

None of this detracts from the point that "The Golem" is a classic silent monster movie, that deserves to be mentioned in the same breath with "Nosferatu" and "The Phantom of the Opera." I would agree that "The Golem" is a lesser example of German expressionism; certainly it is not as textbook as "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" or "Nosferatu." Certainly Wegner, his figure esconced in "clay," is not capable of over emoting in any way. This leads me to another coment: Granted, there are strong similarities between the Golem and Karloff's performance in "Frankenstein" and it would not be surprising if Karloff had seen this silent film. But I would like to point out that the shuffling movements of both performances are logical consequences of being either a figure made out of clay or reanimated dead body parts. Karloff was a fine enough actor to have figured this out, even without the inspiration offered by this film.
Ultimately, I am more concerned over the attempts to make a political reading of the film, premised on the fact that this is a German film (read "proto-Nazi"). In terms of the film this idea is premised on the contrast between the shabby, dark-haired children of the Jewish ghetto shown throughout most of the film with the happy, blonde-haired children that surround the Golem at the end. For the latter, of course, there is a temptation to read the children as being Aryan and to comment on the irony of the impending Holocaust given such the visual oxymoron. But the simpler explanation to me is the contrast between the dark and the light as reflecting the oppressive Dionysian part of the film with its happier Apollian conclusion. Besides, I would have a hard time arguing a film where the main characters are Jewish can be rightly characterized as Anti-Semetic. The film employs stereotypes, but that was a cultural commonplace that extended beyond Jews at that time in popular culture (cf. the novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs). Certainly the Emperor Luhois (Otto Gebühr) is a stereotypical despot.
There are lots of ways of reading "The Golem," so in the final analysis the important thing would be that you see it for yourself and make up your own mind on these issues. I think that however you read this film, it will end up high on your list for silent films in this genre.
review by: heideggerus date: 2002-03-31 rating: 
Sound presentation, shame about the music
"Der Golem" (1920) is an adequate adaptation of the well-known fairy tale about the clay man brought to life to protect the Jews of Prague. Paul Wegener sets down an excellent impression of the Golem, oscillating between a morose slavish servant/worker and the unleashed diabolical destroyer. The tragedy of the Golem is that in both conditions he is but an instrument of either Rabbi Loewe, who created his body, or the demon Astaroth, who animates it.
In this way Wegener precedes that later, more famous Golem of flesh, Frankenstein's Monster (see James Whale, "Frankenstein" [1931] and "The Bride of Frankenstein" [1935]). It is interesting to note that some key scenes in both "Der Golem" and the "Frankenstein" movies are in many ways similar; the Creation finding brief comfort in the innocence of a child, the climatic inferno of the ghetto and the windmill, and the creator's assistant abusing the power of the Creature/Monster (see Bela Lugosi in "The Son of Frankenstein").
There are two drawbacks to this otherwise excellent production. First, this film would have gained greatly in quality had it been digitally remastered. This process has dramatically improved, for instance, Murnau's "Nosferatu" (1922). Second, the soundtrack seems horribly out of key with the scenes. Relief or the mundane is accompanied by a loud agitating orchestra, while a dramatic scene such as the summoning of Astaroth sports a tune reminiscent of Mendelsohn's "Frühlingslied". In the last twenty minutes of the movie the same bombastic track just keeps being repeated, which is simply annoying. Nevertheless, a good addition to a horror/DVD collection.