He's not "attacking" planktonrules' post, he's merely speaking against it, which is generally approved and regarded as normal in any discussion on the topic of film.
Now, I vehemently disagree with the aformentioned review as well, especially with the headline entitled "practically unwatchable film." Now, in Planktonrules' defense, La Roue is obviously extended beyond the limits of any commonplace silent film and his only fault was seemingly for that of it's outstretched running time of about 4.55 hours. However, that is a personal preference of his that really cannot be argued even though I disagree wholeheartedly.
In my opinion, La Roue is one of the most innovative and momenteous films to ever be made and is rightfully lauded for it's pioneering act in the art and technique of motion-picture photography, film-editing, rapid montage, and on-location shooting--a bountiful of technological aspects as well--not to mention, Abel Gance's analysis of the human mental processes and behavior was never quite accomplished to the extent showcased in La Roue. Therefore, the film is indubitably more extraordinary for it's cinamatic achievements oppose to it's melodramatic story. Nonetheless, La Roue is an astonishlingly beautiful impressionists film that would change cinema forever; influencing everyone from D.W. Griffith and King Vidor to Sergei M. Eistenstein and Rene Clair, as well as later filmmakers, such as Akira Kurosawa and Jean Cocteau.
"I hope I never get so old I get religious." Ingmar Bergman
reply
share
BwlBoy
14 years ago
I have read the planktonrules review and whilst he/she has been vilified in the first two posts here, I beg to differ and would agree with elements of it. There is no reason to dispute that he/she is a silent film fan and if he/she has written so many reviews it shouldn't be too hard to confirm this. This would give he/she a point of reference and not just merely treat the film with disdain because it's too long.
I am likewise a silent film fan or moreover a film fan outright. Amongst others I have seen all the silent films recommended in the book 1001 movies to see before you die, with the exception of Gance's Napoleon that I have and intend to watch this weekend.
I watched the flicker alley version of La Roue last night which is split in 2 parts with running times of 161 minutes and 101 minutes. In my view the story really only comes together and gathers pace in the second part. I personally would drastically reduce the running time in the first part so I don't disagree with planktonrules' view that it's too long. Again, I have seen many lengthy silent films e.g. Feuillade' episodic Les Vampires, Birth of a Nation, Intolerance, Orphans of the Storm. I cannot vividly recall taking the view that the running times of these films were detrimental.
That said I think La Roue is still a very good film however I was more than a little disturbed about the incestuous theme that runs throughout. Again, planktonrules made a reference to this.
If I found out that my sister who I had lived and grown with into my adult life was not my sister I would still love her but strictly in a platonic way. The fact that Elie lusts after Norma when discovering the truth is in my view disturbing. Sisif' obsession with Norma is borderline paedophilia. I feel very strongly about this.
My only other view on the story is what I perceive to be the imperfect ending. I feel that Sisif's death should have occurred when the wheel i.e the circle of people dancing, stopped turning i.e. they stopped dancing. That for me would have been both fitting and symbolic. Certainly recommended viewing, undoubtedly pioneering film-making techniques although I'm not convinced that all the famous directors mentioned in the previous post would have witnessed this film and counted it as an influence in their film-making unless I saw evidence to the contrary.
Personally I perceived more innovation in silent films like F W Murnau' The Last Laugh and Dziga Vertov' The Man with the Movie Camera albeit they post-date La Roue.
reply
share
Endy7
13 years ago
"I was more than a little disturbed about the incestuous theme that runs throughout."
"I feel very strongly about this."
That was the point!
"I'm not convinced that all the famous directors mentioned in the previous post would have witnessed this film and counted it as an influence in their film-making"
You being convinced is not important at all. But the fact is film-makers absorb much more films than average film-buffs.
Gance was extremely well known director at the time. "La Roue" was one of the biggest hits in Europe, people were storming to cinemas. And Griffith personally made an agreement with Gance in NYC that UA will distribute the film in North America.
Being influenced by him was easy, unlike for example Mizoguchi being heavily influenced by L'Herbier who unlike Gance was virtually unknown outside of his country yet being probably the biggest aesthete in the 20's.
And Murnau didn't just snap his fingers and the next moment "Der Letzte Mann" was born. At the time he was making his mediocre first films, Victor Sjöström was creating masterpiece after masterpiece. Nosferatu isn't even comparable to stunning "Körkarlen" made year earlier, which also heavily influenced Murnau's upcoming "Phantom".
Benjamin Christensen manipulated with artificial lighting and was using true chiaroscuro as early as 1913/1914, heavily influencing the look of German Expressionist film movement. These days people have no clue who he is yet back then he was well known and copied director not to mention Denmark had some of the biggest studios in the world.
reply
share
BwlBoy
12 years ago
Endy7, you really think incest was the point of La Roue? If so, what is your point of reference?
By the way I never contrive to place importance on anything I say. Clearly, you do which is not a pleasant characteristic.
reply
share
emncaity
9 years ago
Well done.
I appreciate the pushback against the planktonrules review, and it's done very specifically by somebody who really loves La Roue, but I think your specifics about some of the improvements that might have been made, the discomfort with some of the thematic material, etc., are also on-point and very much worth making. Just a very rational, well-drawn response that is (as you know) out of character with most of what goes on out here on the discussion boards, where "you're an idiot because I disagree with you" is the order of the day.
reply
share