I have had similiar experiences with silent films as some of the others here who have trouble getting into them. I will say i somewhat enjoyed King Vidor's The Crowd and Faust. But i am wondering is Greed better than both of these?
Also, is this story as enthralling as All That Money Can Buy aka The Devil and Danile Webster? It may be two weeks or so before i can secure this film and was just wondering.
I'd judge Greed as slightly better than The Crowd, which is marvelous, and notably better than Faust, which is also good. I'd add, however, that if you or anyone is having trouble appreciating silent films, then you may prefer either of the above titles to Greed, if only because of pace. I also hope that in your case, you ordered the two-hour version of Greed and not the nearly four-hour rendition. I say this simply because of pacing; Greed is very slow moving, as might be expected for a film chopped from nine hours to two (or four.)
The Crowd frankly holds up better today than does Greed, but I, unlike most, enjoy the grotesque, painfully realistic, even nearly disgusting-at-times Greed to the above films. I really adore The Crowd but think it unfair and very difficult to compare The crowd, designed to be 110 minutes, against one originally designed to be well over 500.
Re: All That Money Can Buy, etc., vs. Greed in terms of "enthralling." Personally, I find Greed far more enthralling that the decades-later talkie, but I'd be in the minority on this.
Much as I hate to say it, you may not be "wired" for silent film. As of 2009, few hold up better (or are better) than The Crowd. Your middling reaction to The Crowd aside, try a few more silents but I sense you are bound to appreciate talkies. No worry: There are only a dozen or so silents I truly love, and the overwhelming majority of film enthusiasts rarely list silent titles as among their favorites. Silent and sound film really are two separate worlds.
reply
share