Directed by F. W. Murnau

Position on the list (at time of viewing): 514

This movie bears the unfortunate distinction of being the least good film by Murnau that I have seen. It may be simply because there was no way for it to live up to its source material (being one of the greatest works of literature in any language ever), or it might be down to some of the troubled production history of the film. Either way, this sits uncomforably within the broader Murnau canon. While it’s a technically interesting film, it again falls into the category of movies that likely only appeal to the film. buff, or at least huge fans of the director.

Historically, one of the most important things to know about this film is that Murnau was trying desperately to get out of Germany and into Hollywood so he could make a movie with a real budget (an attempt whose eventual result will feature later in the list). Because of that, he was making this, his last German film, with one foot out the door. He was famously already on set directing his next film in Hollywood before this even premiered back in his home country. In addition to the director’s distraction, the movie had a number of issues during its production. It had two rival intertitle writers (who got into a feud over whose script was superior for the movie), it was one of the most expensive movies made to that point in German film history, and some of the director’s demands were very extreme for the time. Murnau was one of the first to film his scenes with two cameras running simultaneously, and demanded large numbers of takes with this system, leading to film costs alone skyrocketing during the movie’s production. There were also at least five (and maybe many more) cuts of the film produced. We have five surviving versions, and they are significantly more different from each other than is usually the case with early silent films. They have different scenes, different camera angles, different pacing, and even changes to plot points. The US version is generally dumbed down from the original German edit, as Murnau didn’t think less cultured American audiences would get some of his references. I watched a restored version of the German cut with new intertitles for this review.

Overall, the film is perfectly fine–Murnau doesn’t make bad films per se, but it doesn’t show the attention to detail or innovation that are the mark of some of the other works in his oeuvre. The first real problem with the movie is that it veers wildly from the source material to tell a largely maudlin tale of love triumphing over all (but not until after the film has had its debauchery cake and eaten it too, of course). For anyone who is unfamiliar with the source legend, Faust (Gösta Ekman here) enters into a bargain with the devil in the form of Mephistopheles (Emil Jannings), often for the love of an innocent girl named Gretchen (Camilla Horn) and is eventually either saved through transcendental mercy or damned for his hubris, depending on the version you’re considering. This particular version is essentially just a mash-up of Job and the Temptation of Christ, but with a much more saccharine ending. Now, obviously the film has virtues or it wouldn’t be on a list like this, but if you are even a remote fan of any of the classic interpretations of the character, from Marlowe to Goethe to Mann, this is not going to be your new favorite version of the story. The movie is, like so much silent film, incredibly melodramatic, with everything operating in an elevated register. For me, at least, it grew wearying before the end of the movie. It lacked subtlety, and while in many silent films I would forgive that, I don’t think I can for Murnau. I know he’s capable of better and more interesting character work, as he shows in Nosferatu or The Last Laugh. I guess this frustrates me as the least satisfying version of this particular narrative. It reduces the divine intervention and transcendence of Goethe’s Part II to a simple “oh they loved each other, so it’s all OK” story, and doesn’t really feature the tragic angst of the Marlowe or Mann versions. This might be holding it to an unfair standard, but if you’re going to tackle something as epic as Faust, you should probably come prepared for those comparisons.

Taken on its own merits, the best stuff that the film has going for it is Murnau’s visual inventiveness and technical virtuosity, which is on full display here as it was back in Nosferatu. The devil looks great, and showcases some of the best makeup and costuming we’ve seen thus far (go back and compare to Haxan for example). The special effects look great as well, with particular note going to the writing in flame on the parchment for the contract Faust signs. It’s still not obvious exactly how that particular effect worked. The composition is also a step above most of its contemporaries because of the previously mentioned multiple cameras This gave Murnau much more freedom later in the edit to find the shots he wanted and maintain a sense of pacing through the individual scenes.

And there are some good scenes, for sure! The abandoned mother and child is really affecting and well-composed (although it really plays into the maudlin tone I mentioned), and the duel is one of the better examples of one on one combat from this period. Overall, though, its a dude chasing half-naked ladies around, arguably way too many intertitles, and an ending that somehow manages to be both too emotional (in an unearned way) and also underwhelming considering what has come before. I was honestly just kinda happy it was over at the end. It certainly wasn’t a movie without merit, but that merit mostly consists of well-executed individual scenes or interesting special effects, rather than an organic whole that transcends its parts. Honestly, I would recommend seeing just about any other Murnau movie before this one (and certainly any other of his films on the list).

Overall: