Current slide {CURRENT_SLIDE} of {TOTAL_SLIDES}- Best-selling in DVDs & Blu-rays
Current slide {CURRENT_SLIDE} of {TOTAL_SLIDES}- Save on DVDs & Blu-rays
After viewing this 1920s feature-length silent film I'm inclined to agree with the possibility that there is both a dramatic and expressionistic link between both creatures and the actors who portrayed them. Which is not to say that the Golem is all that frightening but rather a very expressive and tortured look at a ancient Jewish myth brought to life in an equally mythic Eastern European ghetto of the middle ages. Although I am not Jewish I feel this film deserves analysis beyond the limitation of 1920s-era horror (Nosferatu is equally tacky and cinematically primitive by this century's standards) and provides a deeper understanding of a time when medieval alchemists attempted to recreate divine aspects of creation ("remember thou art dust and unto dust thou shalt return") only to be punished by the results of that creation when things go wrong. If one is to understand the roots of a culture as ancient and as misunderstood as the growth of Judaism in the Middle Ages, understanding the legends and fables of that culture is a good way to start in my opinion. My main critique is that, thanks to the impatience and boredom I feel when watching silent-era films, I tend to enjoy these film better with the fast-forward on, yet forced to replay key scenes when I discover the musical score is equally rich and inspiring in presenting the story. Hence, one should watch this twice, and I intend to rewatch it again if only to appreciate the ballet between the music and the screenplay. You probably won't see this at your local video store unless you look long and hard (thankfully it's on eBay :D) and you may not agree that this is worth your time and patience, but I feel it fills a gap in our understanding the roots of horror concepts such as reanimated beings, zombies and the folly of barganing with the demon-verse. If it was good enough to inspire Karloff, then...Read full review
When I talk about a movie where an inanimate creature is created and then wreaks havoc on it creator and others, most of you would say Frankenstein. But before there was Frankenstein there was Der Golem! In all reality Mary Shelley herself saw this movie when it was released on the silver screen and may have used some of these themes for her book Frankenstein! This version of Der Golem was released in 1920, there was a version from 1915 which unfortunately at this time is a lost film. Both however starred Paul Wegener, who also directed with Carl Boese. This is a great story and also a great character and at least a must watch for fans of the silent horror film era. The only downfall to this movie is that it is a little slow in places, but it does have great visuals and use of the camera as an art form is fantastic.Read full review
I like Paul Wegener's The Golem is a classic of German expressionist in cinema,made the year after the Cabinet of Dr.Caligari. I decided to buy it because (i love horror films) The films primary notoriety,however is how it inspired James Whale's Frankenstein,for the latter picture owes more to Wegener than to Mary Shelley,particularly in the image of the little girl who tries to give a rose to the monster;an image that appears in both productionsAt the beginning of the DvD's "scrapbook", there is a quote from Paul Wegener that says he never thought the Golem was an expressionist film. Watching it right after seeing Nosferatu, that statement becomes believable. Despite amazing sets that would have been at home in Caligari, in story, in acting, and in overall tone, The Golem is a much more naturalistic film. Watching it with my son, who is 16, he was struck by its uncomfortable prefiguring of Jewish persecution. I was impressed by the the scarcity of romantic cliches in the story. The golem itself is clearly the ancestor of the Frankenstein monster. Full of wonderful images and interesting as a predecessor of the Universal monster films, The Golem is also very entertaining as a story and as a piece of dramatic film making. Highly recommended.Read full review
Filmed in 1920, Golem should remind of the classic 'Cabinet of Dr. Caligari'. It falls in the expressionistic, perhaps surreallistic, genre of silent film and offers stunning socio-religious critiques of Judaism vs. Christianity. Set in the 16th century, the film strays from stereotypical Jewish portrayals, showing us a poor Jewish community being persecuted. To deal with this, an elder brings to life a huge clay figure, the Golem, to protect the Jews. The film does run long, so if you are not a fan of silents you will zone out, but offers stunning visuals as well demonstrating early in cinematic history that film could be a tool instead of mere entertainment. Strongly recommended.
No, Mary Shelley did NOT see this movie before writing Frankenstein. How idiotic. Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein in 1818 loooong before movies were invented. It's also unfair to compare this brilliant work of an old legend to Frankenstein. Two completely different stories with two completely different reasons for the creatures being created. Geez people
Verified purchase: No