98 commentaires
To fans of early horror, director F.W. Murnau is best known for 'Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens,' his chilling 1922 vampire film, inspired by Bram Stoker's famous novel. However, his equally impressive 'Faust' is often overlooked, despite some remarkable visuals, solid acting, a truly sinister villain, and an epic tale of love, loss and evil. The story concerns Faust (Gösta Ekman), an old and disheartened alchemist who forms a pact with Satan's evil demon, Mephisto (Emil Jannings). As God and the Devil wage a war over Earth, the two opposing powers reach a tentative agreement: the entire fate of Mankind will rest on the soul of Faust, who must redeem himself from his selfish deeds before the story is complete.
Relying very heavily on visuals, 'Faust' contains some truly stunning on screen imagery, most memorably the inspired shot of Mephisto towering ominously over a town, preparing to sow the seeds of the Black Death. A combination of clever optical trickery and vibrant costumes and sets makes the film an absolute delight to watch, with Murnau employing every known element fire, wind, smoke, lightning to help produce the film's dark tone. Double exposure, in which a piece of film is exposed twice to two different images, is used extremely effectively, being an integral component in many of the visual effects shots. In fact, aside perhaps from Victor Sjöström's 'Körkarlen (1921),' I can't remember double exposure being used to such remarkable effect.
It's often difficult to judge performances in a silent film, but I've certainly got a generally positive attitude towards the acting in 'Faust.' I was particularly astonished by Gösta Ekman, whose character, given limitless evil control, is transformed from a withering old man to a handsome youth. Despite my impression that two different actors had been used, it seems that Ekman convincingly portrayed both the old and young man, which is a credit to both the actor and Murnau's make-up department (namely, Waldemar Jabs). Emil Jannings plays Mephisto with a sort of mysterious slyness, always one step ahead and always up to no good. Whilst I wasn't completely blown away by young actress Camilla Horn as Gretchen the woman with whom Faust falls in love her acting is adequate enough, and she certainly shows some very raw emotion in the scene's final act, when her forbidden romance with Faust sends her life in a downward spiral.
'Faust' was F.W. Murnau's final film in Germany, his next project being the acclaimed American romance, 'Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927).' At the time, the film was the most expensive ever made by the German studio, UFA (Universum Film AG), though it would be surpassed the following year by Fritz Lang's classic science-fiction epic, 'Metropolis.' Notably, there were five substantially different versions of 'Faust' produced, several of these by the director himself: these include a German original version, a French version, a late German version, a bilingual version for European audiences, and an American cut compiled by Murnau especially for MGM in July 1926. Each of these altered particular scenes and camera angles, and often included material that would be more relevant to the target cultural audience (for example, the US version reportedly contains a joke about the American Prohibition era).
At the heart of 'Faust' is a love story between the corrupted title character and his doomed love, Gretchen. I felt that the scenes when Faust is trying to coax Gretchen into loving him were the slowest parts of the film, much less exciting and invigorating than the darker and more effects-driven sequences that preceded and followed it. Nevertheless, F.W. Murnau's 'Faust' is an absolute gem of 1920s silent horror, and anybody who doesn't look out for it is very surely missing out on something special.
Relying very heavily on visuals, 'Faust' contains some truly stunning on screen imagery, most memorably the inspired shot of Mephisto towering ominously over a town, preparing to sow the seeds of the Black Death. A combination of clever optical trickery and vibrant costumes and sets makes the film an absolute delight to watch, with Murnau employing every known element fire, wind, smoke, lightning to help produce the film's dark tone. Double exposure, in which a piece of film is exposed twice to two different images, is used extremely effectively, being an integral component in many of the visual effects shots. In fact, aside perhaps from Victor Sjöström's 'Körkarlen (1921),' I can't remember double exposure being used to such remarkable effect.
It's often difficult to judge performances in a silent film, but I've certainly got a generally positive attitude towards the acting in 'Faust.' I was particularly astonished by Gösta Ekman, whose character, given limitless evil control, is transformed from a withering old man to a handsome youth. Despite my impression that two different actors had been used, it seems that Ekman convincingly portrayed both the old and young man, which is a credit to both the actor and Murnau's make-up department (namely, Waldemar Jabs). Emil Jannings plays Mephisto with a sort of mysterious slyness, always one step ahead and always up to no good. Whilst I wasn't completely blown away by young actress Camilla Horn as Gretchen the woman with whom Faust falls in love her acting is adequate enough, and she certainly shows some very raw emotion in the scene's final act, when her forbidden romance with Faust sends her life in a downward spiral.
'Faust' was F.W. Murnau's final film in Germany, his next project being the acclaimed American romance, 'Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927).' At the time, the film was the most expensive ever made by the German studio, UFA (Universum Film AG), though it would be surpassed the following year by Fritz Lang's classic science-fiction epic, 'Metropolis.' Notably, there were five substantially different versions of 'Faust' produced, several of these by the director himself: these include a German original version, a French version, a late German version, a bilingual version for European audiences, and an American cut compiled by Murnau especially for MGM in July 1926. Each of these altered particular scenes and camera angles, and often included material that would be more relevant to the target cultural audience (for example, the US version reportedly contains a joke about the American Prohibition era).
At the heart of 'Faust' is a love story between the corrupted title character and his doomed love, Gretchen. I felt that the scenes when Faust is trying to coax Gretchen into loving him were the slowest parts of the film, much less exciting and invigorating than the darker and more effects-driven sequences that preceded and followed it. Nevertheless, F.W. Murnau's 'Faust' is an absolute gem of 1920s silent horror, and anybody who doesn't look out for it is very surely missing out on something special.
F.W. Murnau's telling of the classic German legend, 'Faust' is a masterpiece to behold. From both the technical and story standpoint, the film excels and despite being nearly eighty years old, Faust still stands tall as one of the greatest cinematic achievements of all time. F.W. Murnau has become best known among film fans for 'Nosferatu', but this is unfair to the man. While Nosferatu is something of an achievement; it pales in comparison to this film in every respect. Faust is far more extravagant than Murnau's vampire tale, and it shows his technical brilliance much more effectively. The story is of particular note, and it follows a German alchemist by the name of Faust. As God and Satan war over Earth, the Devil preaches that he will be able to tempt Faust into darkness and so has a wager with God to settle things. Satan sends Mephisto to Earth to offer Faust an end to the plague that is making it's way through the local population, and eternal youth, in return for Faust's soul...
The way that Murnau creates the atmosphere in the film is nothing short of amazing. The lighting and use of shadows is superb, and helps to create a strong sense of dread at the same time as making the film incredibly easy on the eyes. It's the music that's the real star of the show, however, as it's absolutely fantastic and easily ranks up with the greatest scores ever written. The scenery is expressionistic and gives the film a strong sense of beauty (which is increased by the excellent cinematography), especially in the darker scenes; all of which are an absolute delight to behold. The story is undoubtedly one of the most important ever written, and within it is themes of good, evil, religion and most importantly, love. The points are never hammered home, and instead they are allowed to emancipate from the centre of the tale, which allows the audience to see them for themselves rather than being told; and that's just the way a story should be.
It's hard to rate the acting in silent cinema as being a member of a modern audience, I'm used to actors acting with dialogue and judging a performance without that is difficult. However, on the other hand; silent acting is arguably more difficult than acting with dialogue as the only way to portray your feelings to the audience is through expressions and gestures, and in that respect; acting is just another area where this film excels. In fact, there isn't an area that this film doesn't excel in and for that reason; it easily ranks up with the greatest films ever committed to the screen.
The way that Murnau creates the atmosphere in the film is nothing short of amazing. The lighting and use of shadows is superb, and helps to create a strong sense of dread at the same time as making the film incredibly easy on the eyes. It's the music that's the real star of the show, however, as it's absolutely fantastic and easily ranks up with the greatest scores ever written. The scenery is expressionistic and gives the film a strong sense of beauty (which is increased by the excellent cinematography), especially in the darker scenes; all of which are an absolute delight to behold. The story is undoubtedly one of the most important ever written, and within it is themes of good, evil, religion and most importantly, love. The points are never hammered home, and instead they are allowed to emancipate from the centre of the tale, which allows the audience to see them for themselves rather than being told; and that's just the way a story should be.
It's hard to rate the acting in silent cinema as being a member of a modern audience, I'm used to actors acting with dialogue and judging a performance without that is difficult. However, on the other hand; silent acting is arguably more difficult than acting with dialogue as the only way to portray your feelings to the audience is through expressions and gestures, and in that respect; acting is just another area where this film excels. In fact, there isn't an area that this film doesn't excel in and for that reason; it easily ranks up with the greatest films ever committed to the screen.
(Contains spoilers)
Goethe's FAUST means to German-Speaking countries what HAMLET means to the English-Speaking world: The terror of schoolchildren forced to write essays and memorize its most famous quotations. Murnau's silent screen version offers us the unique opportunity to enjoy all the suspense of the play without being bothered by the immortal lines of its great author...The version I have seen was restored in 1995 by Luciano Berriatua and offers everything a film fan can hope for: Masterly direction, awesome visuals (at a time where sets were built, not painted with a computer!) and knock-out-performances.
The divine force (here personified by a youth with swan-wings) and Mephisto (Emil Jannings as black crow with goat-horns) struggle over the world domination and open the competition over Faust's (Gösta Ekman) soul. Mephisto spreads his wings over the city and the plague breaks out. Unable to find a cure for the disease, Faust conjures up the devil. Mephisto, now the prototype of middle-aged gluttony, appears and offers Faust a try-out-contract for just one day. This poor old fellow gets his youth back, but the devil is a pretty good psychologist: The very moment when Faust is about to seduce the duchess of Parma, the most beautiful woman on earth, his sands have run out. Now, of course, he is willing to sign the long-term-contract...With a filthy grin, Mephisto draws the curtains of the four-poster.
Carnal desire, however, cannot satisfy Faust for long. Innocence is, what tempts him now. Back in his home town he falls in love with Margarethe (Camilla Horn) who is on her way to church. Mephisto, on the other hand (Jannings, his upper half dressed like a shogun, his lower half in a skin-tight hose) gets hear-ache from her pious singing. The seduction scene would hardly pass today's censors: Among other things, Mephisto mixes a love-potion for Margarethe's cousin Marthe. Heated up, this poor woman starts to chase Mephisto in a slightly indecent manner...
Some scenes are of unearthly beauty, others shocking to an unbearable degree: Margarethe put on the pillory - the crowd rallies to gape at her. She drags herself along, her baby in her arms during a snow-storm - no one will help her. The devil deceives her once more with the illusion of a cradle: She puts her baby to bed - only to discover that she buried it under a blanket of snow. The vision of Margarethe's crying face follows Faust over chains of mountains...
Ekman was Ingrid Bergman's partner in the swedish version of "Intermezzo"; The other stars went Hollywood: Wilhelm became "William" Dieterle, the famous director, Camilla Horn was John Barrymore's leading lady in "The Tempest" and "Eternal Love", and Jannings was, of course, the first actor ever to win an oscar. When he returned to Germany, they rolled out the red carpet for him: he remained the most renowned german actor until his death. Sadly, he also made some propaganda films, one of them (the anti-british "Ohm Kröger") is still blacklisted.
Goethe's FAUST means to German-Speaking countries what HAMLET means to the English-Speaking world: The terror of schoolchildren forced to write essays and memorize its most famous quotations. Murnau's silent screen version offers us the unique opportunity to enjoy all the suspense of the play without being bothered by the immortal lines of its great author...The version I have seen was restored in 1995 by Luciano Berriatua and offers everything a film fan can hope for: Masterly direction, awesome visuals (at a time where sets were built, not painted with a computer!) and knock-out-performances.
The divine force (here personified by a youth with swan-wings) and Mephisto (Emil Jannings as black crow with goat-horns) struggle over the world domination and open the competition over Faust's (Gösta Ekman) soul. Mephisto spreads his wings over the city and the plague breaks out. Unable to find a cure for the disease, Faust conjures up the devil. Mephisto, now the prototype of middle-aged gluttony, appears and offers Faust a try-out-contract for just one day. This poor old fellow gets his youth back, but the devil is a pretty good psychologist: The very moment when Faust is about to seduce the duchess of Parma, the most beautiful woman on earth, his sands have run out. Now, of course, he is willing to sign the long-term-contract...With a filthy grin, Mephisto draws the curtains of the four-poster.
Carnal desire, however, cannot satisfy Faust for long. Innocence is, what tempts him now. Back in his home town he falls in love with Margarethe (Camilla Horn) who is on her way to church. Mephisto, on the other hand (Jannings, his upper half dressed like a shogun, his lower half in a skin-tight hose) gets hear-ache from her pious singing. The seduction scene would hardly pass today's censors: Among other things, Mephisto mixes a love-potion for Margarethe's cousin Marthe. Heated up, this poor woman starts to chase Mephisto in a slightly indecent manner...
Some scenes are of unearthly beauty, others shocking to an unbearable degree: Margarethe put on the pillory - the crowd rallies to gape at her. She drags herself along, her baby in her arms during a snow-storm - no one will help her. The devil deceives her once more with the illusion of a cradle: She puts her baby to bed - only to discover that she buried it under a blanket of snow. The vision of Margarethe's crying face follows Faust over chains of mountains...
Ekman was Ingrid Bergman's partner in the swedish version of "Intermezzo"; The other stars went Hollywood: Wilhelm became "William" Dieterle, the famous director, Camilla Horn was John Barrymore's leading lady in "The Tempest" and "Eternal Love", and Jannings was, of course, the first actor ever to win an oscar. When he returned to Germany, they rolled out the red carpet for him: he remained the most renowned german actor until his death. Sadly, he also made some propaganda films, one of them (the anti-british "Ohm Kröger") is still blacklisted.
I think of Murnau's Faust as a masterpiece not only of cinema, but of the human imagination. I understand that reviews at the time of its premier were lukewarm, but I honestly can't imagine not feeling grateful for the opportunity to see this film today. Moments and images from it are so powerful, they are vivid in the mind years after seeing them -- two hours in a dream world.
The flying sequence has been commented-on more than once, and with good reason. It is a spectacular series of shots wherein the camera tracks through long miniature sets which gradually change from a dense cluster of medieval rooftops and steeples, to a tortuous countryside of mountain peaks and snake-like rivers, twisted trees, deep gorges with plunging waterfalls and stone cliffs, rapids, a field of long grass, elaborate renaissance architecture and an Italianate palace. Along the way there is an encounter with grotesque elongated black birds in the sky, their wings flapping in unison. The sets incorporate running water (with little bits of smoking material floating in the rapids to simulate splashes and spray), an illuminated moon, and smoke to simulate clouds and fog. The whole sequence can't be much more than a couple of minutes long, but the effort to design, construct and coordinate the sequence must have been staggering. The following palace scene is set on a huge multi-level set with female dancers stretching off into the distance. They are there for no better reason than to establish an atmosphere of sumptuous decadence, and young Faust arrives in the middle of this riding between two enormous elephants, which seem to be entirely artificial and crafted of fabric, wire, etc. So it goes throughout the production. Almost every scene is a feast for the eyes, and the darker scenes are vividly expressionistic in design.
The acting is the old-fashioned silent-movie variety of big operatic gestures and vivid facial expression. It may seem odd to those not used to it, but it is NOT an example of ham actors overdoing it. This was a legitimate style of acting in its time, and offers genuine artistic beauty to those who can manage to appreciate it.
The fact that there seems to be no video version of `Faust' at the time of this posting is criminal. Ditto for Murnau's "Sunrise." These things should NEVER be out of print.
The flying sequence has been commented-on more than once, and with good reason. It is a spectacular series of shots wherein the camera tracks through long miniature sets which gradually change from a dense cluster of medieval rooftops and steeples, to a tortuous countryside of mountain peaks and snake-like rivers, twisted trees, deep gorges with plunging waterfalls and stone cliffs, rapids, a field of long grass, elaborate renaissance architecture and an Italianate palace. Along the way there is an encounter with grotesque elongated black birds in the sky, their wings flapping in unison. The sets incorporate running water (with little bits of smoking material floating in the rapids to simulate splashes and spray), an illuminated moon, and smoke to simulate clouds and fog. The whole sequence can't be much more than a couple of minutes long, but the effort to design, construct and coordinate the sequence must have been staggering. The following palace scene is set on a huge multi-level set with female dancers stretching off into the distance. They are there for no better reason than to establish an atmosphere of sumptuous decadence, and young Faust arrives in the middle of this riding between two enormous elephants, which seem to be entirely artificial and crafted of fabric, wire, etc. So it goes throughout the production. Almost every scene is a feast for the eyes, and the darker scenes are vividly expressionistic in design.
The acting is the old-fashioned silent-movie variety of big operatic gestures and vivid facial expression. It may seem odd to those not used to it, but it is NOT an example of ham actors overdoing it. This was a legitimate style of acting in its time, and offers genuine artistic beauty to those who can manage to appreciate it.
The fact that there seems to be no video version of `Faust' at the time of this posting is criminal. Ditto for Murnau's "Sunrise." These things should NEVER be out of print.
Title: FW Murnaus Faust (1926)
Director: FW Murnau
Cast: Gosta Ekman, Camilla Horn, Emil Jannings, William Dieterle Review:
Having seen Murnaus Nosferatu and having enjoyed it immensely I had to check out some of his other films. Faust quickly caught my attention. After Murnau made Nosferatu, he was given the opportunity to do whatever film he wanted..and they gave him the huge budget to do it. The result was an impressive, visually stunning, supernatural film.
God and the Devil are fighting for who gets to control humanity. They do a wager, they decide that if Satan (aka as Mephisto) can corrupt Faust then all of humanity would belong to Mephisto. After the wager is on, Mephisto spreads the plague throughout Fausts town and people start dying. He decides to call upon the powers of darkness to help people out.
First off, more then anything, this movie is a true visual feast. How Murnau made this movie with the limited resources he had at the time is a true testament to his talent as a filmmaker. Heck, it was 1926, before make up fx, before stan winston, before blue screens and CGI, before anything! Yet, he managed to create an incredibly rich film. Heck this guy even managed to do a crane shot in the movie! In a scene where Faust and Mephisto are flying through the sky's...the camera swoops over a landscape filled with waterfalls, mountains and cliffs...all in one shot! I was actually amazed how with their limited technological resources Murnau managed to do this type of shot back in those days.
The imagery is amazing...starting with Mephisto spreading his gigantic black wings over Fausts small town. I kid you not when I say that, that image is one of the coolest images I have ever seen on any movie. Images of the horsemen of the apocalypse riding the sky's....angels with swords, Faust conjuring up Mephisto by reading from his book...man this movie was really something to behold. Its all wrapped around that black and white aura that gives the film that eerie feel. Kinda like the same feeling I got when I watched White Zombie. I love black and white horror visuals. And Faust was full of them.
Of special interest to me was that scene where Faust conjures up Mephisto by reading some words from a book, its truly a great movie moment with an incredible supernatural feel. The visuals of those circles of light emanating from the ground up towards the sky...that was amazing. And actually I think that scene influenced Francis Ford Copolla in Bram Stokers Dracula because he uses the exact same image of circles of light emerging from the ground.
Faust fantastical imagery truly demonstrates that Murnau had complete and total control over everything that he showed on the screen. The snow, the wind, the shadows, the lights...all perfectly handled to create the exact mood and feel that was required at them moment. Its quite obvious as well that this movies benefited from a much much bigger budget then Murnaus previous films. The sets look a lot like those on Caligari at times, the detailed miniatures are very well achieved and the extras are plentiful.
The performances are great, better then in Nosferatu. They are sometimes a bit exaggerated, but not as much as in other silent films I've seen before. On this one, the performances seemed just right to me. Of special mention is Emil Jannings as Mephisto. This guy played Beelzebub with some real relish. The character comes off as evil, treacherous, calculating...and he does it all with this smirk on his face. Great character. The make up on him is great and he kinda reminded me at times of Bela Lugosi as Dracula. But overall, hes performance was the best in the film. I also really enjoyed Camilla Horn as Gretchen, her scenes with her baby in the snow were great not only in the acting department but visually as well.
Overall, Id recommend this movie to those of you interested in German silent cinema. Its really something to see how even in those days, the imagination and creativity was there. And even the limited technological resources couldn't hold them back from creating a truly beautiful, haunting, spooky, supernatural film. For those of you who enjoyed films like Murnaus Nosferatu or Robert Wienes The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari then you will most certainly love Faust.
I would certainly say it is far superior to the films mentioned before, yet for some reason doesn't get as much recognition. Check it out schmoes for a slice of the best horror silent cinema ever. Definitely worth a look.
Rating: 5 out of 5
Director: FW Murnau
Cast: Gosta Ekman, Camilla Horn, Emil Jannings, William Dieterle Review:
Having seen Murnaus Nosferatu and having enjoyed it immensely I had to check out some of his other films. Faust quickly caught my attention. After Murnau made Nosferatu, he was given the opportunity to do whatever film he wanted..and they gave him the huge budget to do it. The result was an impressive, visually stunning, supernatural film.
God and the Devil are fighting for who gets to control humanity. They do a wager, they decide that if Satan (aka as Mephisto) can corrupt Faust then all of humanity would belong to Mephisto. After the wager is on, Mephisto spreads the plague throughout Fausts town and people start dying. He decides to call upon the powers of darkness to help people out.
First off, more then anything, this movie is a true visual feast. How Murnau made this movie with the limited resources he had at the time is a true testament to his talent as a filmmaker. Heck, it was 1926, before make up fx, before stan winston, before blue screens and CGI, before anything! Yet, he managed to create an incredibly rich film. Heck this guy even managed to do a crane shot in the movie! In a scene where Faust and Mephisto are flying through the sky's...the camera swoops over a landscape filled with waterfalls, mountains and cliffs...all in one shot! I was actually amazed how with their limited technological resources Murnau managed to do this type of shot back in those days.
The imagery is amazing...starting with Mephisto spreading his gigantic black wings over Fausts small town. I kid you not when I say that, that image is one of the coolest images I have ever seen on any movie. Images of the horsemen of the apocalypse riding the sky's....angels with swords, Faust conjuring up Mephisto by reading from his book...man this movie was really something to behold. Its all wrapped around that black and white aura that gives the film that eerie feel. Kinda like the same feeling I got when I watched White Zombie. I love black and white horror visuals. And Faust was full of them.
Of special interest to me was that scene where Faust conjures up Mephisto by reading some words from a book, its truly a great movie moment with an incredible supernatural feel. The visuals of those circles of light emanating from the ground up towards the sky...that was amazing. And actually I think that scene influenced Francis Ford Copolla in Bram Stokers Dracula because he uses the exact same image of circles of light emerging from the ground.
Faust fantastical imagery truly demonstrates that Murnau had complete and total control over everything that he showed on the screen. The snow, the wind, the shadows, the lights...all perfectly handled to create the exact mood and feel that was required at them moment. Its quite obvious as well that this movies benefited from a much much bigger budget then Murnaus previous films. The sets look a lot like those on Caligari at times, the detailed miniatures are very well achieved and the extras are plentiful.
The performances are great, better then in Nosferatu. They are sometimes a bit exaggerated, but not as much as in other silent films I've seen before. On this one, the performances seemed just right to me. Of special mention is Emil Jannings as Mephisto. This guy played Beelzebub with some real relish. The character comes off as evil, treacherous, calculating...and he does it all with this smirk on his face. Great character. The make up on him is great and he kinda reminded me at times of Bela Lugosi as Dracula. But overall, hes performance was the best in the film. I also really enjoyed Camilla Horn as Gretchen, her scenes with her baby in the snow were great not only in the acting department but visually as well.
Overall, Id recommend this movie to those of you interested in German silent cinema. Its really something to see how even in those days, the imagination and creativity was there. And even the limited technological resources couldn't hold them back from creating a truly beautiful, haunting, spooky, supernatural film. For those of you who enjoyed films like Murnaus Nosferatu or Robert Wienes The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari then you will most certainly love Faust.
I would certainly say it is far superior to the films mentioned before, yet for some reason doesn't get as much recognition. Check it out schmoes for a slice of the best horror silent cinema ever. Definitely worth a look.
Rating: 5 out of 5
- spacemonkey_fg
- 15 juin 2005
- Permalien
A lyrical fable version of Goethe's famous story, where Mephisto and an angel gamble with Faust's spirit, the entire film has an aura of delicate beauty. When Faust's town is shrouded with a pestilence, Faust summons Mephisto and agrees to a trial selling of his soul, in the hopes that he can save the townspeople. When Faust does indeed cure the town, Mephisto tempts him with the promise of youth and Gretchen, the most beautiful woman in Italy. Misty, often eerie, fiendish imagery, like satanic birds, hooded men, flying horsemen and Caligari-inspired exteriors fill the screen. When Faust signs his contract, the words burn themselves into the page as Mephisto dips his feather pen in Faust's vein. A wonderful touch near the beginning has Faust trying to escape Mephisto but having him appear wherever he goes, always a few steps ahead. Both Faust, as a young man, and Gretchen are lovely, and Jannings gives an excellent performance as the Dark Prince. A masterpiece of poetic atmosphere that ages Murnau's technical mastery wondrously, the film is aided tremendously by the sometimes ominous, sometimes enchanting orchestral score. 10/10
- desperateliving
- 27 août 2003
- Permalien
Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau was the most important director of the German expressionism era. He made 22 films from which only 11 have persisted. Murnau often made several different versions of his films, which made it impossible to tell which was the original one. Faust was no exception; he made 9 different versions of it whose editing, rhythm and acting differ from each other. F.W. Murnau did a lot of breakthroughs in cinema - he's the most influential filmmaker of his time. For instance in his earlier film Der Letzte Mann (1924, The Last Laugh) Murnau used the camera as a character for the very first time. It was the first time the audience couldn't tell when you were watching the events as an outsider and when as a character. Faust is no lesser. Eric Rohmer has written about it in his dissertation and Herman G. Weinberg saw Faust as the most beautiful film ever made.
Everybody knows the German writer Goethe who wrote Faust. But the story did live before his play. It lived as a folktale. And this is where the critics did wrong. They thought that Murnau's Faust was a fiasco; probably because they tried to compare it to the original play. But F.W. Murnau did Faust (1926) based on the folktale. So the philosophy of Goethe's Faust was left away. The production company (UFA) of Faust also produced another artistic film, Metropolis by Fritz Lang. When the audience didn't like either of these films the company failed.
Faust is a story about God and Satan who wager. A man, Faust, agrees to sell his soul to Satan so he can have all the power of the world. First he wants to use the power to help the diseased people but the temptations of eternal youth and beauty win. "Damned be the illusion of youth!" Faust is a timeless story because the idea of selling one's soul will always be there. Faustic contracts are still made. There is only one thing that can terminate the contract. Liebe - Love. The flaming word appears on the screen to assure us. Earlier I mentioned the new camera-work of The Last Laugh. But Faust did something new too. It was the first film that was based on the metaphorical force of light and shadow. The use of shadows in Faust is symbolic and brilliant. When talking about light and Murnau one might be reminded of Nosferatu (1922), a Gothic vampire story by F.W. Murnau, where the beams of light killed Nosferatu.
Faust deals with essential and timeless themes. On the surface the themes are good and evil but Faust is much more complex than that. I would recommend this masterpiece of the German Expressionism to all film lovers. I wouldn't be surprised if one said that Faust is the best film ever made. F.w. Murnau manages to capture real humane emotions.
Everybody knows the German writer Goethe who wrote Faust. But the story did live before his play. It lived as a folktale. And this is where the critics did wrong. They thought that Murnau's Faust was a fiasco; probably because they tried to compare it to the original play. But F.W. Murnau did Faust (1926) based on the folktale. So the philosophy of Goethe's Faust was left away. The production company (UFA) of Faust also produced another artistic film, Metropolis by Fritz Lang. When the audience didn't like either of these films the company failed.
Faust is a story about God and Satan who wager. A man, Faust, agrees to sell his soul to Satan so he can have all the power of the world. First he wants to use the power to help the diseased people but the temptations of eternal youth and beauty win. "Damned be the illusion of youth!" Faust is a timeless story because the idea of selling one's soul will always be there. Faustic contracts are still made. There is only one thing that can terminate the contract. Liebe - Love. The flaming word appears on the screen to assure us. Earlier I mentioned the new camera-work of The Last Laugh. But Faust did something new too. It was the first film that was based on the metaphorical force of light and shadow. The use of shadows in Faust is symbolic and brilliant. When talking about light and Murnau one might be reminded of Nosferatu (1922), a Gothic vampire story by F.W. Murnau, where the beams of light killed Nosferatu.
Faust deals with essential and timeless themes. On the surface the themes are good and evil but Faust is much more complex than that. I would recommend this masterpiece of the German Expressionism to all film lovers. I wouldn't be surprised if one said that Faust is the best film ever made. F.w. Murnau manages to capture real humane emotions.
- ilpohirvonen
- 4 juin 2010
- Permalien
Faust is my favourite German film, a timeless tale brought to life visually perfect by Murnau in 1926. The photography and special effects although obviously constrained by the prevailing technology was stunning and relentless, a tour de force of camera trickery to bring the power of the story across to Artheads and ordinary folk alike. Trouble is, it's a German b&w silent film so mainly Artheads and a few like me will ever see it for its beauty. Sunrise from a year later takes some beating but Faust does it easily.
The Devil wants to rule so places a morally dubious wager that if he wins Dr. Faust's soul he wins the Earth. Faust falls into the snare and so begins his descent into Hell, along with the woman he has in one night of passion "No man can resist Evil". After 9/11 can we really be sure who won? There's so many memorable scenes: The Devil lowering over the town (Jannings having to spend hours perched uncomfortably over billowing soot until Murnau was happy with the shot); Faust throwing his books on the fire in his fantastic room (with piles of dangerous nitrate film deliberately going up to help); the un-cgi magic carpet ride; Gretchen with her baby in the snow etc. Ekman and Jannings were especially superb in their respective roles, but everyone and everything played their parts well.
The print is a knockout remaster, the menacing atmosphere whenever Faust or Mephisto are in shot is palpable as was only possible with nitrate film stock. Thoroughly recommended to those even only mildly interested who've never seen it before, one I will hopefully watch repeatedly in the future.
The Devil wants to rule so places a morally dubious wager that if he wins Dr. Faust's soul he wins the Earth. Faust falls into the snare and so begins his descent into Hell, along with the woman he has in one night of passion "No man can resist Evil". After 9/11 can we really be sure who won? There's so many memorable scenes: The Devil lowering over the town (Jannings having to spend hours perched uncomfortably over billowing soot until Murnau was happy with the shot); Faust throwing his books on the fire in his fantastic room (with piles of dangerous nitrate film deliberately going up to help); the un-cgi magic carpet ride; Gretchen with her baby in the snow etc. Ekman and Jannings were especially superb in their respective roles, but everyone and everything played their parts well.
The print is a knockout remaster, the menacing atmosphere whenever Faust or Mephisto are in shot is palpable as was only possible with nitrate film stock. Thoroughly recommended to those even only mildly interested who've never seen it before, one I will hopefully watch repeatedly in the future.
- Spondonman
- 16 sept. 2006
- Permalien
Personally, I have a love-hate relationship with horror milestones from the silent era. Some of them I rate as downright brilliant and are listed high in my favorites of all times ("The Phantom Carriage", "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari") but quite often I also literally have to struggle to stay awake throughout these so-called indestructible masterpieces. Murnau's "Faust" is definitely unique, because I experienced these two opposite sentiments during one film! The opening sequences are breathtaking. Unbelievably and utterly breathtaking, in fact. There's the grim prologue that covers a showdown between the archangel and Satan, with horrid images of the four horsemen and brimstone storms, and subsequently the temptation of the titular character (who sells his soul to Mephistopheles in return for youth), which is nothing short of jaw-dropping! What comes next is truly one of the most genius moments in cinema, namely the evil Mephistopheles towering over a little town and symbolically unleashing a plague on it. I think I must have re-watched that particular 7 or 8 times, simple because it's so stunning. But then something strange and incomprehensible happened. The rest of the film suddenly became tedious, prosaic and unremarkable. The content of young Faust wooing the beautiful Gretchen, while Mephistopheles distracts her deeply religious mother, is honestly rather dull and uninteresting. All the mind-blowing aspects of the opening sequences, such as the special effects and the camerawork of Carl Hoffman, are pushed to the background in favor of the mediocre romance plot. The finale finds Murnau returning to great shape, but the powerful impact of the first 15-20 minutes cannot be reached again.
My first silent film lasted over two hours. Dialog full of screens after everything's been said. To be honest, I was surprised at how there was never a point of down, there was never a realization that I was watching a silent film, though it did take a bit of getting used to in the beginning. Some might get pushed away due to the fact that the screen transfer isn't great, or that the music has been recently dubbed, but I found it all to fit perfectly. The acting in this film is more than over expectation, that made me believe in the story from start to finish. By the end I had a new found admiration for the makers of movies from our past, and what standards they can set for movies now.
- aqua_swing
- 29 mai 2005
- Permalien
The definitive "Faust" adaptation. The movie is full of iconic imagery, great expressionist scenes and great acting especially from Gösta Ekman as Faust and Emil Jannings as Mephisto himself. Camilla Horn also impresses in the female part. The giant wings of the Angel of Darkness embracing the city is a impressive unforgettable image. A very satisfying film.
Faust is a famous German story from Johann Wolfgang Goethe but to be honest I wasn't familiar with it until I saw this movie. Perhaps that's also why I liked the story so much, the movie changes direction time after time and from the beginning on you don't know how it is going to end. A great story of good versus evil in which love conquers all.
What makes the movie very memorable is the visual look of it. The movie is filled with some truly amazing early special effects. F.W. Murnau truly was a master in using convincing early special effects in his movies, some scene's are really impressive. Also the cinematography is spectacular and it has some brilliant lighting.
In many ways the movie was decades ahead of its time. The way the story is told in the movie is unique and spectacular for its period and so is the use of humor in it. All the scene's with Mephisto and Marthe Schwerdtlein were shear comedy brilliance, also mainly thanks to Emil Jannings his acting.
Mephisto himself really was one scary great villain character, especially when the character is first introduced to Faust.
Maybe not entirely a classic masterpiece, the middle and the drama is bit too much dragging and lacking for it but certainly a movie historical important and memorable movie. A F.W. Murnau movie that deserves to be seen by more.
9/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
What makes the movie very memorable is the visual look of it. The movie is filled with some truly amazing early special effects. F.W. Murnau truly was a master in using convincing early special effects in his movies, some scene's are really impressive. Also the cinematography is spectacular and it has some brilliant lighting.
In many ways the movie was decades ahead of its time. The way the story is told in the movie is unique and spectacular for its period and so is the use of humor in it. All the scene's with Mephisto and Marthe Schwerdtlein were shear comedy brilliance, also mainly thanks to Emil Jannings his acting.
Mephisto himself really was one scary great villain character, especially when the character is first introduced to Faust.
Maybe not entirely a classic masterpiece, the middle and the drama is bit too much dragging and lacking for it but certainly a movie historical important and memorable movie. A F.W. Murnau movie that deserves to be seen by more.
9/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
- Boba_Fett1138
- 22 avr. 2005
- Permalien
- bsmith5552
- 12 déc. 2018
- Permalien
- BassLightyear
- 1 sept. 2019
- Permalien
By 1925 UFA, German cinema's pioneer production company, was almost collapsing under the weight of mounting financial difficulties, having lost over eight million dollars in the fiscal year just ended. It was at this point that American film studios found the perfect opportunity they've been looking for to finally defeat their one opponent in the market of continental Europe. It was ironic that a film industry born out of the necessity of WWI and Germany's inability to provide American, British or French films in the years between 1914 and 1919 would go on to become Hollywood's number one opponent. Indeed Paramount and MGM offered to subsidize UFA's huge debt to the Deutsche Bank by lending it four million dollars at 7.5 percent interest in exchange for collaborative rights to UFA's studios, theaters, and personnel - an arrangement which clearly worked in the American companies' favor. The result was the foundation of the Parufamet (Paramount-UFA-Metro) Distribution Company in early 1926.
This is only tangential to FAUST but important nonetheless to place the film in its correct historical context. Both as FW Murnau's last German film before he left for Hollywood and as UFA's most expensive production to that date. It is no wonder that within a year of accepting Hollywood as business partners, UFA was already showing losses of twelve million dollars and was forced to seek another loan, when FAUST, a film that cost them 2 million dollars alone and took six months to film only made back half of its budget at the box office. FAUST would go on to be succeeded by Fritz Lang's METROPOLIS as the most expensive German production but it remained FW Murnau's aufwiedersehen to Weimar cinema. He was one of many German film artists and technicians that migrated to sunny California following the Parufamet agreement (Fritz Lang would follow a few years later, having refused Goebbels' offer to lead the national film department for Nazi Germany, along with others like Paul Leni, Billy Wilder, Karl Freund and Ernst Lubitsch).
Weimar cinema wouldn't make it past the 1930's and FW Murnau's career would come to an abrupt end with his death at 42 in a car accident, but FAUST, as the last German production, not only in nationality, but also in style and finesse, definitely deserves its place next to 1922's NOSFERATU in the pantheon of German Expressionism. Frontloaded in terms of spectacle and dazzling visuals, this retelling of Goethe's classic version of Dr. Faust's story is as slow paced and dark as Nosferatu but with the kind of fantastic, mystical and romantic blend that characterized German post-war cinema. A cinema aimed at repressed lower middle-classes which, in the absence of a national identity swept away by war, were now turning to a new cultural identity conscious of the social realities of the times. In that sense, Murnau's Faust is part escapism spectacle, part edifying fable on the corruption of evil and the redeeming qualities of love and forgiveness.
And if the story is overwrought melodrama by today's standards, the magnificent sets constructed by UFA technicians and special effects work stand shoulder to shoulder with some of the best from the 20's. Mephisto looming black and gigantic over a town swept by plague is an iconic image etched on the same pantheon wall of German Expressionism as Count Orlok's shadow. The angels of death riding on their horses with beams of light shooting through them combines the dark fantasy of the production design with expressive lighting, the kind of which would eventually become shaped into film noir by directors like Otto Preminger and Fritz Lang. Gösta Ekman as Faust (superbly made-up as an old man to make even Welles green with envy) and Emil Jannings as Mephisto stand out among the cast.
This is only tangential to FAUST but important nonetheless to place the film in its correct historical context. Both as FW Murnau's last German film before he left for Hollywood and as UFA's most expensive production to that date. It is no wonder that within a year of accepting Hollywood as business partners, UFA was already showing losses of twelve million dollars and was forced to seek another loan, when FAUST, a film that cost them 2 million dollars alone and took six months to film only made back half of its budget at the box office. FAUST would go on to be succeeded by Fritz Lang's METROPOLIS as the most expensive German production but it remained FW Murnau's aufwiedersehen to Weimar cinema. He was one of many German film artists and technicians that migrated to sunny California following the Parufamet agreement (Fritz Lang would follow a few years later, having refused Goebbels' offer to lead the national film department for Nazi Germany, along with others like Paul Leni, Billy Wilder, Karl Freund and Ernst Lubitsch).
Weimar cinema wouldn't make it past the 1930's and FW Murnau's career would come to an abrupt end with his death at 42 in a car accident, but FAUST, as the last German production, not only in nationality, but also in style and finesse, definitely deserves its place next to 1922's NOSFERATU in the pantheon of German Expressionism. Frontloaded in terms of spectacle and dazzling visuals, this retelling of Goethe's classic version of Dr. Faust's story is as slow paced and dark as Nosferatu but with the kind of fantastic, mystical and romantic blend that characterized German post-war cinema. A cinema aimed at repressed lower middle-classes which, in the absence of a national identity swept away by war, were now turning to a new cultural identity conscious of the social realities of the times. In that sense, Murnau's Faust is part escapism spectacle, part edifying fable on the corruption of evil and the redeeming qualities of love and forgiveness.
And if the story is overwrought melodrama by today's standards, the magnificent sets constructed by UFA technicians and special effects work stand shoulder to shoulder with some of the best from the 20's. Mephisto looming black and gigantic over a town swept by plague is an iconic image etched on the same pantheon wall of German Expressionism as Count Orlok's shadow. The angels of death riding on their horses with beams of light shooting through them combines the dark fantasy of the production design with expressive lighting, the kind of which would eventually become shaped into film noir by directors like Otto Preminger and Fritz Lang. Gösta Ekman as Faust (superbly made-up as an old man to make even Welles green with envy) and Emil Jannings as Mephisto stand out among the cast.
- chaos-rampant
- 17 févr. 2009
- Permalien
Undoubtedly, Faust is one of the most astonishing visual experiences the silent era has to offer. Almost every single scene was perfect according to the narration. The dark shots are expressed vividly. This movie will remind you again, that astonishing movies are not always about portraying the reality, but to create a replica of realism of its own which is impossible to deny by an audience.
F.W. Murnau's "Faust. Eine deutsche Volkssage" (1926) is based on Goethe's "Faust I", the movie takes as direct text basis a libretto written by Hans Kyser which differs remarkably from Goethe's dramatic play. For example, Kyser motivates the physician Dr. Faustus's pact with Mephistopheles through his mercy for the victims of the plague, while in Goethe's work, the basic motivation of Dr. Faustus is the enlargement of his scientific knowledge. It is thus interesting to see that Mephisto or the devil represents the darkness from which all the additional knowledge seems to come which cannot be reached by Dr. Faustus in the world of the light in which God reigns. It is this negativity of the darkness as opposed to the positivity of the light that parallels the dichotomy of Good and Evil as well as the dichotomy of Volition and Cognition. So, Dr. Faustus' fundamental metaphysical attempt is to control the dark empire of the will that cannot be controlled by traditional science settled in the bright empire of the thought. It even seems that negativity stands for reflection, and reflection comes from the darkness that in the same time represents Evil. Moreover, since the Being is defined by the positivity of light, cognition and Good, the negativity of darkness, reflection and will must be defined by the Nothing, since in classical logic there is no third instance between them.
Therefore, we may see Murnau's "Faust" not only as a movie dealing with the ethic categories of Good and Evil, but also with the metaphysical categories of Being and Nothing. Dr. Faustus, signing his league with the devil, opens the curtain that separates the Here and the Beyond, he transgresses a border of no return. When Mephisto promises Dr. Faustus that he may enter the contract "only for one day", it is quite clear why Mephisto can always turn around the hour-glass in order to prolong the lasting of the league: Eternity cannot be split; if you take out a piece of Eternity there will remain still Eternity. Since Dr. Faustus is a human being and hence does not participate in Eternity, it follows that he will not be able to stand in this never-land between the contextures of Good and Evil, of Darkness and Light, of Cognition and Volition, of Being and Nothing, of Here and Beyond. His intermediary position is shown by Murnau in the often overlooked scene where Dr. Faustus, who had meanwhile turned by aid of the devil into a young man, is charming a young Indian princess while a pendulum above them is vacillating between light and darkness.
Murnau must have had in his mind a poly-contextural world when he shows us Mephisto holding the mirror in which the picture of the old Dr. Faustus appears, although he had already turned him into a youth. Not only does the mirror not reflect Mephisto who is holding it, but it reflects the picture of somebody else and even has a memory of the former state of this person. This phenomenon does not fit together at all with traditional logic in which the mirror can be seen as the operator who turns position into negation, falseness into truth and thus operates like a light-switch that, clicked on twice, leads back to the original state, i.e. from light via darkness back to light or from darkness via light back to darkness.
Now, at the end of his life, Dr. Faustus stays in the borderland between light and darkness that cannot be shown at the hand of a light-switch, since this never stops in an intermediary position between light and darkness. Because the light-switch serves as a model for classical logic, we have to deal in Murnau's "Faust" with trans-classical logic and thus with a world in which there are not only the dichotomic contextures Here and Beyond, Being and Nothing, Cognition and Volition, but a never-land as a third instance between them, and thus we read on one of Gerhart Hauptmann's titles the phrase "At the Gates of Darkness", the gates representing this third instance between the dichotomic contextures of classical logic.
When we read on another title toward the end of the movie "Death sets all men free", it is clear, that Dr. Faustus, after having entered the border-land between the Here and the Beyond by signing his pact with Mephisto, is on a trip that can only end in the Darkness, the Nothing and thus his Death. Once somebody has crossed the borderline between the contextures, he is on a trip of no-return. But such an end would fit into classical logic and thus not fit together with all the hints Murnau gives us toward polycontexturality. Murnau therefore needs a third instance between the contextures by which Dr. Faustus can be rescued from Death representing Evil in two-valued classical logic, both belonging to the contexture of the Nothing. Since Evil can only be neutralized by Good, this third instance must come from Good in order to finish Dr. Faustus's life not in the darkness of Evil, but in the light of Good, and this instance is his love to Gretchen. But in order to achieve that, Murnau needs another trick that does not fit into classical logic: Since Dr. Faustus has meanwhile turned back into the old man he was at the beginning of the movie, Gretchen must remember the alter ego of Dr. Faustus as a youngster, and Murnau shows this by fading over the pictures of the two alter egos of Dr. Faustus. In other words: Murnau achieves to establish Love as a third instance between the contextures of Good and Evil by doubling Dr. Faustus' individuality using paradoxically the dichotomic means of classical logic. When Dr. Faustus and Gretchens die together at the stake, they have finished their trip in to the light that leads them out of darkness: "Death sets all men free".
Therefore, we may see Murnau's "Faust" not only as a movie dealing with the ethic categories of Good and Evil, but also with the metaphysical categories of Being and Nothing. Dr. Faustus, signing his league with the devil, opens the curtain that separates the Here and the Beyond, he transgresses a border of no return. When Mephisto promises Dr. Faustus that he may enter the contract "only for one day", it is quite clear why Mephisto can always turn around the hour-glass in order to prolong the lasting of the league: Eternity cannot be split; if you take out a piece of Eternity there will remain still Eternity. Since Dr. Faustus is a human being and hence does not participate in Eternity, it follows that he will not be able to stand in this never-land between the contextures of Good and Evil, of Darkness and Light, of Cognition and Volition, of Being and Nothing, of Here and Beyond. His intermediary position is shown by Murnau in the often overlooked scene where Dr. Faustus, who had meanwhile turned by aid of the devil into a young man, is charming a young Indian princess while a pendulum above them is vacillating between light and darkness.
Murnau must have had in his mind a poly-contextural world when he shows us Mephisto holding the mirror in which the picture of the old Dr. Faustus appears, although he had already turned him into a youth. Not only does the mirror not reflect Mephisto who is holding it, but it reflects the picture of somebody else and even has a memory of the former state of this person. This phenomenon does not fit together at all with traditional logic in which the mirror can be seen as the operator who turns position into negation, falseness into truth and thus operates like a light-switch that, clicked on twice, leads back to the original state, i.e. from light via darkness back to light or from darkness via light back to darkness.
Now, at the end of his life, Dr. Faustus stays in the borderland between light and darkness that cannot be shown at the hand of a light-switch, since this never stops in an intermediary position between light and darkness. Because the light-switch serves as a model for classical logic, we have to deal in Murnau's "Faust" with trans-classical logic and thus with a world in which there are not only the dichotomic contextures Here and Beyond, Being and Nothing, Cognition and Volition, but a never-land as a third instance between them, and thus we read on one of Gerhart Hauptmann's titles the phrase "At the Gates of Darkness", the gates representing this third instance between the dichotomic contextures of classical logic.
When we read on another title toward the end of the movie "Death sets all men free", it is clear, that Dr. Faustus, after having entered the border-land between the Here and the Beyond by signing his pact with Mephisto, is on a trip that can only end in the Darkness, the Nothing and thus his Death. Once somebody has crossed the borderline between the contextures, he is on a trip of no-return. But such an end would fit into classical logic and thus not fit together with all the hints Murnau gives us toward polycontexturality. Murnau therefore needs a third instance between the contextures by which Dr. Faustus can be rescued from Death representing Evil in two-valued classical logic, both belonging to the contexture of the Nothing. Since Evil can only be neutralized by Good, this third instance must come from Good in order to finish Dr. Faustus's life not in the darkness of Evil, but in the light of Good, and this instance is his love to Gretchen. But in order to achieve that, Murnau needs another trick that does not fit into classical logic: Since Dr. Faustus has meanwhile turned back into the old man he was at the beginning of the movie, Gretchen must remember the alter ego of Dr. Faustus as a youngster, and Murnau shows this by fading over the pictures of the two alter egos of Dr. Faustus. In other words: Murnau achieves to establish Love as a third instance between the contextures of Good and Evil by doubling Dr. Faustus' individuality using paradoxically the dichotomic means of classical logic. When Dr. Faustus and Gretchens die together at the stake, they have finished their trip in to the light that leads them out of darkness: "Death sets all men free".
I was so intrigued with this film. Taking the classic story of the man who sells his soul (initially to benefit humanity). Playing with shadows and religious symbols. Using Emile Jannings "Mephisto" as a three dimensional character, even comedic at times. I think what I like the most was how the middle ages, with the day to day cruelty of pestilence and want, unfolded. Murnau also did some sensational visuals--the apocalyptic visions, the spectre of Satan enshrouding the city, bringing the plague. The character of Faust and his failure to gain love--even though he bargained it away--is very poignant. Faust wants youth but has made a pact. If there is a shortcoming, Faust's debauchery is almost entirely off screen and Mephisto performs all the visible cruelty. The reclamation of the soul needs a little more to pair against. Of course, in many of the Faust presentations, he pays the ultimate price and is not able to repent.
- Dr_Coulardeau
- 27 août 2007
- Permalien
Mephisto (Satan) bets with God that he can get the soul of Faust, a bright and studious man. If Mephisto corrupts Faust, all mankind would belong to him. The first part of this film is related to this pact. Then, with Faust young and handsome, he seduces Gretchen, and the second part of this movie is related to the tragedy of Gretchen. The last scene, with the redemption of Faust, is also wonderful. Yesterday I watched Faust on DVD for the first time. This is another a masterpiece of the history of the cinematographic industry and of the German Expressionism. The lighting, shadows, effects and photography are amazing for a 1926 movie. I read in the biography of the outstanding Morneau that he fought as a pilot in the World War I and died in 1931, with 43 years old, in a car accident. What a loss for the culture of the world! Emil Jannings as Mephistoles is fantastic, alternating evil and wickedness with funny situations. Faust with his regret has a great performance and the despair of Gretchen (a very beautiful woman) is touching. I only regret that the DVD released in Brazil has not restored the images. My vote is ten.
- claudio_carvalho
- 25 sept. 2003
- Permalien
FW Murnau's 'Faust', made in Germany, is a wonderful film. The version I saw had a beautiful piano accompaniment, which certainly helped, but any musical accompaniment would do just as well.
Emil Jannings' performance as Mephistopheles is just superb - mocking, playful, frightening. Camilla Horn and Wilhelm Dieterle (who later became a respected Hollywood film director) are also good value as the sister and brother who fall foul of the young Faust's amorality.
The film is funny, moving, and effective. It looks stunning, it is like having a dream which assaults the senses at every turn. A true gem which I would recommend anyone to see.
Emil Jannings' performance as Mephistopheles is just superb - mocking, playful, frightening. Camilla Horn and Wilhelm Dieterle (who later became a respected Hollywood film director) are also good value as the sister and brother who fall foul of the young Faust's amorality.
The film is funny, moving, and effective. It looks stunning, it is like having a dream which assaults the senses at every turn. A true gem which I would recommend anyone to see.
Two great European myths emerged from the early modern period, despite its being a time of print culture: that of the great seducer, Don Juan, and that of Faust, the frustrated intellectual who strikes a pact with Hell. These are myths in the sense that they are the exclusive property of no individual author, but belong in common to the whole culture (as Murnau's subtitle, calling this a "Volkssage," reminds us); and as such they are susceptible to wide variations in the telling. The tale of Faust began humbly enough (by literary standards) in the anonymous German *Faustbuch*, which, quickly translated into English, soon became the basis for one of Kit Marlowe's greatest plays. After that brief emergence into high culture it went low-brow again, becoming a staple of German puppet theater, and wall-paintings in beer-cellars like Auerbach's in Leipzig. Lessing saw its possibilities, and Goethe (who had drunk at Auerbach's as a student) realized them in the greatest work of German literature--on which he lavished much of a very long life. Goethe's work inspired Romantic artists including not only Byron (as in "Manfred") but also opera composers ranging from Ludwig Spohr to Hector Berlioz, Charles Gounod, and Arrigo Boito.
Murnau's splendid (and now splendidly restored) silent film takes its cues primarily from the Goethe and Gounod versions, but goes its own way too, as is quite right. Goethe, after all, was writing a "closet drama," that is, a play meant to be read rather than performed and seen in a theater (though the first of its two parts is widely considered stage-able); but Murnau was creating a photo-play in which any words had to be in the form of disruptive title screens; and so the verbal component, which for Goethe was the whole, had in film to be kept to a bare minimum. This underlies and justifies many of Murnau's departures from Goethe's splendid precedent--departures that offended me when I first saw this film many years ago, in a far inferior version, but that I now see the reason and justification for. In any case, those of us who are familiar with Goethe's *Faust* (as Germans tend to be) are seeing a rather different movie here from the one that others see--for better and/or for worse.
From Goethe (himself borrowing from *Job*) this film takes the notion of a background wager between Heaven and Hell, here providing that if Faust falls, spiritually, Hell gets to rule the whole earth. This being a film from Germany a quarter of the way through the twentieth century (which Al Pacino, as the Devil in *Devil's Advocate,* memorably characterizes as "all mine"), the terms of the wager provide no sure clue which side will win it. The *Faustbuch,* Marlowe, and Berlioz all consign Faust to Hell at the end; Goethe, Gounod, and Boito all redeem him. What will this film do? Find out!
The emphasis on "youth" (as the main desideratum for which Faust bargains with the devil), and the disproportionate (relative to Goethe) emphasis on the love story with Gretchen, both show influence from the Gounod opera. An example of Murnau's departing from both precedents is having Mephisto himself commit a murder that in both Goethe and Gounod he manipulates Faust into committing; but the underlying idea, that Mephisto is prepping Faust for Hell and damnation by leading him to despair of salvation, is rightly maintained. Also, where Goethe has Faust recall a plague when his and his father's medical science utterly failed to help people, Murnau makes that plague present, and Faust's inability to help is the immediate cause of his spiritual desperation. A maiden who appeals in vain to the aged Faust for medical help (for her mother) is a near look-alike to Gretchen, a nice touch.
Jannings is a splendidly louche, unhandsome devil (here named "Mephisto," the only name bestowed upon this character in actual dialog in Goethe, though speech prefixes give "Mephistopheles"). His tactics are ingeniously contrived to keep outright magic to a minimum, relying on spiritual cunning instead. Camilla Horn seems too much the stock silent heroine early on, but grows mightily as Gretchen suffers. Gösta Ekman as the title character is perhaps weaker in his young guise, but his ability (with great help from makeup) to represent both old Faust and young is breathtaking.
Makeup in general is too stagy for the frequent sharply focused closeups, so that we see it AS makeup. For special effects, shots of the apocalyptic horsemen, and shots of Mephisto and Faust on the back of some rough beast supposedly carrying them through the sky, may induce some cringes; but otherwise the quality is astonishingly high for the period, with model sets exquisitely designed, built, dressed, and photographed. The soundtrack of the 1997 restored version features only one each of cello, trumpet, violin, clarinet, and piano, and so sounds a bit thin, and also rather repetitious, but it is enlivened by intelligent quotations from both Gounod's opera and Schubert's setting (from Goethe) of "Gretchen am Spinnrade."
Murnau's splendid (and now splendidly restored) silent film takes its cues primarily from the Goethe and Gounod versions, but goes its own way too, as is quite right. Goethe, after all, was writing a "closet drama," that is, a play meant to be read rather than performed and seen in a theater (though the first of its two parts is widely considered stage-able); but Murnau was creating a photo-play in which any words had to be in the form of disruptive title screens; and so the verbal component, which for Goethe was the whole, had in film to be kept to a bare minimum. This underlies and justifies many of Murnau's departures from Goethe's splendid precedent--departures that offended me when I first saw this film many years ago, in a far inferior version, but that I now see the reason and justification for. In any case, those of us who are familiar with Goethe's *Faust* (as Germans tend to be) are seeing a rather different movie here from the one that others see--for better and/or for worse.
From Goethe (himself borrowing from *Job*) this film takes the notion of a background wager between Heaven and Hell, here providing that if Faust falls, spiritually, Hell gets to rule the whole earth. This being a film from Germany a quarter of the way through the twentieth century (which Al Pacino, as the Devil in *Devil's Advocate,* memorably characterizes as "all mine"), the terms of the wager provide no sure clue which side will win it. The *Faustbuch,* Marlowe, and Berlioz all consign Faust to Hell at the end; Goethe, Gounod, and Boito all redeem him. What will this film do? Find out!
The emphasis on "youth" (as the main desideratum for which Faust bargains with the devil), and the disproportionate (relative to Goethe) emphasis on the love story with Gretchen, both show influence from the Gounod opera. An example of Murnau's departing from both precedents is having Mephisto himself commit a murder that in both Goethe and Gounod he manipulates Faust into committing; but the underlying idea, that Mephisto is prepping Faust for Hell and damnation by leading him to despair of salvation, is rightly maintained. Also, where Goethe has Faust recall a plague when his and his father's medical science utterly failed to help people, Murnau makes that plague present, and Faust's inability to help is the immediate cause of his spiritual desperation. A maiden who appeals in vain to the aged Faust for medical help (for her mother) is a near look-alike to Gretchen, a nice touch.
Jannings is a splendidly louche, unhandsome devil (here named "Mephisto," the only name bestowed upon this character in actual dialog in Goethe, though speech prefixes give "Mephistopheles"). His tactics are ingeniously contrived to keep outright magic to a minimum, relying on spiritual cunning instead. Camilla Horn seems too much the stock silent heroine early on, but grows mightily as Gretchen suffers. Gösta Ekman as the title character is perhaps weaker in his young guise, but his ability (with great help from makeup) to represent both old Faust and young is breathtaking.
Makeup in general is too stagy for the frequent sharply focused closeups, so that we see it AS makeup. For special effects, shots of the apocalyptic horsemen, and shots of Mephisto and Faust on the back of some rough beast supposedly carrying them through the sky, may induce some cringes; but otherwise the quality is astonishingly high for the period, with model sets exquisitely designed, built, dressed, and photographed. The soundtrack of the 1997 restored version features only one each of cello, trumpet, violin, clarinet, and piano, and so sounds a bit thin, and also rather repetitious, but it is enlivened by intelligent quotations from both Gounod's opera and Schubert's setting (from Goethe) of "Gretchen am Spinnrade."
- bdonovan-348-566809
- 19 avr. 2012
- Permalien
Johann Faust (ca 1480 - ca 1540) was a German physician. After his death there arose the legend that he had sold his soul to the devil. Johann Spies was the first to write this story down in 1587, but it became widely known in the version of Johann (again) Wolfgang von Goethe in 1832. After that numerous writers have been inspired by the Faust story, for example Thomas Mann (1947).
Not only writers were inspired but also film directors. Not so long ago I saw "All that money can buy" (1941, William Dieterle). Reason to rewatch the version of Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau from 1926.
Most of the time a film adaptation of the Faust story appears every couple of years, but "All that money can buy" happens to be the direct successor of the "Faust" of 1926, despite the 15 years in between.
The two films differ on two essential points. In the first place "Faust" is clearly a fairytale while "All that money can buy" is socially critical. Secondly, and in line with this, in "Faust " the devil really corrupts the human being who initially only wants to do good (rescue his city from the plague). In "All that money can buy" however the evil (greed) is already present and the devil only has to stimulate and activate it.
"Faust" is the last German Murnau film, and certainly not his best. The beginning is still an impressive example of German expressionism, but thereafter the story of Gretchen is a little to melodramatic.
Not only writers were inspired but also film directors. Not so long ago I saw "All that money can buy" (1941, William Dieterle). Reason to rewatch the version of Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau from 1926.
Most of the time a film adaptation of the Faust story appears every couple of years, but "All that money can buy" happens to be the direct successor of the "Faust" of 1926, despite the 15 years in between.
The two films differ on two essential points. In the first place "Faust" is clearly a fairytale while "All that money can buy" is socially critical. Secondly, and in line with this, in "Faust " the devil really corrupts the human being who initially only wants to do good (rescue his city from the plague). In "All that money can buy" however the evil (greed) is already present and the devil only has to stimulate and activate it.
"Faust" is the last German Murnau film, and certainly not his best. The beginning is still an impressive example of German expressionism, but thereafter the story of Gretchen is a little to melodramatic.
- frankde-jong
- 15 nov. 2020
- Permalien
What was this film about? After first 15 or 20 minutes, the film plunges into a long, mindless romance and the 'unwarranted' tragedy that follows. Mephisto is more of a comic character than a real menacing figure. This film doesn't really live up to the hype it has created itself over the years. I was utterly disappointed upon seeing this film as I had expected something meaningful and serious like how Faust redeems himself or how the Satan perpetuates his grip on him. Nothing else except cheap romantic and tragic story throughout the film. It feels as if the Gretchen is the real star of the film, not Faust.
Not what it has been said to be.
Not what it has been said to be.