KINO Metropolis at proper speed!

[Goldberg74]

If you're passing out another round, I'll take one.

I have the old Macady version and the Kino version. This would be the cherry on top.

[marknyc]

Anyone who wants to talk to me about the camera-speed version, send me an email:

dcfvgb at hotmail dot com

I think these fan projects are important because no one else will do them. I spent an enormous amount of time replacing all the musical numbers in "Girl Crazy" (1943) with the recently discovered stereo tracks found on the CD. The result was astounding. I sent a copy to WB Home Video in the hopes they would do the same for their DVD release this fall. They didn't - only one number is in stereo on the bonus disk.

I guess financially it's just not feasible to do what crazy fans will do for free.

[ytrez]

I just watched Metropolis at camera speed and thought the presentation at 16 fps was fantastic and much appreciate Mark's efforts in putting this together. The overall effect is much a more dramatic film experience. Standout scenes for me include Maria's erotic dance, Death's dance, and the fight on top of the church. Rotwang, at this speed, comes off much more sinister. Hell, everything looks better. The workers' dance after their riot, mechanical Maria's quick glances all over the place. Everything. Well, almost everything. As overly melodramatic Gustov Frohlich was as Freder at 24 fps, he may even be worse at 16 fps . I was surprised by how well the music worked at this speed.

Excellent, top notch work, Mark. I don't know which is "right", 16 or 24, but given the choice, I don't know why anyone would want to watch it at anything other than 16.

[marknyc]

Thanks for the kind words. It was a ton of work, so it's nice to know people enjoy it!

I agree that Gustov's performance is hard to take at any speed, but at least now we're seeing his actual performance. Silent film acting was all about timing and pauses, so I can't imagine how these actors felt seeing their work completely altered by sped-up projection.

My favorite scene (and the reason I undertook the project) is Maria's chase in the catacombs. It's gotten laughs every time I've seen it with an audience at 24fps, so it was great to see it actually look frightening!

Mark

[rennervision]

Mark was gracious enough to send me a copy of his vision, and he asked that I share any comments I might have.

From reading this entire thread, there’s obviously two different camps of people: those who feel this version deserves a viewing and those who consider it heresy. After watching it, I doubt this DVD is going to sway anyone from the “heresy” camp. However, if you are willing to watch it with an open mind, you might find it very interesting – daresay enjoyable.

First, the DVD has a real professional quality to it – starting with the case and DVD label. But, of course, the real question is the editing. The movie now mostly uses subtitles instead of intertitles (a necessity to sync the movie up with its score, thereby trimming down parts of the running time). The font for these subtitles is an excellent choice which blend in well with the art deco look of the film. I also like the way it no longer has the intertitles describing missing scenes, as inserted in the Kino version. (The Kino version is top-notch, but those moments definitely pull you out of the picture.) Because of all of this, you can actually watch this “slower” version of the movie in a shorter time frame than the Kino version. (The difference is around five minutes.)

From a technical aspect, there's only a few drawbacks that I could see from slowing down the speed and removing the intertitles. Keep in mind, most of the time everything has a very natural flow, and all the music seems to cue up in exactly the right places. There is noticeable motion blur, however, during fast movement. (Unavoidable, I’m sure, due to the process involved in slowing this version down.) Some edits appear to be jump cuts which aren’t very noticeable unless you’re looking for them. I think on a couple of occasions I saw some dissolves that work really well. On only one occasion was there a quick fade to black that seemed a little jarring. (Since the presentation as a whole looks so good, I assume this was also unavoidable for a good reason. I would need to compare it to the Kino version to see for myself.)

As others have mentioned, this version also changes the performances of the actors. It helped me appreciate certain aspects more. Joh Fredersen comes across as more cold and calculating. “Evil” Maria’s dance starts off snaky and seductive. (It still looks awkward in places though.) I even caught some subtle aspects of the film that I hadn’t noticed before. For instance, the entire film can be seen as a metaphor for the pending Apocalypse described in the book of Revelation. (In addition to some Biblical imagery scattered throughout the movie, just look at how Maria’s dance ends with an exact representation of the scene described in Revelation 17:3-4.)

People may say these aspects were already there – you just need to look for them with a greater appreciation of this era of filmmaking. However, I can’t help but feel a little excited at seeing all of these moments exactly the way Fritz Lang saw them in person. I can’t fathom the director thinking it to be blasphemy. I would imagine Mr. Lang himself would be quite pleased to see this version – even flattered that someone would go to this much trouble to show the film at a slower projection speed.

The question still remains for me, however, as to which version is the correct one. I’m not real up on my Metropolis history, so I could be mistaken here. But the thing I keep wondering about is the film score. Wouldn’t the original score be an indicator as to what speed it was to be shown? If so, I would think that pretty much settles it. Metropolis is meant to be seen at 24 fps. That’s not to say you can’t enjoy both versions. You don’t have to choose sides. Maybe the two camps need a mediator like Joh Fredersen’s son to see the light.

[PopcornTreeCt]

But the Masters of Cinema one has better image quality so why not use that one?

[Cameron]

I never did hear back on if I could get a copy. The Nosferatu thread reminded me of this.

[Cameron]

responded to pm, with no reply

[Mazje]

I am very interested in obtaining a copy of this as well. What do I need to do?

[rennervision]

Guys, his email address is at the top of this page.

[The Valeyard]

Speaking of Nosferatu - which ultimate version ended up being the best one? Eureka or Kino?

[marknyc]

Here's another review. I don't agree with him that the actors slowed down their performances in anticipation of being sped up when screened, but it's an interesting theory...

Mark
dcfvgb@hotmail.com

_____________________________


Mark,

I watched your version of Metropolis this weekend, and wanted to offer my thoughts.

First off, the quality of the work is excellent. Most of the edits are seamless, the smearing during movement from your editing program wasn't a big deal (I really didn't notice it), and the music still fits perfectly with the images. Of course, the sound and picture quality are great, since the Kino disc is the source (even with the PAL-NTSC "ghosting").

I didn't notice your trims in the final act. As you said, you only shortened some static scenes. If I have to compromise by accepting these trims in order to see the movie at 16 fps, I'll take it.

Movement was much more natural at this speed, of course, although it seemed that sometimes people's movements and/or individual scenes were too slow. In other words, certain shots looked as if the actors were purposefully moving slowly or that shots lingered in order to be sped up later, a la Alvin and the Chipmunks. While the bulk of the movie played just right at 16 fps, occasional scenes probably would have been better at 24/25 fps. The handful of "too slow" scenes appeared more in the beginning of film, with the final act playing just right at the slower speed.

As for subtitles replacing intertitles, I think this worked very well. I liked that you retained the intertitles that feature unique formatting or effects.

Overall, I preferred your version to the faster one. Yours will likely be the one I watch from now on, although I like having the Kino disc for the extras and to preserve a version closer to the original. As far as which version is correct, it may be true that 24 fps was the intended speed, and that audiences in the 1920s were accustomed to watching sped-up movement. Who knows? At least we now have an option, thanks to you.

Shawn

[marknyc]

I was considering attending the premiere of the newly-restored Metropolis on Feb. 12 in Berlin, based on this email from Martin Koerber:

"Natural movement occurs at 20fps (except for the last reel, which still looks fast even at 20 fps), that is the speed we have chosen when running the film silent or with a pianist, it was also the speed chosen for the music by Bernd Schultheis, which was composed for the 2001 presentation at the Berlin Film Festival."

I was hoping that the premiere might be shown at something other than 24fps - alas, that is not the case.

But I just found out about the court decision below. Does this mean that I can make my version available?

Golan v. Gonzales is a case originally filed in 2001 challenging the constitutionality of restoring copyright of foreign works that were previously in the United States public domain by the United States Congress. The main argument was that restoring copyright violates the "limited times" clause of the United States Constitution.

After the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Copyright Term Extension Act in Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003), the Colorado District Court dismissed the plaintiffs' challenge to that act in 2004. The remaining constitutional challenge to the Uruguay Round Agreements Act was dismissed the following year.

Among the works related to this case were:

* Metropolis (1927)
* The Third Man (1949)
* The works of Igor Stravinsky
* The works of J.R.R. Tolkien
* Several works of H.G. Wells, including the film Things to Come (1936)

The case was heard by District Chief Judge Lewis T. Babcock and was decided by the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado in 2005. It was appealed at the Tenth Circuit.

On September 4, 2007, Judge Robert H. Henry of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the CTEA claim, as foreclosed by Eldred, and the district court's holding that § 514 of the URAA does not exceed the limitations inherent in the Copyright Clause.

The Appeals Court therefore remanded the case to the district court after finding that § 514 "has altered the traditional contours of copyright protection in a manner that implicates plaintiffs' right to free expression" and therefore must be subject to First Amendment review.

The case was then reconsidered as Golan v. Holder. In a holding published on April 3, 2009, Judge Babcock reversed his earlier finding that the First Amendment was not applicable to resurrecting foreign copyright claims. The position now is that "In the United States, that body of law includes the bedrock principle that works in the public domain remain in the public domain. Removing works from the public domain violated Plaintiffs’ vested First Amendment interests." Judge Babcock found that aspects of the 1994 Uruguay Round Agreements Act, which brought some works whose copyright had lapsed back under copyright, thus violates the First Amendment. However, further appeals by copyright owners are expected.

[Solid Snake PAC]

soooo....what does all that mean?

[marknyc]

That's what I'm asking.

It seems to indicate that Metropolis is now in the public domain.

[E. Honda]

The original copyright for Metropolis might be public domain, but if it is, the Kino version would be considered a new work, and is copyrighted. You would need a license from them to distrubute your version. Any other use is a copyright infringement.

[marknyc]

Do you know this for a fact or are you surmising?

The case was about works in the PD that were taken out of PD, like Metropolis. The last ruling said this could not be done.

And you can't copyright your transfer of a film; only the film itself. So I would think that if a film is PD, anyone can release it.

[Sean O'Hara]

When modern publishers reprint books from the 18th Century and before, they often update spelling, eliminate long-S's, and take out commas to conform to modern usage. Even though the underlying work is public domain, the new editing is copyrighted -- when Project Gutenberg puts up a book, they can't just scan a copy they picked up at Barnes & Nobles.

I imagine the same applies to films -- Metropolis is PD, but the new edit isn't, nor is the encoding of the DVD.

[E. Honda]

Originally Posted by marknyc

Do you know this for a fact or are you surmising?

The case was about works in the PD that were taken out of PD, like Metropolis. The last ruling said this could not be done.

And you can't copyright your transfer of a film; only the film itself. So I would think that if a film is PD, anyone can release it.

What you have made is called a "derivative work".

http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/

The copyright for Metropolis expired in 1953. So the film itself entered the public domain. Kino took a print of the original film, restored it, and made many other changes. While the source of their work was a public domain, their end product is considered a new work and is automatically protected by copyright law. So when you ripped the copyrighted Kino version, and altered it, you created a derivative work. Kino owns the copyright in their product, as well as all rights to derivate works made from their product:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17...6----000-.html

So techincally you are commiting a copyright violation when you alter their works and redistribute it without the permission of Kino. But will Kino do anything about it? No way to tell. This same sort of thing happened with Lucasfilm when The Phantom Edit came out ten years ago. But you never know how Kino might react. I would be careful how you proceed.