social scene, while shows, while graphics as hypocritical and dummy can become certain individuals, and how manipulable, frivolous Americans can be, particularly women. A feature whose original footage was brutally mutilated and reduced, however still continues maintaining much appeal.
It is first seen to Princess Olga Petchnikoff (Maude George) and Vera (Mae Busch) with Count Sergius Karamzin (von Stroheim), Russian army officer, all in the comfort of their rooms. Are visited by Cesare Ventucci (Cesare Gravina), an individual with whom they are producing counterfeit bills, they plan to circulate them. Count learns that a major US political official will arrive in Monte Carlo, and plans with cousins to get linked to that man, posing as Russian nobles. Arrive at Monaco's special envoy Andrew J. Hughes (Rudolph Christians), and his wife Helen (Miss DuPont), a woman who draws the attention of Sergius. Count manages to get intimate with her, situations where she feels attracted, while Andrew notes with annoyance that growing closeness. In turn, the Count deceives his maid, Maruschka (Dale Fuller) with false promises of marriage, economic ruin, and snatches the whole savings of her entire live. Sergius tries to pass off as true both their counterfeits and how to grow maid's money betting, without much luck. Count gets Helen carried to his room, interviews alone with her, but Maruschka, mad with jealousy, catches fire throughout the house. Finally tragic outcome will find Count, his cousins will also be stopped, and Helen stays with Andrew.
The image of the main character, Count, is also shown soon, firing at a target testing his marksmanship effectiveness, smoking proudly, and with the monocle which will not come off at all the feature; it is distinguished as a gentleman, or at least that appears to be, constructed to project that image to others. But his real personality is also readily diagrammed, when the daughter of Ventucci, a female of strange behavior, with apparent mental disorders, after being studied by the camera, is addressed by the count, who nevertheless shows intentions apparently dishonest with the woman. We see that he is an abject subject of reprehensible actions, from the beginning we see his personality in those instants. It is a manipulative individual and knowledgeable about how to get what he wants, seducing the wife of a diplomat, indicating a child to announce his false lineage with the most loudly as possible voice. On the feature mainly we appreciate that, falsehood, false of these characters, charades or artificial stuff, the film portrays his game, his falsehoods are portrayed such as the farce of banknotes that will circulate. It is therefore a bunch of swindlers, who make a false image, through which achieve their Machiavellian goals, seduce Helen in the case of Sergius. The Count is certainly one of the meanest characters built by the Austro-Hungarian, we see eloquent sequences, such as watching him giving some privacy to Helen to be undressed, but he, first turning around to pretend false respect and solemnity, then through a mirror looks her undressing, appreciates her relative nakedness with depraved smile. As if that was not enough, in those eloquent moments a goat appears, animal that literally puts its tail in the face of false noble, insistently puts its not so noble parts on his face. A certainly not very elegant figure presented by the filmmaker, but it serves to ridicule the figure of the swindler, potently to reinforce his ridiculous figure and personality, and incidentally outlines a certain comic scene thanks to the impertinent animal. The false noble first with subterfuges approaches Helen at night, the next morning he smooches with one of his cousins, and then still has time and mood to lie and deceive the maid. It is therefore a low, abject, vile being, and its image is reinforced by that perennial sardonic attitude, that sly smile that complements using military cap sideways, crooked, twisted, as the same character who wears it.
Another eloquent image of that character is as he relates to Maruschka, resulting almost unbelievable that the maid had actually believed that the Count would marry her, beseeching and suffering for the conduct of the false noble. But the figure comes when the Count pretends to mourn with her, the face between his hands, covered, until pouring a liquid pretending to be his own tears, but when she does not see, he laughs, outlines again that wry smile, he mocks women, and ultimately, in implausible way, gets money from his own maid, he tricks to keep the money; he is a wretch, and incidentally the title of the film is justified, the lewdness, frivolities that can be seen throughout social circles, particularly the upper stratum now. Even we see the Count wiping his mouth after kissing Maruschka -the female kisses a bird in extreme close-up, figure that we will see similar in Greed (1924)-, it is a harsh and effective portrait presented. The final piece of his personality will be graphed when the fire show us his true face, the face of cowardice. With that sequence is finished tearing apart the figure of Count, falsehood, lies, cowardice, all engaged in a cold Machiavellianism, but finally ridiculed. The subject treated by von Stroheim, the situations portrayed acquire greater vitality when we think about the context in which the picture is placed, the context is always vital to better understand and assess an artistic work. In the twenties of the last century, in the film industry Hollywood ceased to be the great artistic luminary, its main exponents, Griffith at the head, began a slow artistic decline, and the great European masters migrated to Yankee land, to shine with their own light in that environment. This is the case, among many others, of von Stroheim, a newcomer to the United States, seen as an exotic foreign, and the fact that Americans certainly ignored the manners of European royalty, is something that probably shocked and really amused the filmmaker, adapting it to some extent in his feature, as he ponders the frivolities and trivialities of human beings, lower levels of their personalities and instincts; probably he poured some of his own mind, insufflating that vitality all artistic creation has when it feeds on reality, real experiences.
We are also facing one of the pictures whose shooting was among the roughest for Erich, perhaps the greatest in that regard. Nine hours of footage in total were those produced by von Stroheim, material that was reduced to little more than two hours, another detail very similar to what would happen two years later in Greed, with all the frictions and difficulties that this entails, staying many sub plots in the air, many characters losing relevance, losing cohesion and fluidity the work in its entirety. There are alternate endings, like Helen having a baby, Count dying and being devoured by an octopus (! ...), countless asperities in final montage, not to mention the obvious and evident narrative ruptures, resulting of course of severe mutilation and reducted material, much of the original script was severely modified, many details changed, others simply eliminated, in another example of the cruel intervention of producers on a feature. Last but not least, Rudolph Christians, actor who plays the diplomat, had to be replaced, as he perished during filming, and replacement used, mostly appearing backwards, he appears with white hair, contrasting with the black hair of Christians, quite striking, knowing the meticulous detail Erich's personality. Certainly a very rich film from virtually all points of view from which to analyze it, a feature which directly influenced a great filmmaker like Jean Renoir, and curiously the French would use his referent idol von Stroheim in The Great Illusion (1937), clearly showing how well acting was suited for Austria-Hungarian director (actually, his production as an actor is tremendously greater than his production as a filmmaker, but the genius is not measured in quantity). Also interestingly, Renoir was characterized as well as a director and leading actor of his films at the same time; very similar both titans. Von Stroheim's feature is part unfortunately of lost pictures, those movies will never be appreciated as its creator genuinely wanted, not done as he wanted to create them, but as attempts to approach it; different versions over the years emerge but will not be more than that, efforts to rebuild impossible. Reductions from nine hours of shooting to two, a cruel mutilation that would make look not great thing those which suffered Orson Welles himself. Yet it is one of the referent pictures by a major filmmaker in silent cinema, the golden age of film art, a more-than-worthy -to-see work for connoisseurs of the best cinema.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario