Manhatta

This groundbreaking silent documentary captures the beauty and majesty of the New York City in its streets, skyscrapers, bridges, rail yards and harbors.

Is this film groundbreaking? I would have to agree with that. But unfortunately, it doesn't break nearly as much ground as it could. The film reminds me of "Berlin", the documentary made by Karl Freund and Carl Mayer, among others. The big difference being that "Manhatta" is not particularly long.

And that is why I can only give it so much love, because I wish more of 1920s New York was captured on film, an era that is still remembered fondly today (2017). Any document would be somewhat priceless to the right people.

Preface: Due to the nature of such a short film, any valid review will contain some evidence of a "spoiler." This review is no exception.

Paul Strand's "Manhatta" is more than just the simple, pioneering piece in early cinema. "Manhatta" is a representation of New York City through the eyes of a still photographer. Strand uses the format of motion picture to create a sense of life. Similar to his New York still photography, each moving image frames city life, angles, and other objects with semi-avant-garde detail. Strand's own "mentor," Alfred Stieglitz, greatly appreciated the new form of city photography, publishing it in "Camera Work" and in his gallery 291.

In the movie, the blowing smoke, walking people, moving ships, and other objects in motion are what separate the motion picture from a photo album. Instead of portraying New York as an iconic, prosperous city, Strand has been able to portray New York City as an organism that contains a immigrant working class.

In my opinion, "Manhatta" commands the respect of many early motion pictures, influencing many great, more popular films.

One of the earliest "city symphonies", and arguably one of the most groundbreaking avant garde films of the 1920's, 'Manhatta' is a lyrical, slow, and moving tribute to a great American city based loosely off of a Walt Whitman poem. The imagery isn't as intense and vibrant as that in many other films of a similar nature, whether they be other city symphonies or just other avant garde/experimental films in general, but there are several shots in here that definitely widened my eyes. The very specific positioning of the camera for certain angles helped give much of the short film a very epic feel. At some points, it even felt extremely futuristic and, to me, evoked some shots from Fritz Lang's legendary classic 'Metropolis'. It's only about twelve minutes, so any fan of experimental film might as well check it out as it is highly revolutionary and visually pleasing.

Instead of having a filmmaker attempting to be painterly, this poetic gem boasts both a major painter (Sheeler) and a major photographer (Strand) collaborating.

This is the earliest view of Manhattan we have that is neither simple-minded documentation nor backdrop to melodrama. The visuals are striking, and stand up well to later, more gimmicky, film realizations of what makes Skyscraper National Park so special.

The Walt Whitman title cards would probably have worked better as voiceover narration in the sound era, but offer a strong romantic framework for the powerful imagery. A classic, not to be missed.

This experimental movie of Paul Strand about Manhattan is extremely important to the future generations of directors. Paul Strand is like a bird in Manhattan, showing the daily life and the most characteristic points of it. Manhattan is shown in a Bird's eye shot(I think that it's the name in English, kind like the public was God himself. I never went to Manhattan, but in 10 minutes I visited, understood and felt Manhattan. It is amazing how in such a short time, he can illustrate, in a interesting and original way, this mediatic place. Paul Strand is like a magician that takes photos of Manhattan and give life to them. A great short that definitely is a mark on cinema's experimental history.