I watched the 4 hr reconstruction version and I couldn't wait for this film to finally be over. I awaited the words 'The End' the way many cineastes await the discovery of the long lost original cut of this silent film. Despite all its acclaim, the version I saw reveals Greed as an overly-long, ham-fisted melodrama 'epic' with cartoonish characters and situations, clumsy heavy-handed symbolism and the overacting typical of its era. McTeague's wife, Trina, is a pale imitation when compared alongside Ebenezer Scrooge and seems to have a level of depth closer approximating Disney's later character Scrooge McDuck. The film reminds me in some respects to the current trend of 'serious' 'prestige' Oscar-bait movies released every year just in time to receive nominations and wins during award season. It makes Capra's often-derided films seem subtle by comparison.
I can't help but wonder if the voters in various film polls who have acclaimed this film are voting on the extant 2.5 hour version or the 4 hr reconstruction (which often relies on a La Jetee-esquire slide show of old on-set photographs in an attempt to replace 1.5 hours of the missing footage) OR if they're voting for the alleged greatness of the mythic 9.5 hour version seen by a handful of people before it was cut to ribbons by the studio. It seems like people feel so sorry for von Stroheim's loss, that placing his film in the pantheon of 'great films' is an attempt at a consolation prize. Greed can't compare to achievements like Murnau's Sunrise, which also took a simplistic story, but through vision and artistry turned it into something much more. Unfortunately, Greed doesn't succeed similarly IMO. I wish a copy of the original version would be magically discovered in storage somewhere, either so we could see the greatness of this legendary film, or so we could at least debunk the myth of its legendary 'greatness'.
The story: Hot-headed ex-gold miner turned unlicensed dentist McTeague proposes to his friend's girlfriend Trina, after which she wins a $5,000 lottery. His friend with a misplaced sense of entitlement is jealous over the loss of the girl and the fortune, not knowing what a greed-obsessed, penny-pinching gold-hoarder Trina will become and how much she'll make McTeague's life miserable, making them live like paupers while she stashes away her interest on the business investment she makes with her uncle, not to mention the money she scrapes out of her husbands earnings. She'd be content for them to live in filth if she could hold onto her dream of someday swimming in a pile of gold. There are also parallel stories of a thieving maid woman who marries a junk dealer after her elaborate lie to him about a fantasized million $ gold set of dishes that she claims to have once owned/has buried away somewhere and a story of a couple of elderly boarders who live next door to one another and fall in love.
It's astounding that the telling of this story required even 4 hours, let alone 9.5 hours.
If you want to watch a film about what greed can do to people and see an over-the-top performance (in about half the runtime), I highly recommend 'The Treasure of the Sierra Madre' instead. Sitting through 'Greed' is only recommended to silent film enthusiasts and film historians, yet 'tis still better than Vidor's 'The Crowd'.
I can't help but wonder if the voters in various film polls who have acclaimed this film are voting on the extant 2.5 hour version or the 4 hr reconstruction (which often relies on a La Jetee-esquire slide show of old on-set photographs in an attempt to replace 1.5 hours of the missing footage) OR if they're voting for the alleged greatness of the mythic 9.5 hour version seen by a handful of people before it was cut to ribbons by the studio. It seems like people feel so sorry for von Stroheim's loss, that placing his film in the pantheon of 'great films' is an attempt at a consolation prize. Greed can't compare to achievements like Murnau's Sunrise, which also took a simplistic story, but through vision and artistry turned it into something much more. Unfortunately, Greed doesn't succeed similarly IMO. I wish a copy of the original version would be magically discovered in storage somewhere, either so we could see the greatness of this legendary film, or so we could at least debunk the myth of its legendary 'greatness'.
The story: Hot-headed ex-gold miner turned unlicensed dentist McTeague proposes to his friend's girlfriend Trina, after which she wins a $5,000 lottery. His friend with a misplaced sense of entitlement is jealous over the loss of the girl and the fortune, not knowing what a greed-obsessed, penny-pinching gold-hoarder Trina will become and how much she'll make McTeague's life miserable, making them live like paupers while she stashes away her interest on the business investment she makes with her uncle, not to mention the money she scrapes out of her husbands earnings. She'd be content for them to live in filth if she could hold onto her dream of someday swimming in a pile of gold. There are also parallel stories of a thieving maid woman who marries a junk dealer after her elaborate lie to him about a fantasized million $ gold set of dishes that she claims to have once owned/has buried away somewhere and a story of a couple of elderly boarders who live next door to one another and fall in love.
It's astounding that the telling of this story required even 4 hours, let alone 9.5 hours.
If you want to watch a film about what greed can do to people and see an over-the-top performance (in about half the runtime), I highly recommend 'The Treasure of the Sierra Madre' instead. Sitting through 'Greed' is only recommended to silent film enthusiasts and film historians, yet 'tis still better than Vidor's 'The Crowd'.