Faust.

Most people know the name F.W. Murnau because of the famous Nosferatu, which I actually do plan to review as well in a rather special feature…. In this case, however, I will write about one of his other films, Faust. This is based, of course, on a very famous story. I myself have never read it, and I’m not going to assume that you have, either. It all starts with a wager between an angel and Mephisto. If Mephisto can turn Faust’s soul from God, then he will have free reign over the world. Faust is an alchemist who (as the angel points out) is firmly devout and spreads the word of God, but (as Mephisto points out) also has a greedy streak in his quest to turn lead into gold and the like.

After taking the bet, Mephisto promptly swoops over the town and visits a plague upon the masses. Faust, powerless to help amidst the chaos, loses his faith in God’s power and summons Mephisto to his aid.

Mephisto offers him a deal and Faust, though at first hesitant, accepts the conditions of a ‘trial day’. He finds immediately that he can heal the sick, but cannot look upon the cross.

This leads the people of the town to condemn him as affiliated with the devil and throw a lot of stones at him. Faust retreats to his home in despair, and Mephisto seduces him with the prospect of a return to his youth.

After his transformation, Faust is promptly bewitched by the image of a beautiful woman and demands to be taken to her. From then on he apparently lives a life of debauchery and vice, until Mephisto asks him why he is still not satisfied. Faust says that what he wants now is to go home. It seems that the town got over its bout of plague in their absence, and is now happy and bustling with Easter celebrations. Faust becomes enchanted by another girl, Gretchen, but Mephisto warns him not to chase after her because she is good and devout.

Refusing to listen, Faust woos her with Mephisto’s help and eventually proposes to her, but before they are married they end up sexing anyway

and this leads to Gretchen’s brother hunting Faust in revenge. During their duel, Mephisto kills the brother and urges Faust to run. The town turns against Gretchen for her harlotry having supposedly led to her brother’s death.

She is sentenced to stand in the stocks and becomes an outcast, wandering the streets with her illegitimate child. On a harsh winter, she tries and fails to find shelter for the child, eventually hallucinating the image of a cradle and placing the baby in a snowdrift, where it dies.

A group of soldiers come across her and accuse her of killing the child. She is imprisoned and slated to be burned at the stake. Many miles away, Faust ‘hears’ her cries and accuses Mephisto of tricking him, saying she was safe. He swoops to her rescue, but it is too late. He curses his false youth and the pain it has brought him, causing Mephisto to reverse the effect. Faust, as an old man, throws himself on the burning pyre and dies with Gretchen.

The next scene switches to Mephisto and the armoured angel from the beginning. Mephisto claims that he has won the bet, but the angel refutes him, saying that Faust’s undying love absolved him of his sins. Mephisto is banished, and the movie ends.

Overall, I really enjoy this film. The effects are quite impressive to me, even today, and the sets are just phenomenal. Some of the parts are genuinely creepy, and toward the end it’s beautifully tragic. The acting is also very good, and doesn’t have as much of the jarring exuberance so common in movies of the era. One thing I do have to point out, though, is the soundtrack. It just… doesn’t fit. It is light and airy and happy in spite of the tone, and at times the contrast is really hilarious.

My conclusion: Put this film first on your list if you are planning to delve into the Silents. It is well executed, and a solid tale. It’s also a bit long, so set aside a good chunk of your evening for it, and enjoy.

Spin.

Faust is © Friedrich-Wilhelm-Murnau-Stiftung, Wiesbaden.

P.S. I'm trying to find the best image and text size. Input would be most appreciated.

DOUBLE FEATURE: Vampyr and Fétiche

Ah, Vampyr. A film proving that our darling teenage Goths weren’t the first to spell this word annoyingly with a Y.

Seriously, though, this movie isn’t bad at all. It’s not really something I’d watch with popcorn and company, but with a cup of tea and a darkened room it’s a nice experience. It was made in 1932, which, as we’ve seen, generally entails a smooth black and white quality. Not so in this case. The film is scratchy and wonderfully terrible, it jumps and flickers and creates a lovely atmosphere of vague, decaying paranoia. ‘Vague’, incidentally, is a word that I could use repeatedly to describe Carl Theodor Dreyer’s little horror. The whole story moves along in a dreamy, almost lazy haze. No one stops to explain things, no one rushes to the next plot point… it’s actually pretty relaxing.

The tale itself follows a young man named Gray

as he comes upon a dingy inn on the edge of town and is subsequently drawn into a vampiric (vampyric?) mystery involving an elderly man in a dodgy bathrobe

and his two daughters. The man seems to anticipate his own death, and gives Mr. Gray a small package to be opened after that event. One attack by shadowy-shotgun later, and the package is revealed to be a book detailing the process of a vampire’s attack. We find out that one of the late man’s daughters has fallen ill, with mysterious wounds on her throat, and is convinced she is damned.

To make a very confusing story short, the vampire is in fact an old woman who resides in the nearby graveyard. Gray and one of the servants go about staking her 

and subjecting her doctor-minion to what looks like a singularly unpleasant death.

The daughter feels a weight lifted from her soul and is promptly cured, and the story ends on a happy note.

Sounds like a short flick? Well, it is. At a mere 70 minutes long, the simple story is balanced by weird, winding segments that make very little sense at all. Like, for example, Mr. Gray sitting down at a bench and suddenly dividing into a shadow-version of himself, 

and proceeding to explore the villains’ hideout in transparent form. He witnesses the apparent burial of his corporeal body (a very interesting scene, as we get a view from inside the coffin.), 

only to return abruptly to his seat at the bench outdoors. Is this a vision? A dream? Some kind of surreal illusion? I have no idea. The main reason to watch this film is, in my opinion, for pure visual inspiration. The work with shadows is amazing,

and the movie’s tendency to linger over stark and strange shots is a joy to watch. Definitely something I would recommend to the budding cinematographer, just for research.

Now, you ask, isn’t this a double feature? Why yes!

The copy of Vampyr that I procured is packaged with a short film called Fétiche, by Wladislaw Starewicz. It was made in 1934, and is tacked innocently onto the end of Vampyr as something of an afterthought. With very little information, I happily prepare to skim through the 26-minute piece.

…I… I actually struggle for words. This thing is 26 minutes of sheer, unadulterated what the bloody hell.

It starts with a woman working away on a small toy dog. A drop of sweat (or possibly a tear) gathers on her brow and falls onto the little creature, where it promptly wriggles and burrows its way into the stuffing like some kind of salty parasite.

We are treated then to one of the blessedly brief portions of dialogue, wherein the woman’s son professes his desire for an orange, and the mother says they cannot afford such things. I hope very much that this is a dub, because no one in their right mind would allow voice acting so terrible into their work. It’s atrocious. So the little dog comes to creepy, uncanny-valley life and he, along with his companion toys, are shipped in a box to a toy store, but all the other toys escape through a hole in the box before they reach their destination. The dog is purchased but also escapes and comes into possession of an orange in a marketplace.

Then Satan throws a carnival or something

and all the other toys wind up there and do… toy debauchery? I don’t even know. Every second of horror that was missing from Vampyr is present in this terrifying little thing. My jaw literally dropped at the whirl of incoherent chaos that flashed upon the screen.

First

And then

And then

And then

And then

And then

And then

And then... I just don’t know how to describe it further. The little boy gets his orange and Satan disintegrates while the other toys get caught by the police. Just… just watch it. I’m serious. Go find a copy of Vampyr and skip the whole movie, I don’t care. You just need to see this. It makes nailbread-in-a-jar look like a wholesome, mundane thing. This is what insanity looks like.

…Fabulously well-animated insanity. Actually, I’ve found out that Fétiche is a pretty famous thing among animation buffs, and with good reason. The stop-motion puppetry is the best I’ve seen so far, and if that’s your area of interest you have another reason to track this film down and give it a look-see.

Spin.

Vampyr is © 1991 Film Preservation Associates, all rights reserved.

Fétiche is © Gelma-Film (I think).

She.

Oh my goodness, this film just kind of personifies the mildly bad things about old adventure flicks. It isn’t… terrible… It’s just amusingly inane. It stars Randolph Scott, whose name I can’t say without drama due to a few too many viewings of Blazing Saddles, and who, for a brief while, wears a very nice suit. 

It also stars that chap who played Watson in the bad Sherlock Holmes series, who plays… erm, a bungling, dim-witted sidekick. 

His parents must have been so proud.

Anyhow. The story starts with Leo Vincey (Scott) coming to see his dying uncle, who tells him a tale of the ‘Flame of Life’, which he and Watson have discovered is probably real. He tells Vincey that he must trek out to find it. My first question here is: why? Is Vincey a scientist? An adventurer? What exactly qualifies him for this mission?

Never you mind that, for Vincey and Watson quickly depart for somewhere cold and stop by at the local Plot Point’s house for supper, and to procure the help of some local guides. Plot Point turns out to be an utter prat. And also a racist. And he treats his daughter badly. It is at this point I call out my bet that he will die within the next few scenes.

Sure enough, he gets smushed by an avalanche as he tries to hack through some ice to get at a bag of gold left by the less-fortunate (but remarkably well-preserved) companion of the first traveler to try and find the Flame.

Luckily, the avalanche also cleared the way to a cave-path through the mountain.

While passing through, our heroes (now with the ill-treated daughter in tow) are set upon by savage cave dwellers, who try and put a hot metal thingy on Watson’s head.

During this scene, and many thereafter, you may notice something significant about the cast. That is: They all have the intellectual quotient of a soggy parsnip. Really. They’re just dim.

But anyhow. Vincey gets hit on the head and swoons,

only to be saved by a group of fellows dressed in fashionable togas 

and brought into the underground city before the mysterious She. 

She (Who Must Be Obeyed) turns out to be a gossamer-clad immortal queen, who is played by the actually-quite-lovely Helen Gahagan.

Incidentally, this is the only movie Ms. Gahagan did in her entire career. Something of a pity, as she’s also the only character I came to like. Upon seeing Vincey, she proclaims that he is a reincarnation of her long lost love and tells him that she will reveal unto him the secrets of The Flame and take him as her king. Initially, Vincey is quite content with this offer and tells his compatriots to go on their way. But wait! Tanya (daughter of the plot point) hath become quite smitten with our intrepid hero! She attempts to sway him with rather non-tempting talk about how real love means growing old and dying together. A point, but badly made. 

To make a long story short, Vincey realises the wickedness of She’s ways after she tries to sacrifice Tanya, who approached her with a plea for Vincey’s freedom. They try to escape, only to bump into She in the room of The Flame itself. She repeats her offer to Vincey, who still seems a little tempted, but Watson and Tanya urge him against it, saying the fire might be a trap. In order to prove otherwise, She steps into the flames, only to grow older with each flash of fire.

All the while, she talks of how Tanya will eventually wither while Vincey remains young, and that he will no longer want her then. After the last burst of fire, she staggers to the ground, shriveled and ancient, and dies.

Ignominiously.

At this point, I’m staring at the television set with total bewilderment. Vincey, Watson (oh alright… his name is Holly in this movie.), and Tanya are back in London in the next scene, discussing their fabulous adventure and how no one will believe them.

Here, they theorize about how She met her demise. Perhaps, they say, the overexposure to the Flame’s radiation was too much for her. Or perhaps her existence was unnatural, and a higher power had ended it. This strikes me as cheating, somehow. I think the director decided to re-write at the last minute or something.

In the interest of fairness, this film did have some good points. The sets were really interesting, and the role of She was played rather well. With that bit over, here are the points of most confusion:

Why, why, why was everyone in this movie so dumb? Holly was just supposed to be some sort of comic relief, and I think Tanya was supposed to be naïve and pure, but Vincey? He was the hero! One rather assumes that he would be gifted with at least a knack for tactical decisions… Even She Who Must be Obeyed had some baffling lapses in judgement. Why, for example, did she not simply kill Tanya in some dark passage rather than trotting her out where she could be rescued? And how exactly did she not notice the fact that she was decomposing with unnatural speed in her last moments?

Also, the romantic plot with Tanya was just… Uncomfortable. She and Vincey had only known each other for about two days. When did she have time to fall so hopelessly in love? As well, their first real discussion involved Vincey making some awkwardly paternal remarks, and that set the whole thing off on the wrong note.

And finally, mulling over the plot now, I have to wonder why Vincey didn’t just accept She’s offer? You’re a man of science, for heaven’s sake! Couldn’t you imagine the possibilities? This woman has been around since before Christ and doubtlessly has a wealth of knowledge no one else would possess. Your time with her would also be basically unlimited! Think of the places you could see, and the events you could witness at her side!

But alas. He shuns her gauzy embrace for that of the waif with dubious emotional maturity.

In conclusion, I would encourage you to watch She with a few good friends, and laugh at its bemusing majesty.

Spin.

 

She is © 2006 to Legend Films Incorporated.