Monday, July 7, 2008

Classic Restored -- 'Metropolis' Missing Scenes Found

The museum director from Buenos Aires had something special in her luggage: a copy of a long version of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, including scenes believed lost for almost 80 years. After examining the film the three experts are certain: The find from Buenos Aires is a real treasure, a worldwide sensation. Metropolis, the most important silent film in German history, can from this day on be considered to have been rediscovered. ...

They (Paramount) oversimplified the plot, even cutting key scenes. The original version could only be seen in Berlin until May 1927 – from then on it was considered to have been lost forever. Those recently viewing a restored version of the film first read the following insert: “More than a quarter of the film is believed to be lost forever.” Zeit Online
This is fabulous news for what has remained a lasting gem of film.  Here is ten minutes from the transformation scene:

Giorgio Moroder did a restoration that colored the slides and added contemporary music in 1984.  I know some hated the tampering but I loved the version and the new interest in the film.  Here is one song from that restoration:



Anonymous said...

Apparently you gave me a bogus e-mail, because I sent you this letter on Friday:

It was a tossed-off line to get me to the "meat" of my discussion -- how the United States dealt with its colonies. I am absolutely no student of the Spanish-American war, and the main points I recall were the Maine's accidental destruction being blamed on the Spanish and William Randolph Hearst telling his guy to stay in peaceful Cuba to cover the upcoming conflict: "You provide the pictures, I'll provide the war."

I wasn't interested in writing a doctoral thesis on the causes and origins of the Spanish-American war, I wanted to get past it as quickly as I could. So I tossed off a flippant, sarcastic one-liner (OK, if you really want to continue being pedantic) two lines) to get the piece rolling on to the substance.

If you want to read a scholarly, thoroughly-documented account of all the geopolitical snd sociological factors that led to the conflict, feel free to read one. Or, if you're really that interested, write one. I wanted to talk about the long-term consequences of our acquisition of those Spanish possessions and make a larger point. I had no interest in the minutiae of the roots of the conflict, and less now.


LifeTrek said...

Jay, Email address should have been accurate but it may be outdated -- I signed up for my Wizbang account (Typekey I think?) long ago, I will check it when I stop by.

Just to clarify, your one line was:

"Finally, in the waning years of the 19th century, we got into the act. But we decided it was too much work to build our own empire. Rather, why not just take someone else's? That led to the Spanish-American War,"

You may think it is pedantic to point out that we didn't decide to take an empire but it is a fundamentally false accusation that is still used today against the US for the Iraq invasion.

That was a fundamental error that altered the facts supporting your post and it should have been corrected not replied to with a snarky comment.

"I wanted to talk about the long-term consequences of our acquisition of those Spanish possessions and make a larger point. I had no interest in the minutiae of the roots of the conflict, and less now."

And Dan Rather wanted to talk about the TNG not some documents! "Fake but accurate," right?

But that's just my, "pedantic," opinion as you put it.

Anonymous said...

Nicely evaded there. Skip over the relevant parts -- the Maine incident and Hearst's declaration -- and focus on the parts that let you continue your fixation on demonstrating your superior knowledge of an era of US history that I find utterly uninteresting.

Congratulations. You win. You're most likely right that my sarcastic, flippant comment is a less than entirely accurate representation of the mentality of some of the decision makers of the time.

What on earth will you do for your next trick? A thousand words on how the US should have listened to William Jennings Bryan about the gold standard? Several paragraphs on how the Wright Brothers got far more credit than they deserve? Perhaps an exploration of Pasteur's work, and the errors he made?

As I said, I was less concerned with the precise circumstances that led to the US acquiring Spain's colonial possessions and more with what we did with them. I had no interest in going into the full history of that, and feared that I would bore both the readers and myself with a piece that was already approaching 1400 words.

I was mistaken. At least one reader, it seems not only would have been utterly fascinated and enthralled with that, but is seriously put out that I omitted it.

I don't know how I'll get over this crushing disappointment, but I'll try to muddle on.


LifeTrek said...

Jay, wow!

In my initial comment I simply pointed out that your post contained factual errors as they were not how I recalled history.

I even agreed with the larger point of your post, the one you were so concerned about making that you couldn't be bothered with the facts!

I did some research to ensure I had indeed recalled history accurately and a day latter followed up a comment in which I provided you with verification that you had indeed erred and asking if you had a reference for your assertion that the US stole an empire.

Two days later you send me an Email (you posted in comments here) after I, very politely, added one sentence to a comment on another post thinking perhaps you hadn't seen my initial post. ("Oh, Jay, did you happen to check on this post and correct the SAW assertions?")

I never asked for a complete explanation of the cause of the SAW, but I did expect a correction of a factual error.

The entire time I was polite and was attempting to help the accuracy of a blog that I admire and an author that I read religiously since you started at Wizbang!

(I congratulated you on your one year anniversary at Wizbang March 28, 2005, saying, "This is his great blogiversary post.

His insights have added much to the blogosphere!")

You proceeded to call me pedantic waiving off factual errors as if they didn't matter -- you had decided your point and you were going to fit the facts to match your conclusion.

Wow, it is rare that there is a moment when the veil is lifted this clearly by someone's own admission and I guess I just experienced one.

You chose to make it a competition, for some reason being unable to strike out an error in a post. I merely tired to help correct that error. AND I WAS NOTHING BUT POLITE THE ENTIRE TIME. I wasn't even playing whatever game you thought it was!

Thank you for your comments here and for your posting over the years. I do look forward to reading more of your insightful thoughts, you are correct when you assert that you have an innate talent for writing.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License