Greed (1924)

User Rating:

8.1/10   

Director:

Erich von Stroheim

Writers:

June Mathis (screen adaptation and dialogue)
Frank Norris (novel)

Release Date:

26 January 1925 (USA)

Genre:

Drama

Plot:

The sudden fortune won from a lottery fans such destructive greed that it ruins the lives of the three people involved.

Plot Keywords:

Gold | Money | Dentist | Friendship | Murder

Awards:

1 win

Cast

Zasu Pitts	...	Trina
Gibson Gowland	...	McTeague
Jean Hersholt	...	Marcus
Dale Fuller	...	Maria
Tempe Pigott	...	Mother McTeague
Sylvia Ashton	...	'Mommer' Sieppe (as Silvia Ashton)
Chester Conklin	...	'Popper' Sieppe
Joan Standing	...	Selina

Runtime:

140 min | USA:239 min (1999 restored version) | Portugal:130 min (original version) (20 fps)

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Black and White

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1

Sound Mix:

Silent

Certification:

Sweden:15

Filming Locations:

16th Street, Oakland, California, USA

Company:

Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corporation

Trivia:

Jean Hersholt was hospitalized after he lost 27 pounds during the filming of the movie's climax in Death Valley.

Goofs:

Anachronisms: Although all the principals have costumes and hairstyles appropriate for around 1900, outside the theater the other patrons seem to be in modern (1923) dress. A recent-model automobile is even visible in the last exterior shot of the theater.

Quotes:

Trina: Let's go sit on the sewer.

Movie Connections:

Featured in Irving Thalberg: Prince of Hollywood (2005) (TV)

Masterful Cinema, At Any Length

You don't have to watch "Greed" for very long to become impressed with the masterful technique of von Stroheim and his cast. Sometimes it relies on fancy methods such as the occasional use of gold tinting (which must have demanded some painstaking work), and at other times it relies on flawless direction, carefully chosen details, and a keen understanding of what is happening in the characters' lives. The tense finale is especially memorable, a sequence you won't forget for a while.

The only real questions about "Greed" have to do with its length. Hardly anyone disputes the folly of the studio decision to chop the original down to a couple of hours. The restored version uses stills and title cards to fill in the most important scenes that were left out in the studio release, and from this you can also piece together what was actually included in the shorter version. Several significant secondary characters were almost completely eliminated, which took away some of the relationships that were supposed to serve as important comparisons with the central relationship between McTeague and his wife. Even if they had been right to cut the film to a quarter of its length, the choices they made left much to be desired.

Would it really have been better with several more hours of material? Although there is plenty of plot, there isn't anything in the story thematically that would require anything longer then the restored version. It's a gripping study of human flaws, especially greed, but goes no farther. It is admirable to see a director try to hold so closely to a novel, but the Frank Norris novel, while detailed, convincing, and well-conceived as far as it goes, doesn't have the depth or the multi-dimensional characters of the greatest novels. There is no doubt that the lost footage would have provided many more examples of fine film-making, but most of it would not have added very much to the story itself.

What would probably have been perfect is something close to the length of the restored version, with the actual (but now lost) footage instead of the patchwork reconstruction. Since that is impossible, we are very fortunate to have the restored version that includes all of the most important parts of the story and that gives new life to one of the fine classics of silent cinema.