Manhatta (1921) User Reviews

Great short

[monkeyman85 · 8/10 · 10 October 2006]

This short film by Sheeler and Strand is the father of American avant-garde cinema.

It contains beautiful shots of Manhattan shown intertwined with excerpts of a Walt Whitman poem. All of the shots are thought out, and very photographic in nature. But that is expected with Paul Strand behind the camera.

This film is probably the first American avant-garde film, and if it isn't, it is definitely the first influential avant-garde film. A guideline for future American avant-garde filmmakers to follow.

A true visual treat, even for today's standard.

Manhatta(n)

[miguelperes · 7/10 · 26 October 2008]

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.

Manhatta: More Than A Pioneer

[andtheballrolls · 8/10 · 18 April 2006]

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.

Modern Ideas

[Cineanalyst · 22 July 2005]

Here's the beginning of the city symphony film, which would include "Berlin: Symphony of a City" (1927) and "The Man with a Movie Camera" (1929). Although "Manhatta" doesn't contain the rapid rhythmic montage of some of the later city symphonies, it does have a sort of slower, poetic rhythm to it. It's discernible from a travelogue in that it has something to say about its city, other than it's a nice place to visit. The steady progression of images interloped with poetic intertitles taken from Walt Whitman produce the rhythm.

From the still photographer Paul Strand and the painter and still photographer Charles Sheeler, their view of Manhattan is, of course, modern. The shots are of skyscrapers and the inter-workings of the city. One is Strand's 1915 still photograph "Wall Street" come to motion. The composition, camera placement and observation of light and shadow are striking throughout the short film, and they are reflective of the work by the filmmakers in other media. Sheeler and Strand had already transplanted modern, abstract and formal ideas from painting into still photography and with "Manhatta" they similarly redirected film.

A nice historical record

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 25 January 2010]

MANHATTA is an unusual short film. It's like the merging of a travelogue with a poem. So, as the camera moves artistically about the city of New York, the scenes are punctuated with intertitle cards that have poetic verse on them that make it all seem grand and majestic.

While much of this won't appeal to most viewers, the film is still worth seeing for two important reasons. First, the short is a wonderful historical record of the city. In other films of the era, New York is incidental, in a way. You might see bits and pieces of the city, but the city is not the star. Here, however, you see so much of the town that you wouldn't see otherwise--and much of it is gone today. Second, the film is very artistic in its cinematography--with wonderful aerial shots as well as nicely frames shots of the Brooklyn Bridge and the like.

Perhaps not exciting, but a rather important document. And, despite the original negatives being missing and only one print in existence until it was restored, the print looks great!

Needs More, a Nice Start

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 6 January 2017]

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.

highrise construction work

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 16 March 2021]

It's an 11 minute silent short of Manhattan cityscape. It talks a lot about building and skyscrapers. Along with a variety of city life, it does follow some construction. It's missing the 1st POV on walking the steel beams. I don't know how heavy was the camera but they could have given it to a construction worker so that he could film high up. I need that sense of vertigo. I guess they do have to hand crank the camera but construction workers are really coordinated. They do obviously film from some rooftops or high windows to get the high vantage point. It's not the same thing. The construction of each film frame looks very artistic. This looks really good. I just need the high beam walk for it to be perfect.

First Avant Garde Movie

[springfieldrental · 7/10 · 11 October 2021]

Cinema had matured enough in the year 1921 to allow imaginative experimentation with celluloid. Two photographers combined Walt Whitman's lines of poetry with 65 filmed shots of New York City's Manhattan Island to produced their short movie 1921's "Manhatta." Some cite the pair's brief film as the first avant-garde work in moving pictures.

Charles Sheeler, a painter/photographer, and Paul Strand, photographer, decided to base their short project on passages from Whitman's 'Leaves of Grass.' They set their motion picture camera high above the city landscape, framing each of their 65 shots like they were using a still camera, dictating the artistry of the city's buildings and transport vehicles to determine its positioning. The camera rarely moves during each shot and sustains mostly wide shots of the city.

Not only does "Manhatta" serve as a fascinating historic photographic record of New York City over 100 years ago, it also reflects how humans apoear to be overwhelmed by the gigantic concrete structures and mammoth transports surrounding them. One particular visual exemplifying such magnitude is when a horde of workers crowd the stern of a ferry and unload in a rush to get where they need to go.

"Manhatta" was rarely shown after its completion, and when it did the movie was more of a curiosity. In 1950, a worn print of the short was discovered in a British film vault, and an archivist, beginning in 2005, spent four years to restore it to its current pristine form.

We're fortunate to have this film

[DaveLB-3 · 10/10 · 30 January 2000]

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.

modernistic delight

[framptonhollis · 7/10 · 6 July 2018]

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.

New York, New York

[Horst_In_Translation · 4/10 · 12 March 2016]

"Manhatta" is a 10-minute documentary from 1921 (looks older though), so not too long anymore until the 100th anniversary of this one. Looking at the year, nobody should be surprised that this is a silent black-and-white movie. The two men who made it are Charles Sheeler and Paul Strand, the former never made another film and Strand was also not exactly too prolific in the years before or after this film, probably his most famous. The reason why it is somewhat known is that it got included in the National Film Registry. I must say I did not find it an interesting watch. No narrator, but the images also do not really speak for themselves. Maybe you need to be from Manhattan to appreciate this one or have a special connection to the Big Apple. Neither applies to me. That's why I do not recommend the watch.

The above is my original review from spring 2016 for this documentary short film and now in 2024 I gave this another watch and by now it is of course over 100 years old. Overall, I agree with what I wrote back then and also still stand with my rating od two stars out of five. Just a few more thought. To illustrate how old this film is, it can be said that only slightly over a decade had passed since the Titanic tragedy, that World War had been over for not even five years and that World War II was still almost two decades away. What caught my attention here is that the film opens by showing us the words written on the screen that it was photographed by Sheeler and Strand, both in their 30s at that point, and not shot or filmed, which is very fitting because the two were photographers and one of them also a successful painter, but film had not evolved back then to a level where people actually carried the job description "filmmaker". Also, in the first five minutes there are way more people seen on screen here than in the second half. Towards the end, there is a brief scene in which we see people from high up in the air, but in the first half there were way more humans on camera here. Also, not from really close, so it is impossible to identify your potential relatives from back in the day. The second half mostly focuses on technology then and all kinds of achievements from industrialization. All about steam and ships. So, the Titanic was clearly still on everybody's mind. Steaming liberty, you could say in reference to a certain statue, but I would rather say "steaming freedom" in reference to a certain television show I really like. Anyway, as I stated back then, this is maybe a good watch for New Yorkers, especially those who live in Manhatta(n) or frequently are in the area. Everybody else is not missing a lot here if they decide to skip the outcome because you also do not see a lot in terms of touristic sights. That is all.

Great documentary

[PWNYCNY · 10/10 · 21 November 2009]

This wonderful documentary offers a glimpse of New York City from a bygone era, when the city had factories, and steam ships we docked in the harbor and when steam and smoke was bellowing into the sky, a time of industry, of power, and economic might. The documentary suggests an industrious people, a mass of humanity inhabiting a great metropolis, uniquely American, bristling with unbounded energy. The great ocean liner entering the harbor, the impressive buildings, some of which still exist today but back then glistening structures, the epitome of modern design, all suggesting a society in which the sky's the limit. This is a great documentary.

This is one of the earliest films to emphasize that New York City cuts people . . .

[tadpole-596-918256 · 7/10 · 7 May 2021]

. . . down to the size of ants. Maybe it wasn't that way back in the 1300's. But by the end of World War One, even before the Empire State Building or the World Trade Center were gleams in terrorists' eyes, the scale of Manhattan seemed fiendishly devised to promote amorality, lawlessness and major depression. Were it not for the Rotten Apple and scores of gangster flicks ostensibly set there, Prohibition would have been a smash success, saving the millions of lives lost to drunk driving, wife beating, liver disease, workplace accidents, heart attacks, strokes, malnutrition and extreme poverty brought on by Demon Rum during the past century. So as you watch this travelogue, you can put that into your pipe and soak it.

MANHATTA {Short} (Paul Strand & Charles Sheeler, 1921) **

[Bunuel1976 · 4/10 · 16 January 2014]

The film-makers' names are proudly displayed no fewer than 3 times during the credits of this one (the card prepared by Kino before each short on the DVDs included); the end result, however, is nothing to write home about – its principal value nowadays is as a time-capsule, and a dull one at that! It is yet another 'film poem' devoted to the nerve centre of New York City, teeming with people (as witnessed by shiploads of arriving passengers!) and activity. Still, as already intimated, very little of interest is actually captured on celluloid – and the photography is pretty ordinary to boot! The literal translation of "avant-garde" is something that is "forward-looking": tellingly, the one thing I was looking forward to as I lay watching this was its conclusion!

Masterpiece

[Michael_Elliott · 22 January 2009]

Manhatta (1921)

**** (out of 4)

Cinematographer Paul Strand and painter Charles Sheeler teamed up to make this movie, which was their attempt to show their love for the city of Manhattan. The say they achieved in showing that love would be an understatement because this 11-minute movie is extremely well-made and contains some downright break taking visuals. The semi-documentary film has various images of the city put together in no real order nor do they try to tell a story out of the images. Instead we just see various items from the city, ranging from haze rising over buildings to various ships on the water. All of these images make for an incredible film because it really seems like you're watching a science-fiction film with a bunch of fake images. It's rather amazing at how well the cinematography is here because unlike many, or perhaps any film, this one here puts you so close to what you're looking at that it's nearly impossible to remember you're watching a movie. This is certainly one of the most beautiful looking films I've seen and perhaps the start of what would become avant-garde film and one has to wonder if Stanley Kubrick saw this and learned from it.

Manhatta highly deserves its inclusion in the United States National Film Registry list

[tavm · 10/10 · 28 August 2010]

This was another rarity that I just discovered on YouTube. A collaboration of painter Charles Sheeler and photographer Paul Strand with poem verses in text form from Walt Whitman and a compellingly added music score after the sound era came into being, Manhatta provides a great view of New York City from the arrival of a ferry to the sights of factories billowing smoke to the aerial views of people walking to the sunset view at the end. It's just such a marvel to watch even today that no wonder the Library of Congress considered this "culturaly significant" and the United States National Film Registry put it in its preservation list. So on that note, I highly recommend Manhatta for anyone curious about films like these.

A Pioneer, but little more

[Chesnaye · 4/10 · 17 November 1999]

There's very little, if anything, memorable about "Manhatta." Besides being one of the original "city symphony" films, paving the way for better works like "Berlin: die sinfonie der Grobstadt" (which I think translates into "Berlin: Symphony of a City)" and Pennebaker's "Daybreak Express," to name two, all it really offers to modern audiences is a reason to fall asleep. Manhatta is mainly made up of static, or at best, phlegmatic shots, and has inter-titles quoting Walt Whitman. The camera has a strange obsession with smoke billowing from chimneys of boats and factories. It's a pioneer of a new land that was soon in the hands of more skillful developers.

Symphony of a City with a Camera

[Polaris_DiB · 10/10 · 16 January 2010]

Make no mistake--the Industrial Revolution's impact of cinema is so profound that it's hardly an impact, as cinema simply wouldn't exist without it. As such, many early films took their subject with the world that had spawned around them, skyscrapers and their creation, factories and their workers, trains and their operation, cars and machinery and smoke. It was as if the world built itself to be photographed in motion, then invented motion pictures.

This film is one of those interstitial documents that exist between important texts. It is far removed from the early actualities, but focuses on many of the same subjects with a clearer image. By the time this film came out, editing had come to its own as an art form and this movie didn't particularly add anything to montage that wasn't already recognized. Intertitles were expected. However, this movie did come before Berlin: Symphony of a City and was very inspirational to various filmmakers in the idea of documenting the modern world with an eye towards frame-by-frame meaning and abstract structuralism, which directly links it to the great and famous Man with a Movie Camera.

--PolarisDiB

A priceless historical treasure

[dwarol · 10/10 · 21 January 2019]

Back when this short was first released, it was probably considered more of an artistic film than a documentary. It gave people back then who didn't live in the "big city" a view of life in then contemporary New York City. And the short does succeed on that level.

But now that almost a century has passed it's become a kind of historical document, a glimpse of how people actually lived in 1921 New York City without the distortions you get in dramatic movies. Today some of the scenes seem very familiar with modern New York City (for example, the crowds disembarking a ferry) while others point to an era long gone. One difference between then and now is the tone of the film. There's no doubt the film is celebrating life in a large metropolis and the society that built it while today such a film would instead try to impress on us how dysfunctional big city life has become.

As time passes I can imagine what to us still seems commonplace in this film will become even more cryptic to our descendants. Centuries from now historians and anthropologists will go over this documentary almost frame by frame for clues as to how actually people lived in cities.

City Scenes

[st-shot · 8/10 · 12 April 2024]

Manhatta aka New York the Magnificent is a collaborative work by painter Paul Sheeler and photographer Paul Strand in an attempt to define and document the early days of the skyscraper metropolis defined best by the city of New York.

What is generally regarded as the first city documentary, Manhatta does not have the energy or fast paced editing of later 20s city examinations such as the invaluable Berlin, Symphony of a Great City, by Walter Ruttman, made less than a generation before its destruction and Ivan Zertov's magnificent Man with a Movie Camera (1929) but its influence is clear as it depicts the phenomena and draw of big city living and its fast paced ways.

Accompanied by writer Walt Whitman title cards reciting his poem "Mannahatta", iconic photographer Strand and Sheeler capture images of Gotham still unsurpassed in both their sedate grace and energetic calamity. Eleven minutes in length, serenely presented., it holds its own to this day as a valuable timepiece.